Trent0405

RFD 1/3

ARGS

For one, the usage of the word “may” means that Con must prove that the notion “DTaP vaccines for children under 6 months of age may cause autism” is certainly not true, meaning he has a massive BoP.

The main problem I have with Pro’s argument is that he fails to argue that the DTaP vaccines for children under 6 months of age causes autism, although he doesn’t have to, it would do him wonders to attempt to prove it does cause autism as it would raise quite a lot of doubt in my mind. Instead, he tries to rebut the assertion that DTaP vaccines cause autism, which is fine, but not preferable. Whilst he may have tried to be a little more persuasive with his Dr. Plotkin argument, the fact that the IOM couldn’t offer a study that states DTaP vaccines don’t cause autism doesn’t indicate that there isn’t any study that shows that DTaP vaccines don’t cause autism. Furthermore, Con offers 12 studies which show vaccines do not cause autism. In continuation, several of these studies relate to the substance “thimerosal.” It appears that thimerosal does not cause autism, but it is not a substance present in DTaP vaccines as of now, and even if it was in the past, it appears that the resolution is referring to DTaP vaccines as they are today In America. Anyhow, here is my take on the studies offered, keep in mind that I opted to go off of the quotes and interpretations offered in the debate, I will not be digging through the studies myself to keep the vote relevant to the debate and the debate only.

No problem. I hope to see more of your insight in the future.

LoL.

IDK if that would meet your BoP.

I do what I can.

What would running a K look like on this debate?

https://makeameme.org/meme/you-sir-are-77gzb1

No problemo.

I mean...I agree.

Yeah, I generally use R2 for rebuttals, and some new args maybe.

Lol, indeed. I think the 2016 election proved that well enough.

No way he's going to run, and if he does, he'll get smashed. Kanye has like no appeal to voters unless they're voting for the meme.

Andrew is probably my 2nd favourite Democrat, but the only candidate that can truly represent all Americans, is the great Kanye West.

Lol, I don't have the capacity to write past that outside of school.

18 of the listed countries, yes.

Look forward to this debate.

22 hours left.

In the description the definition was listed. Better was deemed to mean more convenient. Wasn't trying to steer the argument, just abide by the description.

How so? In the description better was defined as convenient.

Good debate my 10 legged friend.

"you guys just don't get much sun as far as I know"

Your correct ------- https://www.currentresults.com/Weather-Extremes/sunniest-places-countries-world.php

"You all would have to import a ton of energy."

Yeah, currently renewable energy sources are very inefficient(especially solar).

That would be a problem, although I guess we could improve wind and solar via innovation.

TYPO-

I Said-----------"86% of Canada is White European, vs 70% in America"

I meant 60%.

Here is a chart showing oil prices over time, dropped hard in late 2014. This also caused Russia and Brazil's recessions in 2014. https://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crude-oil-price-history-chart

Our economy still hasn't returned to it's pre recession size.

https://www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/how-canadas-economy-went-from-boom-to-recession-so-fast/

Things certainly have gotten shaky under Trudeau. I doubt he's the reason for the our recent problems. 2014, 2015, and 2016 were horrible years because of plummeting oil prices, causing a recession. Trudeau had little to do with it I'd say. He ain't helping though.

When was Canada great?

Well we still are great, but we were better in the early 2010's.

MAKE CANADA GREAT AGAIN.

Lol, thanks.

#nOtmYpReSiDeNt

Thanks for the vote. Can't say I disagree with your conclusion.

Okay. PM me, we'll work out the debate details.

Well, I like both a ton. I'd say America is the greater country overall though.

Correct, I'm a proud Canadian.

Well obviously I'd rather be harmed than murdered, but that doesn't mean we don't count assault in crime statistics.

Your saying X is worse than Y, so Y isn't relevant. That's quite faulty.

Well maybe a home break isn't as bad as a mass shooting, but a home break is still a big deal.

Con's source only looks at rape, theft, and murder, these aren't minor crimes.

http://chartsbin.com/view/39717

This is what Con proposed.

You do realize that Con actually gave evidence that stated America is safe, so one side gave me evidence, one didn't, how could I side with you?

He stated America had low crime rates, YOU NEVER REFUTED IT, even if it's obvious that America has a lot of crime, you failed to point that out during the debate.

You never said any of this in the debate.

Okay, Con stated America had loose gun laws and low Crime, if this is true you lose the debate given the resolution. You concede that America has loose gun laws and NEVER touch his point on America having low crime rates world wide.

Hawaiian Monk Seals is where it's at bro.

I enjoyed it myself, I must say I enjoy your debate topics.

Bump for potential voters.

I'm aware that is what you were stating, and that's what I said you stated(or at least what I meant to say), Squid stated how starting to learn economics early was better, meaning, even if the difference was minimal from starting to learn economics in grade 7 vs high school, it's a net positive nonetheless.

I did reread my vote and realized many grammatical issues, it was late at night when I wrote this VOTE.

I'm currently writing one, will be done tomorrow.

Bump for voting!!!

i was able to prove Wyoming had a better quality of life.

How do hippies make a state good.

1-you didn't prove it was a better place to live, you proved it had a higher quality of life which I disputed.

2-If I have 8 valid contentions and you dispute 1, I will at least win 7-1.