The Instigator
goldenrod000
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
hockeyman77
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Is time travel too dangerous to attempt?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/27/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 585 times Debate No: 74317
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

goldenrod000

Pro

First of all, I'd like to thank my opponent, whoever he/she is, for participating in this interesting debate in a civilized manner. Second, I'd like to mention that in this argument, there will probably not be as much proof as a normal debate simply because the topic we are covering is science fiction, thus making it harder to find strong evidence against or for this topic. Thank you.

Time travel is a fascinating concept that many people consider to be one of the most famous science concepts ever. It's been considered multiple times, it's been dreamed of by even the most famous scientists, and EVERYONE wants it to become a part of our lives someday. However, one question remains unanswered, and it probably will remain unanswered until time travel somehow comes into play: Is time travel too risky for humans to attempt, or not? My argument states that, yes, time travel is too risky for us to use. Since this is my first part of the argument, I will list my first piece of evidence behind this. One reason why time travel would be too risky is because there are just too many problems that can occur. Yes, almost every time travel-related cartoon or television show depicts the time machine of the user's choice being a safe, non-harming way to predict the future, but in reality, there are just too many downsides to time travel for time travel to look GOOD. Some could get downright dangerous to use, because trivial mistakes in any time of time machine operation could get time travelers dead. Worse, the world or more could get destroyed by the time machine itself. (1) There are so many possible things that can go wrong with time travel that it seems like a horrible idea to even consider this Hollywood-style act! I'm not alone here either. In the 1989 movie "Back to the Future Part II", Doc Brown is known for saying the quote, "The time-traveling is just too dangerous. Better that I devote myself to STUDY the other great mystery of the universe: women!" (2) Although women is not exactly the "mystery" we could be researching, this quirky character is absolutely right when it comes to time travel and what we could be doing otherwise. Instead of trying to do something that could end up changing the world in a negative way, we could just consider some possibilities and study other more important mysteries. If you think that it's nonsense that I used a fictional character as my proof that I am not alone, just think that the cast members of the movie probably tried to give Doc Brown that quote, which might suggest that the cast members feel the same way about this topic. That's not all, though! Whether you attempt to time travel forward or backwards in time, you're not safe from the danger that lies within time travelling, so either way on the timeline, travelling through it is not a good idea. When it comes to travelling back in time (also known as "backwards time travel", it is theoretically possible by several different methods using general relativity. However, each of these methods has its own peculiar problems that could destroy the time machine before it has a chance to operate. (3) Travelling to the future, however, has a good chance of the possibilities that I listed above happening. In every aspect, form, and way that it has been depicted, time travel is a dangerous concept because there are just too many downsides to time travel to possibly think that time travel will lead us to a positive and beneficial place.

(1): http://tvtropes.org...
(2): http://en.wikiquote.org...
(3): http://cse.ssl.berkeley.edu...
hockeyman77

Con

Firstly, I would like to thank my ally and opponent for allowing this debate to occur. I totally agree that evidence will be extremely hard to come by, even though there are a minuscule amount of studies which investigated time travel.

As observed in almost all science-fiction films, time travel is the action of reversing time, and going back to a time in the past. Though the idea of time travel is prevalent in movies, the concept inst very a realistic practice in the real world. The chances of actually creating a machine, which would most definitely work, are very slim, as the general concept seems nearly impossible to the mind.

On the other hand, many people wish to pursue the career of innovations, and if they would like to attempt creating machinery and using it to time travel, then they should be allowed too. But, the risks at doing so are too tremendous, thus why practices should not be produced.

The common knowledge of not messing with unknown applies strongly to this case. Inventors of this sort can not just construct a machine without knowing the pros and cons of it. Even if the thought of going back in time, saving a life, wavering a situation, or even solving a problem could be done, the cautions could also be as extreme.

Thus, the human race should not go messing around with unknown elements, as society has gone the way it has for a reason. If the measures are changed, then an effect on all humans may be completed. Therefore, for the sake of mankind's safety, no machinery should be built, which could possibly change the past, as small actions in the short run cost dramatic measures in the long run.

Thanks for your time, and all of our input.
Debate Round No. 1
goldenrod000

Pro

Very fascinating addition to the debate. I have found all of your theories and possibilities to be notably true and, in a way, logical, and I respect you for that. I would like to add to my previous argument on why time travel cannot be used without some consequences going about.

It seems that in my previous argument, I covered the main gist of why I believe time travel is a no-go when it comes to the safety of the universe and possibly beyond, but in this argument, I would like to talk about one of the larger problems that many fictional movies and films have theorized that leads me to believe even further that time travel leads to nothing but trouble: the Grandfather paradox. You see, the Grandfather paradox is one of the most fascinating and intriguing time travel topics to cover, and it goes like this: a time traveler goes back in time and kills his grandfather before his grandfather meets his grandmother. As a result, the time traveler is never born. But, if he was never born, then he is unable to travel through time and kill his grandfather, which means the traveler would then be born after all, and so on. (1) Although this is a difficult concept to grasp, this leads to trouble and it is quite obvious. If we were to live in an entirely futuristic world where even children and teenagers would be sustainable to time travel, teenagers who aren't particularly fond of their parents would end up proving the Grandfather paradox if it were true. On the flip side, grandfathers who aren't particularly fond of their grandchildren can kill their children, and that would cause a whole deal of problems. The older that kid is, the more damage you've caused upon your family and your lifestyle, because that child is more likely to accomplish more goals later in life, and all traces of your son's accomplishments would be completely wiped out of existence because he doesn't exist anymore. Of course, a maniacal son trying to kill his grandfather or an insane grandfather trying to kill his children is unlikely, but it is possible, thus giving time travel yet another reason to be feared and forgotten of outside of fictional movies. I apologize for the strange example, but this is the only example I could come up with that accurately and impressively gives us an example of the Grandfather paradox. The Grandfather paradox is no laughing matter, and it is a bit sad (even if it is fictional in our current state), so we shouldn't have to experience it in real life. There's only one solution: Forget about time travel in real life. Grandfathers and children will be saved, and their accomplishments won't be erased from existence because of something stupid.

(1): http://en.wikipedia.org...
hockeyman77

Con

hockeyman77 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
goldenrod000

Pro

goldenrod000 forfeited this round.
hockeyman77

Con

hockeyman77 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
goldenrod000

Pro

goldenrod000 forfeited this round.
hockeyman77

Con

hockeyman77 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
goldenrod000

Pro

goldenrod000 forfeited this round.
hockeyman77

Con

hockeyman77 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by goldenrod000 1 year ago
goldenrod000
In response to UndeniableReality: I did not take this in a way to make time travel sound true or real. I instead wanted this to revolve around the type of time travel that many famous movies use, which is fictional. Of course we won't know the definitive answer to this question, but many sources online are predicting the fate of time travelers, and because of this, I wanted this to be a question to debate about. In a nutshell, we are basing this debate on solely assumptions and Hollywood-style approaches on time travel, not the assumption that this may really happen in real life. Thanks for the pointers. :)
Posted by UndeniableReality 1 year ago
UndeniableReality
It's simply an ambiguous and poorly stated proposition. In a scientific sense, the question is meaningless unless there is a method of time travel to consider and contextualize it.
Posted by goldenrod000 1 year ago
goldenrod000
In response to Ragnar: Good point. Thank you for sharing your take on this argument in a civilized fashion. I appreciate those who find civilized discussions preferable over non-civilized ones.
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
My point is pretty well shown in the first Back To Thr Future movie, stolen uranium bought from violent terrorists. It's almost certainly so dangerous that people should not attempt it, but no amount of danger will prevent people from attempting things.
Posted by goldenrod000 1 year ago
goldenrod000
In response to Ragnar: I do not understand what is "dangerous" about my resolution, but I have changed it. Because of this, I wish for you not to be my opponent because it feels like an unfair advantage for my opponent to be giving me pointers when I am supposed to be against said opponent. Nothing personal, just a fear of an unfair advantage in ANYONE'S favor.
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
Please do yourself a favor and refine the resolution. People attempt dangerous stuff all the time
No votes have been placed for this debate.