The macrophage is not important or essential to the human body
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 3 votes and with 19 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 2
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
No information
null norfeit
According to this website's dysfunctional forfeiture rules, Pro FF'd and Con didn't, even though both posted the same Rounds of debate. :)
With effectively only one round this debate is really simple. Pro shows that in many areas macrophages can be replaced, but con only needs to show that they can not be replaced in one area in order to win.
I can just immediately vote on the specialized cell point for this reason.
Then Con also tells me that there are profound effects, and this claim is never responded to as it is the last speech. I am also going to believe this claim over pro's due to the sources presented by con which lend credibility.
Finally there is the entire argument with BoP and sources. While purely logical arguments are find in my mind, especially for a scientific debate sources seem important to make ones point so this is yet another possible place to vote for Con purely on presumption.
The forfeited rounds are unfortunate, so this is definitely still a low point win.
I feel like there's something fishy about this debate. It seems too good to be true. Looks like a free win, so free to the point something is up.