The Instigator
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it does a woodchuck chuck enough wood*

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1

Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Anon_Y_Mous
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 5/21/2013 Category: Miscellaneous Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period Viewed: 877 times Debate No: 33990
Debate Rounds (4)

 Pro *Finishing topic* to escape the gravitational pull of the black hole before he is sucked in? ~RULES~ 1) This is a "troll" debate but it is not to be taken lightly 2) No Profanity unless necessary 3) Round 1 is acceptance round debate starts on round 2. 4) . . . Thats itReport this Argument Con *Something witty about Round 1 only being acceptance*Good luck. Report this Argument Pro StatementYes this woodchuck does chuck enough wood for the simple fact that the proximity to the black hole causes the temporal "Thread" to slow down enough, and that the gravity has severly decreased he strenght of the already soft balsa wood to allow the wood chuck to decimate the entire forests tree supply . . .Report this Argument Con First off, I would like for you to clarity whether you are you arguing that a woodchuck could chuck enough wood to escape a black hole, or trying to argue that a woodchuck could chuck a set amount (where 'set amount of' means 'enough') of wood before it is sucked into the black hole? Both are generally affected by similar factors, but please choose one in the next round. Rebuttal:1. 'The proximity to the black hole causes the temporal "Thread" to slow down enough' So, you're assuming that the black hole is close enough to the trees to weaken them, but not close enough to immediate suck in the woodchuck. I would appreciate it if you could clarify what you meant by 'temporal thread', because I'm not sure what you meant. 2. 'the gravity has severely decreased the strenght of the already soft balsa wood' The only way this could happen is if the gravity from the black hole was identical to that of the dominant source of gravity for the woodchuck (presumably the planet it's on), so that there is essentially an antigravity zone between the two entities. This would essentially allow the woodchuck to pick up any amount of wood, due to it's weightlessness. However, these two entities would be moving towards each other simultaneously, and the black hole would be growing bigger at an exponential rate.(1) This would lead to a disruption in the balance, so the wood would be sucked into the black hole, along with any unfortunate mammals trying to chuck it. This would not count as chucked wood, because the woodchuck didn't actually chuck it. Statements: 1. If the tree falls and no one hears it, then the woodchuck has to be out of earshot when it hits the ground. This means that not only would the woodchuck have to chuck lots of wood, but it would first have to sprint to it, assuming it knows where the wood actually is. A woodchuck can only run about 10mph. (2) Provided it has at least some moderate hearing ability, this will take quite a while, especially if the woodchuck has to search for the fallen tree. This is all assuming that the woodchuck has to chuck at least the tree that fell. 2. Black holes grow at an exponential rate. (1) This will lead to the eventual destruction of the universe (assuming something else doesn't happen first). The point is, no matter how fast a woodchuck runs or how fast it chucks wood, it will never be able to escape a black hole. Report this Argument Pro Arie forfeited this round. Con Extend all arguments. Yes, I used the Scribblenauts wiki as a source. Report this Argument Pro Arie forfeited this round. Con After extensive testing, I have conclusive evidence that the woodchuck would not chuck enough wood. http://www.debate.org... Vote Con!Report this Argument
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by GeekiTheGreat 4 years ago
Lmao walrus.
Posted by Walrus101 4 years ago
That was the quickest I have ever seen someone lose spelling and grammar.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.