The Instigator
question1349
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points

Can it be explained by logic?

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 1 vote the winner is...
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/26/2016 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 345 times Debate No: 85578
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

question1349

Con

This happened on my 4th floor apartment`s balcony within a few hours.

Photos here:

http://imgur.com...
http://imgur.com...

You can see some soil near to the other plant pots on the concrete which was the original place of the pot -as usual- with of course the plant in it. In the afternoon, I noticed that the pot was moved about a meter, the plant was taken out, the pot was upside down, and no trace soil on the concert while this all was happening. No winds and no human or animals around. Only me in the apartment.

Can it be explained by logic or natural causes?
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid

Pro

Thank you for the opportunity to debate this topic.

Definitions:
"Can" - be made possible or probable by circumstances
"Explain" - account for (an action or event) by giving a reason as excuse or justification.
"Logic" - a proper or reasonable way of thinking about or understanding something
"Natural causes" - cause and effect in accordance with Newton's three laws of motion. I'm afraid assumptions of anything beyond that must be documented and evidenced by con's argument.

The scenario you described is lacking in some fundamental data. Therefore, I must identify assumptions.
1. You are describing a real event, not a logic riddle intended for humor.
2. You are not suggesting the presence of supernatural forces like magic, telekinesis, Kylo Ren's tantrums, or an infinite improbability drive (hence, the absence of a sperm whale).
3. Given the information you've provided, I cannot conclusively identify the exact cause of this event with 100% precision. The argument as stated does not require this.
4. My burden of proof is that the event is possible due to logical and natural causes.

I'm unsure how you plan to describe an argument that this is not explainable by logic. Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
question1349

Con

question1349 forfeited this round.
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid

Pro

In the comments, my opponent has decided to not continue this debate.

I contend that a logical explaination exists for the displacement of the plant.

If question1349 would be so kind as to post anything quickly to end the debating period, it would be appreciated.



Debate Round No. 2
question1349

Con

question1349 forfeited this round.
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid

Pro

I have it on very good authority that @SactownBoom's momma lives on the Third Floor. Traffic can be heavy, both through the interior, and exterior of the building. Some of her guests have a high incentive to avoid being seen. Most logical explanation.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by SactownBoom 1 year ago
SactownBoom
Voting left. Pro seems angry. Miserable even.
Posted by question1349 1 year ago
question1349
Thank you for commenting. I guess I first have to proof that there was no wind/human/animals around to make the debate start.
Posted by Briannj17 1 year ago
Briannj17
Logic requires assessment of data of (which you don't supply) It would require us to be there to see for ourselves what could have happened. Therefore this debate should prove to be unwinnable for pro.
Posted by MagicAintReal 1 year ago
MagicAintReal
Would we have to accept your anecdotal evidence that "No winds and no human or animals around. Only me in the apartment." to accept the debate?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Hayd 1 year ago
Hayd
question1349diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kidTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con drops all of Pro's arguments and makes none of his own, thus Pro wins arguments. Con ff multiple rounds so conduct to Pro.