The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Infinite water is possible

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/14/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,030 times Debate No: 77680
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (10)
Votes (1)




Water expands when you freeze it, so if you un-freeze it you have more water. Re-freeze it again and it expands. Therefore infinite water.


Dear Mr. Occisionis,

You are incorrect with your assumption that water can be infinite. I am actually so astounded that one can be that stupid. I am obviously superior to you in all aspects. I am incredibly smart and can see right through your argument. Your argument actually personally offends my superior intelligence. You thought you could compete with the big players here (me) with this ridiculous argument. Let me remind you (and everyone else), I am way smarter than you. Its a proven fact that I proved because I have the intellectual upper hand. You, Mr. Occisionis, are trying to debate the master of debates.

I am appalled at your reasoning for your argument. That sounds like something a teenager would write. I, of course, am above your level and understand what you were trying to convey, even though it is incorrect. My perfect brain knows that you attempted to communicate something, but failed to. Let me remind you, I am way smarter than you. You are wrong.

Let me compare this with a simple analogy that your simple mind can understand. Imagine I had 2 oranges. Then I add another 2. I'll give you the answer so you don't have to work it out yourself: you now have 4. If you didn't understand that, maybe you should have paid more attention in class. I am a refined man, I will not shout expletives at you. Unlike many people, I do not get angry at people who are worse than me.

I am always polite, as you can see. I never get angry. i am not angry at you. I just feel pity to know that your brain is not quite as high-functioning as mine. To the voters, please keep my professionalism and politeness in your minds and choose me over this pretender. I am obviously the smarter man, as I have stated many times. If you disagree with me, I am sorry that I can't change your opinions as you have too much of a simple mind. Comment your opinions on this debate.

Warm regards to you,
Debate Round No. 1


The fact that you stated you were superior so many times proves that you feel very insecure and inferior that you do not have a PhD in troll science. YOU should have paid more attention in troll physics and troll chemistry for you to understand my statement. By the way you still haven't proven why my statement is wrong, but instead just exclaimed how you were smarter for 4 paragraphs.


Troll science is not a real science so you are invalidated. You are making up your credentials.

Voters, you know who the correct one is, it's me.
Debate Round No. 2


This kid doesn't even have a PhD. I know what I'm talking about.


Everyone knows that I am smarter than you. I don't have one of your fake PhD's to prove my worth. Troll Science is not a real thing. I might as well have a PhD in Physics, as I am actually smarter than most physicists anyway. I am a man of real integrity, that is why I do not claim to have something I don't. You don't know what you're talking about. Water (at least not in this case) is not infinite.

Debate Round No. 3


Trollology is a real thing and I have my phd certificate to prove it:


Oh ok then I'm sorry for insulting you. I should have checked your credentials before hand. That reminds me of a moment I had a year ago. I was walking to work one day and a man walked by. Naturally, I shouted at him "I am so much smarter than you" in order to let him know who he was dealing with. I thought he was just a normal guy who knew 1/100th of the things I knew. However, he turned around and got mad at me. I never get angry, so I said calmly "WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT DUMB GUY". It turns out he had a PhD in Zoology and actually knew more stuff than I thought. So I felt a little bad for insulting a smart man. I was actually smarter than him, but he was polite so that made up for his inferior intelligence.
Debate Round No. 4


My good pal has 3 PhD's in Zoology. That reminds me of a story when I had to show my PhD diploma to an abnormally stupid person who thought he was smarter than anyone with a PhD. I keep my diploma around for such idiots, SEE:

Anything I say is true because I have the PhD and you don't.


Mr. Occicnosnicosis, I must thank you for allowing me to debate this mysterious topic. I guess since both our great minds could not come to a conclusion on this debate, it is evident that the topic must be researched. I will use this debate as an underline for my PhD thesis in hydrodynamic physics.

I am a man of great prestige, and I must admit you have some prestige as well. I hope your university recognizes you as a worthy student. I was not aware of the university you studied at prior to this debate, but now I look upon it and it's faculty with mild respect.

To everyone reading this, before this debate, it was clear that I was in the right. However as the debate progressed, Mr. Ossicionicsis provided strong points to prove his side. Throughout the debate, I was always polite and courteous and always showed respect to my opponent. My stance on this debate was made clear by my arguments that showed deep insight in the topic. I always show consideration towards the readers and make sure that they are aware of my strategically placed words. I hope you consider the science behind this as well. Water cannot actually expand and then contract and make more water. Anyway, back to the morals. Please take into consideration the amount of research both sides have done on the subject. Both me and my opponent provided sources of knowledge that were credible and verifiable. I hope you as a reader enjoyed this debate and took away information from this.

If you feel you have learned something of value in this debate, please vote.
Debate Round No. 5
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Cotton_Candy 2 years ago
"I never get angry, so I said calmly "WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT DUMB GUY"."

Posted by Cotton_Candy 2 years ago
Gawd Con's the obvious winner in this debate! People who can't apprehend the intellectual might of the arguments he used and who believe that PRO should have won should probably get their voting rights stripped off or better be banned from the site.
Posted by Greg4586 2 years ago
Ya know this probably could have been the easiest win possible for you Con, but you still failed.
Posted by ZBestDebater 2 years ago
heh, this is kinda funny. Nice troll, occisisonis, By the way, what's your Xbox 360 Gamertag? I'd like to troll some people with you, I see you're quite dedicated.
Posted by lol101 2 years ago
Man... what a terrible debater.
Posted by lol101 2 years ago
Really Con?
Posted by Nautical 2 years ago
I have PHD in infinate water so i know hes right
Posted by Occisionis 2 years ago
I have a PhD so I know what I'm talking about.
Posted by Alpha3141 2 years ago
*Slow Clapping*
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
its just little air bubbles, you dont get more matter out of the same matter
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Philocat 2 years ago
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: What a terrible debate. Instead of actually discussing Pro's argument, Con never even attempts to refute it and so, despite it being demonstratably fallacious, I have to award arguments to Pro. Con simply asserted, in an extremely obtuse and arrogant manner, that he was much smarter than Pro and that he was stupid. Therefore I will give the conduct point to Pro as well. I hope Con wasn't being serious, as otherwise he is either mentally ill or extremely arrogant.