The Instigator
Nails
Con (against)
Winning
28 Points
The Contender
mush16
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Compared to most birds, owls are smart.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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 4 votes the winner is...
Nails
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/4/2010 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,998 times Debate No: 10678
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (4)

 

Nails

Con

Owls have long been considered wise. If they were wise, why would they sleep in the day and come out at night? Why would they spin their heads around? Why would they eat nasty rodents? They clearly are not smart.

I will provide further arguments in round 2.
mush16

Pro

As i've not been provided a definition for the word smart i have provided my own.
smart: showing mental alertness and calculation and resourcefulness
source:
http://www.google.co.uk...

Not all owls are actually nocturnal for e.g the burrowing owl.Owls are nocturnal because they hunt for their prey under the cover of darkness,showing understanding how to hunt productively and thus prolong their existence. showing their smartness in the way of calculation. However, not all owls are nocturnal some are crepuscular active during dawn and dusk for e.g the pygmy owl. Even though few owls are active during the day it's not unheard of, such as the short eared owl. An owls eyes are fixed in their sockets, so the owl has adapted to turn it's head to change their line of vision, showing that they are resourceful. Also it is known for some owls to eat fish, however the ones that do prey on "nasty rodents" are extremely helpful to humans because they provide us with a natural form of pest control, which while keeping the food chain balanced helps control rodent populations.

Compared to most birds owls are smart because:
1.The collective name for a group of owls is called a parliament. Generally any species in the world other than humans that can make a parliament is obviously of similar intelligence to that of humans.
2.My source quotes
" The Paleocene genera Berruornis and Ogygoptynx show that owls were already present as a distinct lineage some 60 - 57 mya (million years ago), and presumably also some 5 million years earlier, at the extinction of the non-avian dinosaurs. This makes them one of the oldest known groups of non-Galloanserae landbirds." showing that Owls are extremely ancient and generally speaking the older you are the more experience you have and so the wiser you are.
3. Owls can live in most parts of the world except antartica, some of green land and remote islands.
4. Astheticly owls are also smart because their feathers have cleverly adapted to help with catching food. Their feathers are dull and can "render them almost invisible". And the serration on the edge of the owls wings reduce noise during flight making their method of catching food more reliable and resourceful.
my source:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Nails

Con

My opponent provides a definition of 'smart' as 'showing mental alertness and calculation and resourcefulness' which I'm fine with using, but she never really shows how owls meet this definition.

My opponent contradicts herself, saying that being nocturnal is smart, bu that owls aren't necessarily nocturnal. It matters not anyway, because (just like her point about owls' eyes) this is simply an adaption of animals, not anything that shows mental alertness. Insects have some of the most unique and resourceful adaptations, for example, yet are also among the stupidest of animals.

She then provides a list.

1. Owls don't 'make a parliament,' humans named a group of owls a parliament. Even if we were to assume that owls made a parliament on their own, what does it matter? They don't make laws or pass bills in it, the use of the parliaments that PRO considers smart.

2. Yes, the older one is the wiser one is. The saying is not 'the older your ancestors are, the wiser you are.' A baby with ancient ancestors is not wise.

3. Yes they do.

4. Owls are smart because they have useful feathers? I'll refer PRO to her own definition of MENTAL alertness.

Her only source for anything anyway is a single Wikipedia article.

----

Unfortunately for PRO all of the actual evidence stacks up against her. For birds, owls are quite dumb.[1][2][3]

[1] http://wiki.answers.com...
[2] http://www.bigsiteofamazingfacts.com...
[3] http://www.birdnature.com...
mush16

Pro

:| some people are unbelieveably sad....get a life its a joke..do you have nothing better to do with your time im sick of everyone on here getting so self-righteous. stuff the lot of you :)
Debate Round No. 2
Nails

Con

This is an owl trying to think: http://www.cuterush.com...
They clearly are not smart.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by mush16 7 years ago
mush16
i do understand the use of periods actually.... for if you want a baby ^^
Posted by Cody_Franklin 7 years ago
Cody_Franklin
Pro was actually putting up a decent fight in Round 1! I wish that she hadn't given up.

As far as an RFD, I would be wasting my time if I didn't simply say that I agree with Nails.
Posted by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
Conduct: PRO insulted CON
Grammar: PRO hasn't discovered the proper use of periods.
Arguments: All of CON's arguments went unrefuted
Sources: PRO's only sources were wikipedia and a source for the unnecessary definition of smart.

So, all points to CON
Posted by EHS_Debate 7 years ago
EHS_Debate
Points to CON. CON refuted arguments and provided arguments that were not refuted. PRO seemed to have given up the last two rounds.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by mongoose 7 years ago
mongoose
Nailsmush16Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by Cody_Franklin 7 years ago
Cody_Franklin
Nailsmush16Tied
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 Nails 7 years ago
Nails
Nailsmush16Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by EHS_Debate 7 years ago
EHS_Debate
Nailsmush16Tied
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:70