The Instigator
Jhate
Pro (for)
Tied
34 Points
The Contender
frozen_eclipse
Con (against)
Tied
34 Points

I beleive anyone can drop an egg 100 feet and hit the concrete without breaking it.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-4
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 17 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/30/2012 Category: Science
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,880 times Debate No: 23299
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (20)
Votes (17)

 

Jhate

Pro

I believe anyone can drop an egg 100 feet and hit the concrete without breaking it.

Rules:
1. 1st round acceptance.
2. 2nd round argument/ counter and closing statements.
3. The debate is what it says.
4. Forfeit results in automatic loss.
frozen_eclipse

Con

Since the first round is acceptance, I will wait to post my argument until next round.

Anyone-any person at random; no matter who

drop-to smash, split, or divide into parts ; reduce to pieces or fragments:

http://dictionary.reference.com...

Debate Round No. 1
Jhate

Pro

Thank you. My argument is anyone can drop an egg 100 feet and hit the concrete without breaking it.

It- pronoun- 5. (used to represent an action or activity understood, previously mentioned, or about to be mentioned):

http://dictionary.reference.com...

Without breaking it- definition of "it" refers to the concrete, this means the sentences meaning is that the concrete wont break due to the word "it" referring back to the concrete.


If i drop an egg 100 feet itll break on the concrete; however the concrete will not because the concrete is so hard. The egg is not hard enough.

Heres a video of me demonstrating. Please everyone and voters understand that "it" refers back to concrete. This means the question is saying the concrete wont break. That is howit is to be intepruted in English lauguage thankyou.

Thank you. My argument is anyone can drop an egg 100 feet and hit the concrete without breaking it.

It- pronoun- 5. (used to represent an action or activity understood, previously mentioned, or about to be mentioned):

http://dictionary.reference.com...

Without breaking it- definition of "it" refers to the concrete, this means the sentences meaning is that the concrete wont break due to the word "it" referring back to the concrete.

Here is a video of me throwing a egg

frozen_eclipse

Con

Im not taking this. I assumed you meant the egg wont break. So i ask the voters not to vote on this debate because obviously there was a clear misunderstanding. Thus this debate cannot be measured accurately in scope.
Debate Round No. 2
20 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Jhate 5 years ago
Jhate
It wasnt really a trick, it just requires good knowledge of english i dont understand whas wrong with that
Posted by SuperiorArsenal 5 years ago
SuperiorArsenal
WriterDave brings up a good point. There are people that cannot throw eggs. My two arguements would have been that in conjunction with the idea that, given sufficient velocity, and egg could indeed break concrete. You would need many a kilojoule, but it would be possible.
Posted by WriterDave 5 years ago
WriterDave
And with all due respect to FE's wishes on the voting, I believe that JHate deserves a loss for that stunt.
Posted by WriterDave 5 years ago
WriterDave
If I were Con, the entirety of my closing statement would have been:

"There are people who are in long-term comas. These people cannot drop eggs. The resolution is negated."
Posted by martianshark 5 years ago
martianshark
That was brilliant. Although it was obviously a trap, Pro should win since Con didn't even attempt to argue.
Posted by Ron-Paul 5 years ago
Ron-Paul
PEOPLE, THIS NEEDS TO BE A TIE. A TIE. TO QUOTE CON, "So i ask the voters not to vote on this debate because obviously there was a clear misunderstanding."PLEASE VOTE SO THAT THE DEBATE SCORES WILL BE TIED.
Posted by KeytarHero 5 years ago
KeytarHero
No offense to Con, but I knew Pro was going to use a game of semantics (the "it" referring to the concrete and not the egg) before I even read the debate. There's no way he could have proved it if it were the egg, since not just anyone would be able to build a contraption to prevent the egg from breaking. Let this be a lesson to Con that make sure the resolution is clear before taking any debates in the future.
Posted by SuperiorArsenal 5 years ago
SuperiorArsenal
Technically speaking, if one were to drop an egg and use some form of technology to increase the velocity, the energy exerted by the egg could possibly be enough to break the concrete. Of course, the problem is getting the egg to move at such a velocity....
Posted by TUF 5 years ago
TUF
This is kind of a scam. I feel bad for con for being tricked so I am giving him a conduct point.
Posted by Poachi 5 years ago
Poachi
Looks like someone took a high school English course and knows how antecedents work.
17 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Ron-Paul 5 years ago
Ron-Paul
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: People, "So i ask the voters not to vote on this debate because obviously there was a clear misunderstanding.", Read. Amend 1: PEOPLE, READ. AMEND 2: P-E-O-P-L-E R-E-A-D.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Semantics
Vote Placed by whyt3nn3rdy 5 years ago
whyt3nn3rdy
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: VB Counter Semantics does not equal bad arguments. Con easily could have argued that the video did not feature concrete, and the egg was not dropped. Pro said "Forfeit results in automatic loss." Rules of debate outweigh semantics.
Vote Placed by Matthew3.14 5 years ago
Matthew3.14
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Too much sematics. This debate was so dumb. Pro did a bod job of setting up the debate and in the argument itself.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 5 years ago
1dustpelt
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: semantics. Unethical troll debate. Pro fail. Tying this.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: countering daves blatant votebomb
Vote Placed by SarcasticIndeed 5 years ago
SarcasticIndeed
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Semantics
Vote Placed by babygirl23 5 years ago
babygirl23
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: .
Vote Placed by WriterDave 5 years ago
WriterDave
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Semantics. Auto-fail.
Vote Placed by KeytarHero 5 years ago
KeytarHero
Jhatefrozen_eclipseTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: I can't award conduct to anyone. This was an obvious trap by Pro, but Con conceded. Con could have easily won the debate by calling Pro out on his deception and then arguing properly. As Con conceded, I will award arguments to Pro.