The Instigator
Solarman1969
Pro (for)
Losing
19 Points
The Contender
Logical-Master
Con (against)
Winning
55 Points

COLLOIDAL SILVER IS THE BEST REMEDY FOR KILLING BUGS!

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/7/2008 Category: Science
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,206 times Debate No: 1518
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (23)

 

Solarman1969

Pro

************* You are REQUIRED to have a MINIMUM of a BS degree to take up this debate

I will NOT ARGUE with you kids or NON-EDUCATED fools on this subject

It is TOO IMPORTANT

The government is LYING TO YOU FOR PROFITS

SILVER IS FREE

SILVER WORKS INCREDIBLY

once again YOU MUST HAVE A BS FROM AN REAL UNIVERSITY to debate me on this subject

even with a BS , you still are probably NOT qualified , but given the TOTAL LACK OF ANY QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS HERE , I am LOWERING MY STANDARDS

good luck , internet

SOLARMAN
Logical-Master

Con

remedy (rěm'ĭ-dē) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. rem�e�dies

Something, such as medicine or therapy, that relieves pain, cures disease, or corrects a disorder.
Something that corrects an evil, fault, or error.
Law A legal order of preventing or redressing a wrong or enforcing a right.
The allowance by a mint for deviation from the standard weight or quality of coins.

tr.v. rem�e�died, rem�e�dy�ing, rem�e�dies

To relieve or cure (a disease or disorder).
To remove, counteract, or rectify. See Synonyms at correct, cure.

In today's round, the job of the negative side will be to disprove the notion that Colloidal silver is the best remedy for killing bugs.

First, since my opponent did not provide a definition of remedy, it is unclear as to what his conditions are for what could possible serve as a superior remedy. Therefore, I will use a definition from "American Heritage Dictionary" to clarify.

Remedy: 1) Something, such as medicine or therapy, that relieves pain, cures disease, or corrects a disorder. 2) Something that corrects an evil, fault, or error. 3) Law A : legal order of preventing or redressing a wrong or enforcing a right. 4) The allowance by a mint for deviation from the standard weight or quality of coins.

tr.v. rem�e�died, rem�e�dy�ing, rem�e�dies

5) To relieve or cure (a disease or disorder).
6) To remove, counteract, or rectify. See Synonyms at correct, cure.

At any rate, I believe that the 1st, 2nd, 5th, and 6th definitions are most relevant to this debate.

With the above definition acknowledged, it is certainly not the best remedy that concerns killing an insect. Although one may suggest that a "dosage" would be fatal against an insect, there is the matter of how mobile an insect is as not all insects remain in one space while awaiting their inevitable deaths. Even the best bug killer liquids are pointless if an insect (such as a grasshopper or a wasp) has mobility to its advantage. I submit to my opponent that a shoe (although "icky") is more efficient in dealing with all manners of bugs both mobile and stationary. Now, do I believe that it is the most efficient remedy? Certainly not, but it's more useful in general.

With that said, lets look at my opponent's case:

My opponent states that Colloid Silver works incredibly, is the best, yada yada yada, but one thing you must note is that he never backs up his position; he never explains how it is superior to all other remedies; he commits the fallacy of begging the question in that his premise is basically his conclusion.

My opponent suggest that the Government is lying to everyone for profits, yet presents no evidence to support this claim.

My opponent then attempts to set a standard by stating that only people with a BS degree may respond, but he is incorrect as the terms of use clearly dictate that all members of this website may respond to arguments that are open to all members.

To sum up my opponents case, it is basically a collaborated logical fallacy surrounded by all means ridiculousness.
Debate Round No. 1
Solarman1969

Pro

you are not qualified to debate this subject

I will await a qualified individual with a minimum level of understanding

(1) Chemistry

ie concentration, ions, colloids, compounds, molecules

(2) Biochemistry - interactions of medicines and pathogens in the body

(3) Pharmacology is dose, response pathogen types pathways etc

Since you dont have the undestanding of these, all you will do is spout nonsense that is NOT supported by scientific facts

This is akin to the Global Warming caused by CO2 nonsense

have a nice day

Solarman
Logical-Master

Con

In my opponent's 2nd round, he dropped my arguments, so I would like to extend all of them (assuming he doesn't intend to respond in the third) for this round.

Concerning this round: My opponent states that I'm not qualified to debate this subject, but he presents no evidence to support this claim. Of course, even if I weren't, his response still doesn't excuse dropping my entire case.

My opponent claims that he will await a qualified individual with a minimum level of understanding on this subject, thus, we have reason to assume that he is forfeiting his round with me.

Basically, my opponent's argument (if it can be called such) is "I'm right, you're wrong, and you are not qualified to debate with me."

Thus, I urge that you all vote on my case.
Debate Round No. 2
Solarman1969

Pro

you can have the vote

Again, no offense to you

you simply dont have the educational level to intelligently debate this subject

You will simply put forth non science nonsense that is cleverly disguised propaganda from Big Pharma and the feds

Unless you can understand things like dose, particle size, response, proper scientific inquiry and proof , types of silver collids and compounds, and the like, it wont be an interesting debate

My purpose here is to PROVE that CS IS a very effective remedy for viruses and pathogens.

This is for the purpose of the HEALTH of people reading this debate

In trying to have this debate in the past, and in the comments from other debates, it is clear that the propaganda about

(1) Argyria- a false condition that is NOT caused by CS

and

(2) false reports about Silver toxicity and other harmful effects

and furthermore

the proper science that HAS been done to prove the effectiveness of CS on pathgoens

If you cant get into the specifics here, then it will just be based on your FEELINGS and a quick internet review of PROPAGANDA , which is of no use

Thus ,my requirements for a minimum of a BS

it is NOT an age thing- there is a 45 year old that also doesnt get science who has tried to argue this subject

I appreciate your attempts nonetheless

SOLARMAN
Logical-Master

Con

In his final round, my opponent presented reasons as to why he requires individuals with a minimums of a BS degree to debate with him. All that is fine as there is nothing wrong with having opinions, but this doesn't address the actual topic at hand and is thus an example of red herring.

Again, my opponent has dropped my previous contentions. Therefore, as I stated in the previous round, all of my contentions are extended.

Finally, my opponent has even agreed that I should get the vote for this round.

Reasons the Negative side wins today's round:

1) My opponent dropped all of my contentions
2) My opponent doesn't support his conclusions with premises.
3) It is my opponents fault for not having the opponent he wanted as he made this debate open to all members; he could have easily avoided having me as his opponent by sending an invitation to a member he wished to argue with.
4) My opponent agrees that I should get the vote.

So there you have it, ladies and gentleman. For those reasons, you should vote for my case.

Thanks and goodnight. :D
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by mindjob 9 years ago
mindjob
While the FDA may have recommended against using CS and has issued warnings regarding it, the government is lying to you so everyone else can make huge profits off of your slow, painful demise. Everything is a conspiracy and you're a stupid peon for thinking anything else. Elvis is also a gas pumper in Nome, Alaska and aliens are traveling across the universe with the sole purpose of shoving probes up our asses. There, I saved solarman from having to type out another comment. Your welcome.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 9 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
I think his degree must be in propaganda...

Colloidal silver works no better than normal antibiotics, although it does tend to leave more of the beneficial bacteria alive than normal antibiotics. Also, colloidal silver hasn't historically been available in a regulated way - there are reports of the amount of silver in a bottle ranging between 15 and 125% of what is posted on the bottle. And last, but not least, there have been cases of argyria - basically, silver poisoning, although not lethal.

Also, the FDA has recommended against the use of CS, and issued warning letters to its makers.

More info on why CS isn't the best: http://www.quackwatch.com...
Posted by mindjob 9 years ago
mindjob
Just out of curiosity, what is your degree in? Biomedical engineering? I doubt it considering that they never would have allowed you to graduate if you did your logical reasoning in the same way you do now. A firm appreciation, understanding and application of the scientific method is necessary to even get by in such a field, yet you haven't demonstrated anything close to that in any of the debates I've read of yours. You know, youth has a significant advantage when it comes to warding off senility.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
all your degrees are meaningless in discussing hard science

at least you are out of high school though
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
I have nothing against you either, solarman. It's just that I debate to win. :D

I'd advise that you do some research on the members here so that you can simply invite any opponent of your choice to debate with you on this subject.
Posted by mindjob 9 years ago
mindjob
Was that comment even directed at me? It's following mine, so I'm guessing yes. Actually, my BAs are in International Relations and History, and my MA is in Public Administration, with a good background in Political Campaigning. Your lack of logical, thought-out, evidence-based argument, while your over-reliance on emotionally-based, knee-jerk, impulsive, mindless and egocentric babble seems more characteristic of a devolved caveman. And liberals are the lower forms of life?
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
Oh yeah, genius

whats your graduate degree in - Sociology?

Communist thought?

Social thinking among amoeba, democrats and other lower forms of life?
Posted by mindjob 9 years ago
mindjob
The last person I would ever go to for scientific observation or an in depth understanding of anything scientific is you, solarman. In the spirit of Top Gun, your ego is writing checks your brain can't cash.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
A BS is really necessary because I am going to cover at least fourth year undergrad

Chemistry
Biochemisty
Pharmacology

to prove the CS does indeed work and that the supposed Argyria and what not are NOT based in SCIENCE

cheers

SOLARMAN
Posted by artC 9 years ago
artC
Why a BS and not a BA??? Does this debate really require that you take Bio 101?
23 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 11 months ago
KingDebater
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Pluto2493 9 years ago
Pluto2493
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:30 
Vote Placed by cLoser 9 years ago
cLoser
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:30 
Vote Placed by Greendonut 9 years ago
Greendonut
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Sanchez 9 years ago
Sanchez
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Grandma 9 years ago
Grandma
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by LandonWalsh 9 years ago
LandonWalsh
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by anwermate 9 years ago
anwermate
Solarman1969Logical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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