"First of all its quite easy to make 2+2=5 using simple algebra..."
Vote Here
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style:  Open  Point System:  7 Point  
Started:  6/1/2009  Category:  Miscellaneous  
Updated:  7 years ago  Status:  Voting Period  
Viewed:  2,057 times  Debate No:  8501 
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (14)
Votes (13)
My opponent claimed the above in the comments section of this debate: http://www.debate.org...
I think that this is absolutely impossible. [2 + 2 =/= 5], because if [2 + 2 = 5], and [2 + 2 = 4], then [ 4 = 5], so [X = X + 1], so all numbers are equal. This would be ridiculous. Algebra  a branch of mathematics concerning the study of structure, relation, and quantity (http://en.wikipedia.org...) Thank you, should you accept this debate.
Say x=1 and y=1 ok. So x=y If we were to multiply both sides by "x" the equation would still be correct. x�=xy correct. Now if i was to subtract "y�" from both sides the equation still remains correct. x�y�=xyy� correct. And this is equal to (xy)(x+y)=y(xy) correct. The (xy) on both sides cancel each other out. Leaving x+y=y or 2=1 Ok so lets take 2+2=5 Right lets take the 2+2. I have just shown that through algebra 2 can be equal to 1 without any flaw in the math. So 2+2 becomes 1+1 Now lets take a look at 5 5= (2x2)+1 And since 2=1 that becomes (1x1)+1 Which is equal to 2. So that leaves me with 1+1=2, which was originally 2+2=5. So by manipulating 2 to become 1 using algebra I have brought the two sides to be equal. We really didn't need three rounds bud. Make what you want of it. Cheers for the debate anyway. 

Take a look at my opponent's argument.
"Say x=1 and y=1 ok." This means that because [1  1 = 0], [x  y = 0]. [The (xy) on both sides cancel each other out.] Because [x  y = 0], you can't use dividing by [x  y], because this goes against division by zero. http://en.wikipedia.org... "Under the standard rules for arithmetic on integers, rational numbers, real numbers and complex numbers, division by zero is undefined." In fact, Wikipedia was so kind to point out my opponent's fallacy, and why it doesn't work. http://en.wikipedia.org... My opponent's argument was one that tried to disguise the division by zero by dividing by a difference of zero. Therefore, my opponent's logical argument is entirely flawed, and [2 + 2 = 4], by the property of addition, and [2 + 2 =/= 5], because [4 =/= 5], because two different numbers have two different values. http://www.google.com...:*:IESearchBox&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7DKUS_en (I apologize for the broken link. Please copy the part that wasn't included in the original hyperlink into the window opened up by the hyperlink. Cheers.) "I have just shown that through algebra 2 can be equal to 1 without any flaw in the math." You made one of the biggest mathematical flaws in the history of mathematical flaws. You divided by zero in a sneaky, underhanded way. "We really didn't need three rounds bud." Yes, we will. In my second round here, I point out the flaw in your logic. You then make some defense for your logic. I point out that your defense is, in itself, flawed. You hang your head in shame. "Make what you want of it." Your argument is flawed. There. "Cheers for the debate anyway." Cheers.
Impressive. I didnt think you would spot it. I told you we wouldnt need three rounds bud. Smart little 14 year old. 

Erectile disfunction!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Cherymenthol 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  7  0 
Vote Placed by SaintNick 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  0  7 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  0  7 
Vote Placed by Xer 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  0  0 
Vote Placed by philosphical 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  7  0 
Vote Placed by Chase_the_Bass 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  7  0 
Vote Placed by MTGandP 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  6  0 
Vote Placed by ToastOfDestiny 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  7  0 
Vote Placed by abard124 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  7  0 
Vote Placed by mongoose 7 years ago
mongeese  purplehaze  Tied  

Agreed with before the debate:      0 points  
Agreed with after the debate:      0 points  
Who had better conduct:      1 point  
Had better spelling and grammar:      1 point  
Made more convincing arguments:      3 points  
Used the most reliable sources:      2 points  
Total points awarded:  5  0 
I think that every proof includes division by zero. Though maybe there is some flawed proof that can be constructed by getting a negative absolute value or something.
Good job mongeese.
Most of my debates are standard debates revolving around a topic.
However, whenever I see someone claim something that I know is false, I challenge them to a debate, and prove them wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
My opponent believes to have an autowin just as much as I do; otherwise, the debate wouldn't be accepted.
People who try to find a loophole on the foundations of math using a seemingly convincing algebraic 'worksheet' just make a fool out of themselves when they find out they are making a simple algebra error, as stated before :P.
Anyways, kudos to CON for calling him out, though most of us here probably knew who the winner was beforehand.