The Instigator
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
SJM
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

9/11 never happened proof courtesy of the Blame Game Confusion Cycle

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
SJM
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/12/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 388 times Debate No: 95351
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2

Pro

9/11 never happened explained by The Blame Game Confusion Cycle
in the cycle, there are 3 choices, Osama Bin Laden, Saudi Arabia, or George W Bush, but we cannot determine who really did it because there are too many choices.
we can't choose neither one of those three choices because there would be bias and confusion.
If we can't determine who did it, than it is easier to say "nobody did it"
if nobody did it, if planes don't fly by themselves, if towers don't fall down by themselves,
than 9/11 never happened.
SJM

Con

This argument could easily be refuted by saying, just because we don't know who/what did it, doesn't mean it didn't happen, just that we are ignorant of the cause. We have yet to discover who/what created everything or the first something, but we know something exists. Therefore my opponent's argument does not prove 9/11 didn't happen, it at bests proves we don't know who caused it.

Also, you can choose if there are many choices by making the best logical decision based on evidence and etc.
And saying nobody did it is as easy as saying someone did it.
Debate Round No. 1
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Mharman 2 weeks ago
Mharman
Circular reasoning by pro.
Posted by whiteflame 5 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: BackCommander// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Con points out that not having an answer for WHY something happened doesn't prove that it didn't happen. This being a one round debate Con's argument holds.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter is required to specifically assess arguments from both sides. While the voter does assess a point from Con, he fails to assess any points from Pro, and that makes the vote insufficient.
************************************************************************
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by BackCommander 5 months ago
BackCommander
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2SJMTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro states "if nobody did it, if planes don't fly by themselves, if towers don't fall down by themselves, than 9/11 never happened." which is a false conclusion build on the fallacy of no one committing the act of terror, which is a very obvious impossibility. Con points out that not having an answer for WHY something happened doesn't prove that it didn't happen. This being a one round debate I award the points to Con.
Vote Placed by Overhead 5 months ago
Overhead
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2SJMTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: As con points out, even if the premise of "we don't know which one is right" holds true, that doesn't mean that magically none of them are right. It simply doesn't logically follow. As that is Pros entire argument, Con wins.