The Instigator
pr.Daniel_Jordan
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
PericIes
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Could comets and meteors have brought water on earth?

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...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/11/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 505 times Debate No: 78590
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

pr.Daniel_Jordan

Con

State your scientific argument that water was brought to earth by comets / meteors. I will quote each point you make and respond to it systematically.
PericIes

Pro

It is possible for comets and meteors to have water on and/or in them. It is possible for comets and meteors to come into contact with Earth. It is therefore possible that comets and/or meteors could have brought water to Earth.
Debate Round No. 1
pr.Daniel_Jordan

Con

You: It is possible for comets and meteors to have water on and/or in them. It is possible for comets and meteors to come into contact with Earth. It is therefore possible that comets and/or meteors could have brought water to Earth.

Answer: I will not let my time be wasted with unnecessary calculations such as only qualifying certain groups of meteorites like carbonaceous chondrites, and then qualifying only water-bearing groups of that specific type of meteorite such as Cl which on average contain 22% water -- what I will perform is a calculation that is in favor of your meteorites-brought-water theory, so much in favor that it's beyond reality -- it will only reveal the true absuridity of the theory.

Let the calculations begin.

Components of the calculation:
(1) 1,260,000,000,000,000,000,000 liters of water in ocean (CORRECT - no advantages or disadvantages)
(2) A meteorite is a 500g hand size object with 90% water. (FALSE - but great advantage to you)
(3) The earth is 100 billion years old. (FALSE - but great advantage to you)

The actual calculation: 1,260,000,000,000,000,000,000 liters of water on earth / 0.45 liters of water on a meteorite (450g H2O) = 2,800,000,000,000,000,000,000 meteorites needed to account for water on earth. Then we divide the meteorites needed to account for water on earth 2,800,000,000,000,000,000,000 by the age of the earth 100,000,000,000 and we receive meteorites per year: 28,000,000,000

______________________________________________________________________________________________
Question: Is 28,000,000,000 meteorites per year for 100 billion years realistic? State your scientific argument.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
PericIes

Pro

I was not aware that you intended for the debate to be on whether or not comets/meteors were the ultimate source for the existence of water on Earth. If this is the case, then you should have worded the title differently, or specified in round 1 that this was what you intended. I interpreted the title literally, by which I mean that I took it to mean exactly what it says: that comets and/or meteors could have brought water in any quantity to Earth.

This was not a play on semantics. The question of whether or not comets and/or meteors have brought water to Earthis a large debate, because, if they did, it is possible that they could have brought life to Earth.

In light of these clarifications, my arguments from the previous round extend to this round. I don't feel that I need to change my position, because, with respect, I was not responsible for the lack of specificity in the rules of the debate.
Debate Round No. 2
pr.Daniel_Jordan

Con

I thought it was obvious that rocks from outer space can bring water on earth, and that I had made it clear enough that I meant the water on earth. Now that I look at it, I may have not have been extremely precise, but I would still not say that the title was terribly wrong...

Then we agree, great!
PericIes

Pro

The title isn't wrong, but it's not specific enough. Shall we just agree to a draw, then?
Debate Round No. 3
Debate Round No. 4
pr.Daniel_Jordan

Con

pr.Daniel_Jordan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Cook123 1 year ago
Cook123
pr.Daniel_JordanPericIesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Draw