Instigator / Pro
7
1701
rating
18
debates
100.0%
won
Topic

THBT: Climate change is likely real.

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
3
0
Sources points
2
0
Spelling and grammar points
1
0
Conduct points
1
0

With 1 vote and 7 points ahead, the winner is ...

Bones
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Nature
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One month
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
0
1465
rating
3
debates
0.0%
won
Description
~ 405 / 5,000

THBT: Climate change is likely real.

1. No new arguments are to be made in the final round.
2. Definitions are agreed upon and are not to be contested.
3. Rules are agreed upon and are not to be contested.
4. Sources can be hyperlinked or provided in the comment section.
5. A breach of rules 1-5 should result in a 1 point penalty.
6. No Kritiks.
7. A breach in rules 6-7 should result an instant loss.

Round 1
Pro
Thx StevenCrowder, 

--

Prelim:

  • THBT: Climate change is real 
  • BoP
    • Bones = Climate change is real. 
    • StevenCrowder= Climate change is not real. 
--

Contention 1: Analysis of the resolution

p1. The climate exists
  • True via truism. 
p2. The climate changes
c1. Climate Change exists

--

Contention 2: Argument from the scientific testimony




Based on well-established evidence, about 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening.

- American Association of the Advancement of Science 



















Con
Your whole argument is  an appeal to authority data can easily be manipulated especially when media has a liberal bias
regardless of this i will make my case



Climate change is marxism

Once upon a time karl marx sought to destroy capitalism
in order to do this he had to make it seem like the climate (it hasn't changed significantly) was changing due to capitalism thus he spread propaganda about climate change.



Round 2
Pro
Thx steven for your prompt reply. 

--

OBSERVATION

  • Contention 1 has been neglected thus I extend it. 

-- 

Contention 2: Argument from scientific testimony

Crowder: Your whole argument is  an appeal to authority data can easily be manipulated especially when media has a liberal bias

It appears my opponent has confused "deferring to an authority on the issue" with the appeal to authority fallacy. A fallacy is an error in reasoning. Dismissing a council of legitimate experts and authorities turns good skepticism into denialism. The appeal to authority is a fallacy in argumentation, but deferring to an authority is a reliable heuristic that people use on virtually all problems. True, there is always a chance that any authority can be wrong, which is why I have provided 16 independent institutes and their testimonies. It is not at all unreasonable to accept information as provisionally true by credible authorities, especially in the fashion in which I have provided. Usually, in debating, calling an argument an appeal to authority requires the accuser to demonstrate why this is the case, and where the offence has been committed. Steven Crowder, I invite you to point to me where the scientific literature I have provided is inconsistent or faulty. 

Rebuttal: Story time!

Steven: Climate change is marxism

I dispute this on the grounds of the identity of Indiscernibles, which dictates that no two things have exactly the same properties. As climate change and Marxism are distinct entities, they must also be distinct in terms of their properties. Thus to say that climate change is Marxism is false. 

Steven: Once upon a time karl marx sought to destroy capitalism
In order to do this he had to make it seem like the climate (it hasn't changed significantly) was changing due to capitalism thus he spread propaganda about climate change.

That’s a nice story, but the business of Karl Marx is not of any concern to me. The scientific literature that I have provided is true irrespective of what Marx said. But since you’re so nice to provide a story, here’s Jesus and the fisherman. 

A long, long, long time ago, Jesus needed his friends to help[ him spread God’s message. As he walked down by the Sea of Galilee, he saw two fishermen put their nets in the water to catch fish. The two men’s names were Simon and Andrew. Jesus called out to them and they came to the shore. Jesus said “Follow me! And I will make you special fishermen of the people”. The two men left their nets at once and joined him. They had understood that Jesus was the promised Savior. As he went along, Jesus came across another two brothers, James and John. They were sitting in a fishing boat. They were repairing their nets. When Jesus called their names, they left their nets and joined Jesus. They too know that Jesus was sent by God. Jesus chose these people because they were loyal to God and not because they were talented or gifted. He gave them new names. Simon was named Peter. Andrew was named Apostle. John and James were called “sons of thunder”. D end. 

Also would you like to play a game of tic tac toe? I’ll got first.

…|...|...
…|O|...
…|...|....

Con
CONCLUSION
I  have given him irrefutable evidence to which he has ignored

TIC TAC TOE
⁣⁣⁣…|...|X
…|O|...
…|...|....

Round 3
Pro
CONCLUSION
I  have given him irrefutable evidence to which he has ignored
I quite literally copy and pasted your entire argument to dissect. Every single word of your argument has been debunked. I have provided a syllogism which was completely dropped, and 16 sources which likewise, were dropped. VOTE BONES.

Now onto the main course. 

O|...|X
…|O|...
…|...|...



Con


O|...|X
…|O|...
…|...|X