The Instigator
F0102439
Pro (for)
Tied
3 Points
The Contender
Lonewolfunrol
Con (against)
Tied
3 Points

Does Atlantis exist?

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 3 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/8/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,773 times Debate No: 30049
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

F0102439

Pro

Plato's quote on Atlantis, translated by Benjamin Jowett.

"Many great and wonderful deeds are recorded of your state in our histories. But one of them exceeds all the rest in greatness and valour. For these histories tell of a mighty power which unprovoked made an expedition against the whole of Europe and Asia, and to which your city put an end. This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles; the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent. Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent, and, furthermore, the men of Atlantis had subjected the parts of Libya within the columns of Heracles as far as Egypt, and of Europe as far as Tyrrhenia. This vast power, gathered into one, endeavoured to subdue at a blow our country and yours and the whole of the region within the straits; and then, Solon, your country shone forth, in the excellence of her virtue and strength, among all mankind. She was pre-eminent in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she defeated and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjugated, and generously liberated all the rest of us who dwell within the pillars. But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of misfortune all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared in the depths of the sea. For which reason the sea in those parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way; and this was caused by the subsidence of the island".

I eagerly await my opponents response. I am for this topic.
Lonewolfunrol

Con

I am not completely swayed in either direction because I have been given tangible proof of said existence, but at the same time...

I worry that if you rely too much on a possibly non-existent city that lies at the bottom of the ocean, the chances of finding such are slim to none.

I will admit, however, that there are many things in this world that have appeared and cannot be explained or have a crude explanation that leaves much to be desired. I believe in the paranormal and in the extraterrestrial, but there are some things that just leave too many questions with little to no relevant answers.
Debate Round No. 1
F0102439

Pro

You stated that "there are many things in this world that have appeared and cannot be explained". However, as time passes we eventually uncovered the reason why such a thing existed. For example, Lycanthropy, which we now know is responsible for starting the werewolf scare in Europe, is actually a disease that affects the brain. So I am stating that as time passes and technology improves, we will be able to learn the mystery that Plato wrote in "Timaeus and Critias" around 360 B.C.E.
Lonewolfunrol

Con

Can you tell me if UFO's are real? Thermal, infrared, nightvision, ultraviolet, even full-spectrum cameras haven't been able to capture a 100% "genuine" sighting because of other possible happenings. Our technology has yet to find such a thing out.

Is Bigfoot real? We've captured multiple sightings and videos that have all been marked as either a hoax or inconclusive. Yet you say our technology could soon find them without a problem...

Does Atlantis exist? Sonar can cover all sorts of depths in the ocean and monitor all types of physical barriers; rocks, volcanoes, submarines, sunken boats and planes, etc. Yet... nothing at all on a sunken civilization... Or would you like to say that there is a magical barrier preventing detection?

The point I'm trying to get across, is that we can't rely on technology for finding everything out. Sometimes we need something more solid than a picture.

For example, there has been "strange recordings of voices" that have been detected underwater from various microphonic buoys all across the ocean at the same time, in the same day. Some people say it's Chuthulu, some say it's a secretive Russian underwater base with a sonar jamming system, some even say it could be a sickly whale. Which is real? Can technology really tell us if we've yet to find out with what we have now? What can we do to suddenly upgrade technology to be able to catch -or disprove- these beings?
Debate Round No. 2
F0102439

Pro

I believe that Atlantis does exist because there is no evidence against it not existing, but there is no evidence proving that it exists. A perfect mystery. Just waiting to be solved. You stated that "Is Bigfoot real, we've captured multiple sightings and videos that have all been marked as either a hoax or inconclusive". I believe that the reason why Bigfoot has not been discovered is because there are too many areas in the forests of North America yet to be mapped or surveyed believe that technology, if advanced enough, can help solve any mystery. For example, the best pressure resistant unmanned submarine can go 35000 feet deep and the deepest part in the Atlantic Ocean is 28232 feet, but the visibility is close to zero and the pressure is more than five tons, but if if technology improves we might be able to make a detailed map of the Atlantic Ocean and possible key areas as to where Atlantis lies.
Lonewolfunrol

Con

Tell me this, if you don't mind;

You say that the lowest part of the Atlantic ocean is 28,232 feet deep... What of seismic plates moving and sediments settling? For all we know this mysterious city could have burned in magma under the ocean floor when a plate it rested on moved? Or if the city survived that, wouldn't it be completely buried under all the sediments that came to rest over it? The chances of a sunken city is just too low to be scientifically correct.

One last point to make, you said "...technology, if advanced enough, can help solve any mystery." So far instead of people using said technology to locate possibly real beings, they have been trying to make more efficient weaponry and war machines. It is somewhat like an anonymous quote I once read; "We... as a species, have been able to fly to space, save lives that were once considered lost, rebuild crippled societies... But the one thing we haven't reach, and I fear we may never be able to reach... is an understanding between people."

If what they say is correct, the last thing on a nation's mind is a sunken city. The first thing, and most important thing, is to kill or subdue those of the same exact species... The same species, but of a different variant.
Debate Round No. 3
F0102439

Pro

You stated that "the chances of a sunken city is just too low to be scientifically correct", however there are quite a few sunken cities that have been discovered, just to name one, such as Port Royal which in 1692 fell beneath the waves. You stated that "the last thing on a nations mind is a sunken city", however in more advanced nations, such as the U.S., they have Marine Archaeological programs which have nothing to do with "killing or subduing", a people. You also stated "For all we know this mysterious city could have burned in magma under the ocean floor when a plate it rested on moved", are you stating that you agree with me? Please clarify. May the best man win.
Lonewolfunrol

Con

To answer your direct question, whether or not it's real, it wouldn't matter if the city was burned to nothing.

When it comes to US programs other than Military, they get little to no funding from the government because they put everything into fighting other people. My point is, we don't have what it takes to disprove or prove the existence of just about any scientific, extraterrestrial, or paranormal anomalies just yet.

Let the best man win, my brother. I look forward to the results.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Nur-Ab-Sal 4 years ago
Nur-Ab-Sal
I do Atlantis debates too, it's my favorite topic to argue on here.
Posted by Lonewolfunrol 4 years ago
Lonewolfunrol
To anyone who views this; Me and my best friend [F0102439] would be very appreciative if you would comment/vote with your personal theories and ideologies. Thanks in advance!

-Lonewolfunrol, Calvin Nelms Debate Team
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
F0102439LonewolfunrolTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not fulfill his BOP by playing the "argument from ignorance card" which proves nothing. He had no evidence to suggest Atlantis exists, so there is no reason to believe it does. He did not make any convincing arguments, while con provided reasoning to suggest Atlantis doesn't exist.
Vote Placed by Oryus 4 years ago
Oryus
F0102439LonewolfunrolTied
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: NAS is correct about the burden of proof shifting. Just because Con cannot disprove your point does not make you right- burden of proof not fulfilled. Also, Con didn't even take the "con" position and basically rambled. Both parties did equally poor.
Vote Placed by Nur-Ab-Sal 4 years ago
Nur-Ab-Sal
F0102439LonewolfunrolTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro used some bizarre burden of proof shifting on Con, but I think Con's rebuttals were either inadequate or irrelevant.