The Instigator
wolfassasin347
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Pro (for)
Winning
20 Points

Mermaids are real.

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 4 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/7/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,564 times Debate No: 48644
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (4)

 

wolfassasin347

Con

Good luck to whoever my opponent is. But you must know that you are agreeing and saying they do exist.
Wylted

Pro

Mermaids Are Real


Introduction

Thank you con for thinking of this debate and issuing an open challenge. Let's take a moment to define mermaid.

mer"maid (m"rR42;mādR42;)
n.
A legendary sea creature having the head and upper body of a woman and the tail of a fish.
[Middle English : mere, sea, lake; see mere2 + maid, maid; see maid.]


Video Proof

The fact that Liberals deny the existence of mermaids despite video evidence to the contrary is simply amazing. Mermaid deniers are no different then the 9/11 truthers, who don't think planes brought down the twin towers. Despite video evidence that planes did bring down the towers. I'm not a 9/11 truther, so of course I believe in the video evidence. Please watch the videos, I have listed.

Photographic Evidence

Here are real photographs of Mermaids. Please click on links.

http://www.fanpop.com...

http://wafflesatnoon.com...

Is my opponent going to deny video and photographic evidence?

The Legends

Mermaid legends appear on almost every continent. Are ancestors believed in Mermaids. It can't be just coincidence all these cultures have legends and stories of Mermaids. This is beyond coincidence. Since it is beyond coincidence, these legends must have a basis in fact.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org...

Credible Eyewitness Testimony

Black Beard; can testify to Mermaids being real. He reported spotting them on several occasions.(reported by bbc documentary) Audio of the documentary can be heard on below link.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Christopher Columbus; He spotted mermaids in at least one occasion.

http://touch.latimes.com...

Dozens of Israeli Citizens; reported seeing a Mermaid at the same time.

http://www.haaretz.com...

Reservoir Workers in Zimbabwe; Work stopped on 2 reservoirs when workers were chased off the sites by mermaids.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk...

The Medical Community is Involved in a Coverup

Humans evolved from fish.http://www.bbc.com...

Not all fish evolved. Some fish stayed fish, and that's why we still have fish on this planet. The missing link between fish and man is obviously mermaid. What is a mermaid, but a half evolved fish.

Sometimes man reverts back to a pre evolved state. It's why humans can be born with tails. http://en.m.wikipedia.org...

Occasionally you get a baby that is born a mermaid. http://en.m.wikipedia.org...

Of course a mermaid can't survive out of the water long so usually mermaid babies die within just a few days of being born. The doctors usually participate in a cover up and say its fused together legs, or something. Instead of helping the baby survive by tossing it in a large body of water, doctors just let it die. We should stand up to the medical community and demand they stop covering up Mermaids.

Conclusion

I've provided more then enough evidence that Mermaids exist. Even if one of my premises are shot down it doesn't matter. Each premise stand on its own as evidence of mermaids. My opponent has literally no case. I also fully expect my opponent to succumb to reason and concede this debate. So I will thank him in advance for his graceful exit. Good luck in your next debate con.
Debate Round No. 1
wolfassasin347

Con

First I would like to point out that your second link under photographic evidence is actually a link to proving it's fake if you read under the picture it shows evidence the photo is fake. Also under the statement there is a link to disproving the first video that you have at the begging. (http://wafflesatnoon.com...) it says it was a mockumentary. Also your first link in photographic evidence clearly shows the mermaid with eyeballs which it wouldn't have even if it was mummified this wouldn't allow it to keep its eyeballs. Also your second video gives no real evidence it could be faked there's no real way of telling if it's real. About your eyewitnesses your first 2 are dead and lived in times were there could be no sure way of telling if they actually saw anything. The last two have no proof people can lie or the placebo effect can take effect altering peoples visions of what they see. The last point when it says that you get born as a mermaid there not actual mermaids it's just where the embryo hasn't developed properly meaning there legs are fused together meaning there not actual mermaids. Secondly you point out that mermaid is just a half evolved fish which can't make sense because we evolved for apes not fish so there is no link there. Also why would the medical community have any reason to cover up mermaids they would't need to. And the so called mermaid baby's have no scales or gills meaning the could live under water and also there bone density is the same as a humans so the would be crushed by the pressure of water.

I would also like to point out a human could not survive the cold temperatures of the deep sea or even the pressure meaning they would die instantly. They c in conclusion I can say they can not exist in the sea due to the pressure and harsh temperatures.
Wylted

Pro

Introduction

My opponent has succesfully refuted the photographic and video evidence arguments as well as the medical community cover-up. However each one of my arguments stand on it's own.

Missing link

"Secondly you point out that mermaid is just a half evolved fish which can't make sense because we evolved for apes not fish so there is no link there."

Humans didn't evolve from apes. We share a common ancestor, so we're closely related.

http://www.pbs.org...

However, humans did evolve from fish. My link proved this and backed it up. Here is another link to prove it as well. Our faces are evolved from Jawless fish.

http://www.newsmax.com...

Given this information. The missing link between fish and humans is obviously, mermaid. Sometimes the evolutionary tree branches. In the fish case our evolutionary tree branched in 3 directions. Some of our species decided to stay fish, some decided to go the human route, then some of those selfish indecisive jerks decided to go both directions (just like the selfishness of bisexuals) and decided to be human and fish.

The Legends

The legends argument was ignored. These legends sprung up because obviously, people of the past saw mermaids. It's like the legends of dragons (dinosaurs), turned out to be real. There were legends of Alexander the Great. Legends are based on fact, and my opponent has failed to attack this premise or the facts it rests upon.

Eyewitness testimony

"About your eyewitnesses your first 2 are dead and lived in times were there could be no sure way of telling if they actually saw anything."

Not true. Eyewitness testimony is eyewitness testimony. Just because they eyewitnesses are dead, it doesn't make their testimony any less reliable. If what you say is true, then we could in no way trust anything written during the time periods, they lived in. This is an absurd statement backed by absolutely nothing.

"The last two have no proof people can lie or the placebo effect can take effect altering peoples visions of what they see.

The stories are amazing because of the amount of corroborating witnesses. You can't just be dismissive of that many eyewitnesses in the same location, seeing the same thing, at the same time. Random strangers or tons of coworkers don't just get together to make up stories. It is clear to any reasonable person that these individuals believe they saw mermaids. Also my opponent misunderstands what the placebo effect is.

placebo effect
n.
The beneficial effect in a patient following a particular treatment that arises from the patient's expectations concerning the treatment rather than from the treatment itself.


http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

As you can see the placebo effect, doesn't cause people to see mermaids.

Conclusion

Mermaids exist. My opponent fails to prove they don't or to disprove all of my independent stand alone arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
wolfassasin347

Con

wolfassasin347 forfeited this round.
Wylted

Pro

My opponent, has failed to show how the eyewitness testimony is invalid, or any reason the eyewitness testimony should be discounted. I would like to thank my opponent for this interesting debate.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by wolfassasin347 3 years ago
wolfassasin347
Thank you Wylted and just so Masanova knows, for future references, beginning of sentences start with a capital letter.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Masanova, don't insult my opponents intelligence with a sentence that doesn't use proper capitalization.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
There is more evidence for mermaids then there is for global warming.
Posted by i_know_all_and_i_will_win 3 years ago
i_know_all_and_i_will_win
You have made this debate impossible. No one will accept knowing what the topic is. There is no scientific research about this topic.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
wolfassasin347WyltedTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Well, you did it. Don't really know how, but it's pretty obvious that Pro is dominating this debate. Con simply doesn't do enough on each point to completely eliminate them, and his explanation for why they can't exist is threadbare.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
wolfassasin347WyltedTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I can't believe you got away with this, Wylted. You did some dodgy things in this debate, and a better debater would have mauled you, in terms of arguments. Pro faulted on some points, yet the eyewitness ones, somehow, managed to go relatively uncontested. Pro's sources were much better than Con's, citing all kinds of things, of which were relevant to the debate. Conduct to Pro for Con's round forfeit.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
wolfassasin347WyltedTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments regarding his stance wasn't sufficient and also lost conduct for the forfeit.
Vote Placed by tswizzle36 3 years ago
tswizzle36
wolfassasin347WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons was just not as organized and harder to follow and understand. Pro made his case and arguments perfectly clear and therefore convincing me there was a possible chance of mermaids existing. It was cool to watch this debate! Also Con Forfeited so Pro wins because of that as well.