The Instigator
youseeovermyhead
Pro (for)
Losing
19 Points
The Contender
Kleptin
Con (against)
Winning
52 Points

Global warming

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/4/2008 Category: Technology
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 12,059 times Debate No: 3072
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (18)

 

youseeovermyhead

Pro

Everyday millions of BTUs of carbon dioxide are released into the atmosphere. Because of these greenhouse gases, global warming is occurring. Global warming is the theory that the earth is getting hotter due to greenhouse gases, the ice caps in Antarctica are melting rapidly, tornadoes and hurricanes are getting stronger IE Katrina. Temperatures across the globe will rise and droughts will occur.

Global warming is occurring due to various human activity, such as using oil in cars, factories, etc. We as a whole need to find more efficient means of transportation that does not include oil. I propose more electric cars. Hybrids are a great example, except they are still part gas. Factories release an enormous amount of carbon dioxide. There needs to be a regulation or even better a stop to releasing carbon dioxide in the air.

If people as a whole start using public transportation and stop using private cars, the amount of carbon dioxide will immensely go down. I also suggest getting nicer and more comfortable transportation to encourage people to use the transportation. Also the transportation would go to more areas.
Kleptin

Con

I thank my opponent for giving background information on Global Warming.

As you can see from the title of this debate and my position as "Con", I am against Global warming. My opponent has provided a good and clear background as to what Global Warming is and how it is caused.

I am personally against Global Warming because it severely alters climates and may pose severe threats to humans. I will detail my argument in later rounds, but I must first ask my opponent to clarify her position by answering several questions:

1. Why do you believe Global warming to be a good thing?
2. Do you believe that those reasons outweigh the negative aspects of global warming?
3. How so?

I await my opponent's response.
Debate Round No. 1
youseeovermyhead

Pro

I am not for global warming. I am for a change in our society's ways. I don't how one could be for global warming. Hotter days, beautiful ice caps gone? How could somebody want that? I believe global warming exists and that is why I took the pro position.
Kleptin

Con

The issue of debate is not "Global Warming Exists". Rather, you have written it as "Global Warming".

Since you are arguing the Pro position (In favor), I MUST assume that you are arguing in favor of global warming.

You have yet to detail a response as to why you support global warming.

One argument I have encountered is that the melting of the polar ice caps will yield beaches where there were none before. Artificial beaches are quite expensive to maintain and construct, so this would obviously be a benefit.

However, I argue against this because the loss of revenue from the water level rising and destroying property would most likely be greater than the revenue collected from these new beaches.

Another argument for Global Warming is that the warmer temperatures are better and easier to live in. I argue that Global Warming will alter the climate in ways other than temperature, and that the overall exchange is not worth it.

*****

To sum up, I have given an argument as to why I am AGAINST (Con) Global Warming. Since my opponent is FOR (Pro) Global warming, I invite her to argue her point for she has not yet provided an argument.
Debate Round No. 2
youseeovermyhead

Pro

My opponent think I am for global warming. I am FOR changes to stop global warming. I don't think my opponent understands what change means. Change means to transform or alter. I want to ALTER or TRANSFORM our use of various items that cause global warming. Such as our dependency on oil, especially foreign oil, factory production of harmful gases into the atmosphere, and different means of transportation that contribute to global warming.

Closing arguements:
Believe it or not, global warming is occurring all across the world. Humans have cause this, by burning fossil fuels, such as carbon dioxide, cars, and factories. I am for the changing of our life styles to help stop global warming.
Kleptin

Con

"My opponent think I am for global warming. I am FOR changes to stop global warming. I don't think my opponent understands what change means. Change means to transform or alter. I want to ALTER or TRANSFORM our use of various items that cause global warming. Such as our dependency on oil, especially foreign oil, factory production of harmful gases into the atmosphere, and different means of transportation that contribute to global warming."

I think that's all well and good, but my opponent is actually arguing my position. I wish to stop global warming, and have been arguing that point because I am the CON position. I am AGAINST Global warming.

My opponent is PRO Global Warming, meaning, she is supposed to be arguing that she is for it. For this entire debate, she has been arguing on the wrong side.

"Closing arguements:
Believe it or not, global warming is occurring all across the world. Humans have cause this, by burning fossil fuels, such as carbon dioxide, cars, and factories. I am for the changing of our life styles to help stop global warming."

This has nothing to do with your argument. The issue of debate is "Global Warming" and my opponent is now focusing on "Changes to prevent Global warming". She is supposed to be arguing her position, which is "PRO GLOBAL WARMING".

I have offered my own arguments as to why I am against global warming. If my opponent wishes to argue for my side, that is fine, but she does so at the price of her own side of the debate.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by jsonn5 8 years ago
jsonn5
Even if global warming is occuring which I believe is not true what is wrong with hotter days. Being an agriculturists I understand that hotter days will help me. We have an ever growing world population. In Colorado, we lose about 10 acres of farm ground a day due to urban sprawl. You do not understand where your food comes from. If all of our farm ground is taken away what will you eat. America will also lose thousands of jobs. Every 1 in 5 jobs is directly involved with agriculture. Farmers and ranchers are getting the burden of producing products for human consumption in a world with a massive population. With a longer growing season (hotter days) farmers can produce more commodity projects.
Posted by byebyepats 8 years ago
byebyepats
kleptin is an idiot. He has several accounts and loads up his debates with fake votes. This person wanted a serious debate and instead you chose to waste her and our time reading this. I think from now on if i see you are involved I might as well just skip over it.
Posted by Korezaan 8 years ago
Korezaan
Lol @ Kleptin's approach.
Posted by believer_720 8 years ago
believer_720
Jeez, Con, you could have made this into a debate, but you decided to pick apart the wording of her topic. I didn't understand either, when I first looked at the topic, but once I read her argument, it was really pretty easy to figure out. It looks like the only reason you even continued is to mess with her, and nothing more.

I am against Global Warming. Let me clarify, I am against trying to find a solution to a problem that is not as severe as other things we could be working on. If anyone wishes to debate global warming with me, feel free to ask.
Posted by rojogato19 8 years ago
rojogato19
Actually there is no link between global warming and stronger tornadoes and hurricanes. And 20 years ago everyone said an imminent ice age was looming. Yet still, in the past the earth has been considerably hotter than it is now, and it then cooled, then warmed, then cooled - hence a pattern that continues today. There is a LOT of theory in global warming and little fact. The fact: the earth has warmed...everything beyond that are theories at best. Another FACT is that temperatures increase prior to CO2 levels increasing, NOT the other way around as some without knowledge of the subject claim (such as Al Gore). Honestly, if you are interested in the truth of the issue, i suggest you investigate it thoroughly and objectively.
Posted by DucoNihilum 8 years ago
DucoNihilum
What's your premise? "Global Warming" isn't a premise.
18 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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:
Vote Placed by brittwaller 8 years ago
brittwaller
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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 Robert_Santurri 8 years ago
Robert_Santurri
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by youseeovermyhead 8 years ago
youseeovermyhead
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Mickeymouse 8 years ago
Mickeymouse
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by jsonn5 8 years ago
jsonn5
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by SportsGuru 8 years ago
SportsGuru
youseeovermyheadKleptinTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03