The Instigator
tvellalott
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mikeee
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Advanced Civilisations in Prehistory

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...
Mikeee
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/2/2011 Category: Science
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,137 times Debate No: 18489
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (8)
Votes (2)

 

tvellalott

Pro

INTRODUCTION:
I have over the past few weeks, discovered some very interesting things through documentaries and my own research about our history. This debate is the product of this information.

FULL RESOLUTION:
There is evidence to suggest that civilisations existed prior to "Recorded History" (4000BC) that were far more technologically advanced than previously thought.

IMPORTANT:
I don't want this debate to fall into semantics, so let me clarify what I expect from this debate. I will supply evidence and examples of objects and anomolies which contradict the belief that pre-historic humans were exclusively simple hunter-gatherers. It is commonly believed that "Homo Sapiens" reached full behavioural maturity around 50,000 years ago. With recorded history only going back around 7,000 years, I will theorise about those missing 43,000 years. My opponent will rebutt these arguments by feisably explaining how these objects were built and how these anomolies could have occured using the simple methods we generally ascribe to these people.

I will only have five arguments throughout this debate. This will prevent information overload and keep the debate concise. If my opponent is able to cast REASONABLE doubt on all five points, he will win the "Arguments" section of point allocation. This means the burden of proof is on me, obviously. The rest are at the voters discresion.

Any video evidence supplied CANNOT be more than 8 minutes long TOTAL, per round. It's contents must be summorised so that voters need not watch it.

STRUCTURE:
Round one is only for laying out rules and definitions and acceptance. If my opponent wishes to add anything, please discuss it in the comments before accepting.
Round two I will provide my first three arguments and my opponent will rebutt them.
Round three, I will provide my final two arguments and attempt to rebutt any counter-arguments my opponent has made. My opponent will attempt to rebutt my own counter-arguments, as well as the new arguments.
Round four will be only counter-arguments, with the last chance for either of us to provide new evidence.
Round five will be strictly a summary and conclusion, with no new arguments or evidence.


Good luck to my opponent.

Mikeee

Con

I completely argue with the pro side of this debate, but I will argue con's side to gain new prospective on the subject.

From my understanding, pro will be trying to prove that great technological advancements and complex societies existed prior to the development of a written langue

I will have to prove that the development of writing made the development of certain advancements and complex societies.

If I have misunderstood any of this please correct me in the comments or beginning of next round.

Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
tvellalott

Pro

tvellalott forfeited this round.
Mikeee

Con

No debate? :(
Debate Round No. 2
tvellalott

Pro

Forfeit.

Full points to my opponent. The timing of this debate has been really bad. I'm far too... disposed... right now to write up this debate and I really need the full rounds to make my case.

Soz to my opponent. If he wishes to have this debate sometime in the future, I'd be happy to ablige.
Debate Round No. 3
Debate Round No. 4
tvellalott

Pro

I ask that my opponent lets his last debate round run out of time so it doesn't show up on the main page. I'll direct people here to vote for him.
Mikeee

Con

Mikeee forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by tvellalott 5 years ago
tvellalott
God damn, where does the time go?
Posted by tvellalott 5 years ago
tvellalott
Yep. ^_^
Posted by Mikeee 5 years ago
Mikeee
Are we still going to debate, just with 3 rounds instead of 4?
Posted by tvellalott 5 years ago
tvellalott
Sorry dude, completely forgot. Auto conduct to my opponent.
Posted by Mikeee 5 years ago
Mikeee
Strictly "written langue" or "physical lounge", such as Inca quipu?
Posted by tvellalott 5 years ago
tvellalott
@ReformedArsenal: That's why my resolution says "there is evidence to suggest...".
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
The trouble with this resolution is that you cannot technically prove ANYTHING that happened in history. That is an epistemological limitation of the field of historical inquiry.
Posted by Raisor 5 years ago
Raisor
Looks like an interesting topic, but the Resolution is pretty mushy. What counts as "civilization?" What counts as "far more?" What exactly is the standard of what counts as "than previously thought?" Whose opinion matters in deciding if something was "previously thought?" If I find one academic who has always said that civilization started 50,000 years ago, do I win?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by randolph7 5 years ago
randolph7
tvellalottMikeeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: lame. F
Vote Placed by Mestari 5 years ago
Mestari
tvellalottMikeeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.