THBT: Climate change is likely real.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 7 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
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.
Bones wins this debate by a landslide.
First off, Pro gives evidence suggesting that humans are changing the climate, massive amounts of them. All Con did was to dismiss it as an appeal to authority, and a baseless theory about Marx creating Communism, which, isn’t mentioned or given by anything as of my knowledge now. The appeal to authority fallacy declaration isn’t valid either, as Con used zero effort to prove that those sources are not reliable. Pro held those points to the end and Con claimed that his baseless argument was irrefutable, despite that it has been refuted.
Conduct to Pro because Con clearly isn’t taking this debate seriously. Seriously. How non-serious do you have to be to declare a baseless argument as “irrefutable” and give absolutely nothing in the last round when losing?
S&g to Pro due to Con not capitalizing correctly and missing periods in some sentences, that just adds on to his non-serious atmosphere of debating, which isn’t a good thing.
a debate where you just play tic tac toe would be kinda cool
'CONCLUSION
I have given him irrefutable evidence to which he has ignored"
that is the best argument i have ever heard this guy deserves to be head mod
I'm climate chamge????????????????????????? (NOT CLICKBAIT)
what are you talking about?
He clearly won this debate with "irrefutable evidence" such as "climate change is marxism".
libtards like you just dont understand the science of it
/sarcasm
This debate is a bruh moment from con
At what point are you just trolling
That is the exact argument I am using.
1. The climate exists
2. The climate changes
3. Climate Change exists