On balance, coffee is more beneficial than tea.
Debate Rounds (4)
It's time I denounce the crux of Earl Gray supporters and the general tea proponents.
1st Round - Acceptance ONLY
2nd Round - Presentation of arguments ONLY
3rd Round - Presentation of rebuttals with/or additional arguments
4th Round - Summary of proposition and opposition's case (NO new arguments)
Pro must argue that coffee is more beneficial than tea
Con must argue that tea is more beneficial than coffee
In this case, burden of proof is shared between us both. In the event where both tea and coffee are 50/50 , the debate should be tied as dictated by this framework.
On balance - "Taking everything into consideration; all in all."[http://www.thefreedictionary.com...]
Beneficial - "Producing good or helpful results or effects." [http://www.merriam-webster.com...]
The rest is pretty self explanatory.
Here we go.
Coffee pleases everyone
Everyone drinks coffee. Whether it be shaping for a day or work or a shift at night, the day has no meaning without our usual coffee. Coffee is our best friend. It never rejects us, it is even kind enough to treat our body with such dignity. We are surrounded by lovable beans, yet we never notice it. Just recently, people noticed that StarBucks are on every street in Chicago (1.http://chicago.cbslocal.com...) . After all these years, only now do humans realize the value of coffee. Only now do we realise that coffee is a big part of our life.
It is obvious that people love coffee as they often frequent these stores just to buy one hot cup of coffee. My estimates is that it pleases about 98% of its customers since most of them came to coffee shops just for the sake of buying one.
And what does tea have? Nothing
Caffeine reduces cancer risk
Coffee contain significantly more caffeine than coffee.
Coffee reduces cancer risk more than tea. Moreover, caffeine reduces skin cancer (2.http://www.livescience.com...). Towards this day, Ultra violet rays pierce through our ozone layer, even more than that of the past due to our consumption of CFCs and our intolerance of nature. An increase in Ultra violet rays, will lead to an increase in the risks of skin cancer. One study showed that consuming each cup of coffee reduces about 5% of cancer risk(2). Imagine drinking it as a habit.
How do we prevent this? by drinking coffee. Tea's amount barely exert an effect, at best it exerts 0.0001% influence on our body. Coffee on the other hand, contains more caffeine of which helps combat skin cancer cells.
The effects of an overdose are balanced by neil risk of serious illness
Opponents of coffee would argue that drinking caffeine in an excessive amount harms individuals. This issue is an urban myth, carved by the earliest civilization to freak conspiracy theorist out about coffee in an attempt to denounce it to their heart's content. Any dietitian, would acknowledge that any sort of excessive will cause harm, but caffeine's benefits far outweigh the risk of its drawbacks of over consumption. Solving long term is preferable rather than side effects of overdose.
The evidence is through Dr. Rob Van Dam's study. He looked into various studies such as the renowned Nurses health study . The study contains a huge sample of over 130,000 volunteers. The results shows that there is no causal correlation between high risk diseases and coffee (3.http://www.hsph.harvard.edu...). In fact, there is no such link, not even a single one.
By having no risk, why should you bother? Just drink away and be done with skin cancer. Coffee is indeed, more beneficial than tea. Beyond reasonable doubt, the benefits here are immeasurable. Let me restate the question again, What does tea have? nothing.
Coffee has immeasurable amount of benefits
Furthermore, Coffee's main disadvantage is an overdose, whereas its benefits are countless. Let's look at the bigger picture, cancer is humanity's biggest enemy, and yet coffee is there right beside us, standing by us, to be with us as our body fights the inevitable.
There are immeasurable cases of which supports coffee's superiority over tea, but only 1 is needed to justify the premise. For example, we are plagued by diabetes, a serious illness which people underestimate as a whole. Studies have shown that there is a correlation between coffee and diabetes. The data collected showed that coffee is associated and responsible for lowering type 2 diabetics (4.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...).
In addition to that, one benefit opens the door to another benefit. As I said before, the count is infinite. Lowering diabetes lowers risk of liver cancer greatly(5.http://www.medicalnewstoday.com...) as diabetes is a known cause of it. This benefit opens the door to another.
What does tea have? sure it pleases your emotions and what not, but it is nevertheless useless. A drink that satisfy by emotion, not by health. How useless.
Tea has several drawbacks that obfuscates its own benefits
Opponents, depressed of hearing how good coffee is would probably be compelled to commit suicide upon hearing the dreadful effects of tea. The FDA(Food and drug administration) have concluded with sufficient evidence that Green tea have no benefits in reducing weight loss and reducing the risk of breast cancer (6.http://en.wikipedia.org...). Moreover, they found out that, drinking tea does not solve or reduce any type of cancer.
The second phase is denial. Supporters of tea would still cower back to conspiracy theory to back their beliefs. They argue that there has to be a correlation between tea and cancer. The US national institute(6) reported after a study was made in epidemiological studies and the results show that any benefits shown are inconsistent. There are evidence that suggest otherwise. They concluded that they wouldn't recommend tea to be a potential weapon against any sort of disease as the evidence is inconclusive.
The premise of moderation is widely accepted
Lastly, the only disadvantage that coffee may have is its overdose. This is common sense. Everything should be taken in moderation. When both tea and coffee are taken moderately as part of a balanced diet, the evidence far leans towards coffee than tea. It is beyond reasonable doubt as thousands of studies have proved it so. Thus coffee is more beneficial that tea in terms of its overall benefits.
It reinforces the premise of health,social and emotional content whereas tea only manage to garner emotional content. The resolution is proved to be true.
Finally, I have shown immeasurable amounts of benefits of coffee while tea has inconsistencies in its benefits that any health institute would dismiss upon a simple face assessment. Even if they were to dig deeper, it would be a waste of time. I'll end this with my question
What does tea have? nothing.
I'd like to thank schachdame again for suggesting this friendly debate, any topics that pertains to health is definitely a favourite of mine. Thank you, I await your response.
Welcome to the part where your eyes are opened for the glory of tea.
Tea is not only beneficial for your body's health but also for your soul's. An art older and much more elegant than coffee. It's creative and joins the the two paradoxes of simplicity and complexity. Tea is what you want it to be and what you need. Tea liberates you from economical and social pressure.
I see how those, who believe in coffee, cannot understand this immediately. That's why I am going to explain this very carefully and detailed.
1 | Diversity
Coffee may be made out of different beans from different regions of the world but it cannot reach the cultural diversity nor taste and effect diversity that tea provides.
The National Coffee Association USA lists only four main types of roasts (light, medium, medium-dark and dark) with only a handful sub-roasts each, less than 20 in total . Black tea itself has more varieties, just giving Assam, Nepal, Darjeeling, Nilgiri and Ceylon as an example . But there is not only black tea. Or green tea for that matter. You can also get white tea, Oolong and Pu-erh. And then there are herbal teas, infusions that are, although not brewed from the tea plant, commonly referred to as "tea"*: Many herbs (like sage or mint) can be brewed into teas which opens a mere infinite universe of mixing, combining, smelling, tasting and color experience. And every different kind of tea offers a different health benefit.
Tea can therefore be freely chosen according to your needs and desires. You don't have to accept the limited offers of coffee.
2 | Art and Culture
Tea stands on the the shoulders of great art and culture. Nations like China, ranking Number one on tea's retail markets  have a tea history that is not only centuries but over a thousand years old . They have produced tea-related craft work of simplicity and quality ( - see Picture 1) that lasted in timeless beauty.
- Picture 1 Chinese Teapot
The coffee nation USA, the number one coffee market, provides with coffee-related objects of a different kind ( - see Picture 2), that, as a mass produced mug, doesn't show craftsmanship or elegant creativity at all.
- Picture 2 A Penis Mug
3 | Body health benefits
Hydration. Although several studies have shown that a moderate amount of coffee is not negatively effecting one's hydration, tea is doing the opposite. You can fill your daily water-intake with most types of tea, especially those who naturally don't contain any caffeine. The sides effects of overdosing tea and overdosing water are basically the same. Just imagine drinking two liters of coffee each day.
Medication. Herbal teas in particular are a soft support when your sick and usually the first thing you turn to, when you feel a infection is threatening your health. Green and White tea provide antioxidants  without exciting your circular flow as bold as coffee. Brews with roots like Ginger are helpful to regulate blood sugar and relieve indigestion softly and natural .
Immunity. Tea has shown an ability to support immunity and boost the Immune System of the regular consumer 
4 | Mental health benefits
Black tea has shown an ability to reduce stress  but this is not merely as important as the subjective feelings of security and being-at-home that evolve around every cup of tea. A nervous or traumatized person is rarely further exited with the offer of a cup of coffee. Tea is what you drink when you feel physically and emotionally weak.
5 | Economical and ecological aspects
Tea is cheap and simple. To brew a high quality tea at home you need neither special equipment like a coffee machine nor an espresso maker. You can brew tea of any quality and type with a hot plate or kettle and fresh water. That saves money, because you don't have to invest into something that only is there to make you coffee.
Depending on your taste the tea ingredients can also save you money. Herbs can be grown on window benches or garden, something that is impossible to do with coffee. You cannot just grow and roast your own beans unless you are living close to the equator.
Tea can be reused. If you are really cheap or broke you can use the same leafs twice or even a third time before they cannot give you any additional flavor or benefits. Try making coffee with your old coffee grounds, it'll disappoint you severely.
Waste. Coffee Machines like for example the capsules based nespresso ones are producing absurd amounts of waste; as does the whole coffee-industry evolving around brands like Starbucks. Tea, even the tea bags, on the other hand, is fully recyclable and natural. And ecological products spare us the money for waste disposal.
 NCA, Roasting types http://www.ncausa.org...
 Wikipedia: Tea http://en.wikipedia.org...
 Huffington Post: Coffee and Tea Consumption around the world http://www.huffingtonpost.ca...
 Chinatravel: Chinese Tea http://www.chinatravel.com...
 HealthCase http://healthycase.com...
 "Black tea soothes away stress." University College London, 2006. http://www.ucl.ac.uk...
 "More Research Confirms Tea's Medicinal Value." Saverio Bettuzzi, associate professor of biochemistry, University of Parma School of Medicine, Parma Italy; Jack F. Bukowski, M.D., Ph.D., assistant clinical professor of medicine, Harvard Medical School, and staff rheumatologist, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston; Joseph Simrany, president, Tea Association of the USA, New York City; Hasan Mukhtar, Ph.D., Helfaer Professor of Cancer Research and director and vice chairman, research, Department of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2003. HealthDayNews.
Picture 1 - http://theteaguide.com...
Picture 2 - http://www.tifr.us...
* As Pro and I both forgot to set the lines here; I am proposing that I will accept coffee-like brews (such as instant coffee or milk-related coffee-mixtures like Lattes) in exchange of my opponent accepting herbal tea as tea.
Personal Note | Sorry that it took me so long this weekend. I had troubles with my laptop and mainly browsed DDO with my phone (which was a pain).
Anyway. Thanks for the first round, it was lovely - I really enjoyed this and I am certainly going to drink a cup of tea before I finally go to bed. Try doing this with coffee ;)
Thanks Con. I will start with rebuttals first, defence later.
Con makes a claim of diversity, but she did not explain how this benefits tea. The benefits is just that it's colorful rather than actually saving people's life. She did however, concluded that coffee had limited offers. This is by far untrue, Coffee has tremendous amount of varieties such as Chai Latte, Yuan Yang which is primarily based on hong kong, there is also the Turkish coffee which is a culturally based drink (7.http://en.wikipedia.org...). The total varieties listed by wiki alone is 64, that alone surpass my opponent's feeble 30.
Let me elucidate it a little more, coffee has tremendous amount of varieties. even more than tea, especially with its cultural background such as the Turkish Coffee, Greek Coffee et cetera. This alone will entice tourists to come and experience the wealth of coffee, unlike that 'other' one.
Rebuttal: Art and culture
This isn't an argument, as you're appealing to popularity in hopes of scoring for tea. The same weakness is seen from my opponent is that she failed to explain how this benefits tea. It is popular,yes, and the argument stops there. Tea can still be popular, but given that it holds little health benefits as compared to coffee, this shows that coffee still surpass tea by several layers. Further, Both tea and coffee holds an interesting history, not one is more superior than the other. The earliest credible evidence showing the existence of coffee dates back to the 14th century in Africa and from there, they spread all across the world in a short span of time (8.http://en.wikipedia.org...).
In addition to that, I'd like to contest my opponent's point on art. She clearly selects evidence to suit her case. This stands to be completely false, as art has always been associated with coffee. Saying so is complete bias, and suits only to obfuscates her case and endorse mine. The difference is clearly outlined below
This is self explanatory. It holds way more artistic value
Rebuttal: Health Benefits
Hydration? This is laughable. I didn't know people literally eat coffee beans without filling them with water. The risk of overdosing coffee is close to neil as my previous round states, there are no risk of serious illness. Any overdose will likely damage your health overall, the only difference is that Coffee holds more health benefits than tea and has substantially less risk in the face of a few overdose.
My opponent makes her second case whereby tea contain antioxidants which help boost our general health. Aha! She fell into my trap. AntiOxidants causes cancer (10.http://www.webmd.com...). It appears to accelerate it's progression by ten fold as concluded by a medical researcher, Dr Martin Bergo as he said and I quote.
"We found that antioxidants caused a threefold increase in the number of tumors, and caused tumors to become more aggressive,"
His study was conducted on a group of mouse and results show that there was a strong correlation between antioxidants and cancer. Mouse are mammals, they have similar physiology to ours. Thus, there is a cause that antioxidants causes cancer in humans.
Let's look at the bigger picture, Antioxidants causes cancer but coffee prevents it. Do you see where we are now? The resolution proposed by my opponent is nullified.
Rebuttal: Mental Health Benefits
Reduce stress? Even water itself reduces stress. Who would want to be dehydrated anyway. This argument is weak in that it is a rabbit hole benefit comparison, unlike coffee which holds significantly more. We are burdened by cancer and my opponents wishes to advocate the case for stress. This is in itself, a weak premise and holds little substantiation to the resolution.
How do you know coffee doesn't entice nervous people, is there any chance to back that up with psychological studies? I have shown how coffee pleases everyone given my first argument while Con sticks to her subjective merit.
Rebuttal: Economical and ecological aspects
Con, there is no such thing as "the only way to make coffee is through an espresso machine". Any human being is wary of this as you only need water and coffee beans as well as milk. Only those wishing for a higher taste would go for a more expensive alternate. The benefit is still there.
My opponent devoted to her last 2 paragraphs about the economical aspects of tea. This comparison is very selective. It is the same with apples, you may grow it in some parts of the world, and in some parts you can't. You run into loads risks if you were to plant crops. There are apple maggots, fungus that travels by wind, bacteria which hides inside the core of the apple. The inconsistency within its ecological aspects here is very clear, as my opponent ignores the risk.
You might risk losing your own herbs if you are unaware of its risks. Any gardener would know this. Regardless, Even if its a cheap alternative, the benefits far holds coffee to be more beneficial than tea. In this case however, I have proved both that tea is in no such circumstance economical nor is it beneficial in terms of its health benefits.
Coffee however is proved.
I have proven my case beyond reasonable doubt through the benefits of coffee while my opponent sticks to selection and cases which yield poor substantiation. Over to you Con.
Glad to be back.
Diversity as benefit
"benefits" are more than just health related. Great variations in taste and visual appearance mean that you have more to choose from. This means that, you statistically, have a better chance to find a tea that you like and that suits your situational preferences. If you don't like the bitterness of coffee you have only one choice: to pour something additional in it to change the typical bitterness. In terms of tea, you might first try a different flush or a different type of tea, before you proceed to add additional flavor.
I expected to hear from all the coffee-variations that include milk or other additional flavors. In fact, you can flavor your tea as well. Black teas are already drunken in the three typical British ways: pure, with milk or with lemon. To show the difference in a (simplified) example calculation:
< 20 different coffee roasts * x flavor options = 20 different tea bases * x flavor options = > 20^x variations
If you add flavor you can increase the curve exponentially, but as these flavors also can be applied to tea they both increase with the same factor, making the one with the higher base figure always the one with the larger amount of variations.
Artistic value of coffee-foam-art
This is indeed crafty. But first of all are the given examples mere reproductions of previous art (was the second picture Van Gogh?) and second are they only temporary. They don't survive time, apart from their photographic pictures.
Handmade teapots from ancient china have not only survived centuries and are still here for us to touch and admire, they also communicate the history of their culture. The foam art cannot compete with that.
Again art, history and appeal are visual and emotional benefits not health benefits. There is a reason why people draw old masters on coffee foam (like the second picture or even Einstein's portrait for that matter), because they inspire our intelligence and creativity. Tea and tea-related, art due to it's age, is on the inspiring an long-lasting side of the creativity process. It communicates history emotionally. That is an educational benefit.
Also, saying that coffee art holds "way more artistic value" is a bit hypocritical, after stating that my examples are weak because they are chosen to my benefit (which was valid anyway, because I have to chose examples and are unable to provide all possible options). Also do they not prove that art has always been related to coffee, because the given examples are obviously recent foam arts.
Hydration and Overdosing.
I never predicted that someone dies from too much coffee but possible side effects like
insomnia, nervousness, restlessness, stomach upset, nausea, vomiting, increased heart and breathing rate are only moderate overdosing side effects and evolve into headache, anxiety, agitation, ringing in the ears, and irregular heartbeats . That's not killing you but these side effects are irrelevant or at least less relevant for tea and usually not desired.
Only exception are the insomnia and the laxative effect. But the first one encourages harmful sleeping habits  and the second one correlates with the problem that you develop a tolerance  and might become partly dependent on your morning-coffee to be able to relieve yourself.
That Coffee is not able to hydrate a body as well as tea, because it starts do dehydrate in larger doses  brings hydration "back in the game", because it is relevant in the long run.
I was trying to avid this. But has most of my opponents statements sooner or later start to evolve around the cancer-reducing benefit of coffee, I will have to address it.
1. Reducing cancer risk is not automatically overcoming everything.
Whether someone risks the immediate side effects stated before   just to get in potential health benefit is someones personal choice. Some might think that it is not worth it, especially considering how many things in our daily life seem to influence our cancer risk like cell phones, the sun or hair dye . Cancer risk is so complex that coffee can not possibly claim to influence it significantly.
2. Tea also reduces cancer
Green Tea's HSP90 protein for example has shown to stabilize proteins overall all and reduces cancer risk 
Again it's a subjects personal decision, what seems to have more value to them, possible small changes in a complex problem that is ones cancer risk or the antioxidants ability to prevent the aging damage of DNA . If again one want's to evaluate what has more value, you can at least say, that the life-expectancy benefits and risks are in balance.
That tea reduces stress is not irrelevant like Pro states ("burdened by cancer and my opponents wishes to advocate the case for stress"). Stress is a serious problem for many people nowadays and although a lot of cancer patients might prefer having a lot of stress instead of cancer, life-quality is not something that you can just ignore.
Stress causes many psychological and physical problems and the meditative process of brewing tea is a more cost effective and short contribution to prevention than stress seminars.
I am a bit upset that my opponent quoted me wrongly to support his statement. I've never stated that "the only way to make coffee is through an espresso machine". I've stated that you need special equipment like a espresso machine or a coffee machine, but not that these are the only ways to make it.
1. Geographical aspect
This is relevant because plants that can be made into tea grow in nearly all climate zones that allow proper vegetation. Coffee grows in less. That means that statistically more people are able to grow tea for themselves, if they want to.
2. Risks of growing your own herbs
It's not difficult to own a mint pot. It grows on window benches. And if you loose it, your financial loss is about $1 - $3, and only, if you bought the mint pot somewhere. The pot is reusable anyway. If you manage to water it properly it regrows and gives you cheap, fresh and relatively save leafs that also boost your self-esteem, because you consume something that you harvested and cared for succefully. And fungus that travel by wind would be inhaled anyway.
Conclusion | Tea has all of coffees beneftis but less of it's disadvantages.
// review just cut off my sourcing / I am posting it into the comments and then again into the beginning of the last round//
Very well, thanks Con. I will be summarizing everything and fix a few holes and misrepresentation. There will be no new arguments, just a summary of what we did above as we agreed on our rule '4th Round - Summary of proposition and opposition's case (NO new arguments)'
Con resorted to misrepresentation and 'shifting the goal post' mentality. This is evident through her rebuttals with new arguments for tea in an attempt to square off with coffee and treat it as a tie whilst also ignoring my rebuttals that were scientifically proven. Moreover her argument is guilty of the use of personal predicament. This is in addition to several contentions dropped, including arguments that are key and are backed by scientific credibility. I intend to show how.
Summary Of Proposition's case
Shifting The Goalpost Mentality & Personal Predicament
First of all she made rebuttals against my case that ran not to denounce mine but to supplement her case in hopes of scoring. This is shown through previous rounds as she stated that tea had proteins which help combat cancer. Instead of rebutting my argument about coffee's immeasurable benefits(which to my surprise was filled with holes yet it still ran uncontested), she 'shifted the goal post' by making over generalized claims about benefits of tea about how protein contributes to destroying cancer. Anyone can flip a kill card by presenting an alternate case instead of rebutting her opponent. To make things worse, she resorted to public adversary(Personal Predicament) instead of scientific credibility. That's like asking Kim Kardashian how the universe came into existence. This is seen as she said and I quote " just to get in potential health benefit is someones personal choice". How does this qualify as an argument on how X is better than Y? because Z thinks otherwise?
I am not done yet. Furthermore instead of locking her horns to tackle the issues, she chose to ran away by saying cancer is too complex. By her premise, if an idea is too complex for us to understand, we should drop it because we're can't possibly comprehend it. The evidence is there as she stated "Cancer risk is so complex that coffee can not possibly claim to influence it significantly. " while scientific sources chose to show otherwise. She cannot just drop my argument.
An attempt to square off with coffee by resorting to opinion & bombing evidence outside the contention of coffee is a feeble rebuttal. Therefore it should be dropped.
Secondly, My opponent's case has lots of generalized claims, of which was without proper elaboration. She cannot do this. You have to elaborate your case. I have provided mine how Rob Van Dam's study with over 130 000 participants on how coffee benefits health in tremendous ways. She did not, in anyway rebutted any of my scientific studies cited. Not one do I see 'Rob Van Dam's study was false due to reasoning XYZ' she insisted on shifting the goal post again in hopes of scoring. Likewise this is seen again as She made additional contentions such as the drawbacks of coffee, of which was generalized as she just spit symptoms of coffee overdose which were clear evidence of blatant generalizations. She did not elaborate how one symptom came into fruition and instead resorted to source towering. Your source is meant to supplement your position, you cannot bomb it in hopes that it explains your position. I provided how one came into fruition, how one benefits opens to another but she did not. Thus, this argument is not even substantiative because Rob Van Dam's study of causal correlation between illnesses and coffee ran uncontested.
Moreover, I made contentions from FDA(Food and drug administration) and The US national institute about how tea's benefits are inconclusive. It is in no position to curb cancer. Not even once did she ever criticize the scientific studies cited and instead resorted to telling the audience about how protein prevents cancer. This sort of generalization will not fly off the window, I urge voters to take this in consideration.
My contentions in summary that were dropped(without any rebuttals)
(1)Coffee Pleases Everyone
(3)The effects of an overdose are balanced by neil risk of serious illness
(4)Tea has several drawbacks that obfuscates its own benefits
(5)The premise of moderation is widely accepted
Con attacked my premise as she states and I quote "I've never stated that the only way to make coffee is through an espresso machine"
The trial is in session. We will now check the soundness of my opponent's accusation on conduct.
Lets look at previous rounds
"Tea is cheap and simple. To brew a high quality tea at home you need neither special equipment like a coffee machine nor an espresso maker...because you don't have to invest into something that only is there to make you coffee. "
Your statement suggest otherwise. You would made it clearer. If it boils down essentially towards 'Coffee making mechanisms are similar to tea', then why is it that in the first place, do you insist on suggesting that it was expensive to make coffee? Why is the word invest into something even there? Semantics is a poor way arguing a case. She cannot do this. She cannot simply shift attention, strawmanned everything while at the same time dropping arguments everywhere.
Summary of Opposition's contentions
Hydration vs Cancer risk
Which do you prefer? Stage 4 cancer or dehydration? Hidden tumors or clear exhibited symptoms of dehydration? If you, as a person would choose which to prevent first, do you prevent the hidden disease of which you have no knowledge if you have it, or the hydration which can be tackled once the symptoms kick in. The evidence is clear in this that you would choose to prevent cancer.
Therefore cancer is the viable alternative. Coffee is indeed better as its benefits are superior
She made contentions how one variable expounds to different variables of tea, yet does not give any additional proof whatsoever. Thats like asking how one atom of salt makes a difference in cooking when clearly, the right taste is the norm in cooking. There is no such thing as Medium salty, over easy salty. I fully rebutted her argument by saying that Coffee's cultural variation are superior than tea. This argument is nullified
Art and Culture
She resorted to historical irrelevancies. We should ignore whats currently in trend and appreciate past artifacts. The Foam Art is widely present in coffee shops, clearly it indicates that it is infact popular. The Supply and demand is clearly on coffee's side. Resorting to history is irrelevant, the supply and demand clearly shows otherwise.
"And fungus that travel by wind would be inhaled anyway."
Generalized statement. No how or why. My rebuttal on risks of gardening remains strong.
Emotional argument. I have provided how coffee pleases everyone. At best, both provide the necessary emotional supplements.
Overall The resolution is negated.
Thanks Con for overlooking my source-clumsiness!
Personal Note | I can only ask the reader to critically think for himself about the points of false and valid accusation. We cannot be our own judges and merely point out where we see problems.
1. concentrating on outlining the benefits of tea is "shifting the goal"
- We have a shared BOP. That means that coffee may have it's benefits, as long as they are not overcoming those from tea. I can acknowledge some coffee-benefits by not disproving them, because I also have to show that tea has benefits and more of them. And if these overcome the benefits of coffee I fulfilled my task. It would be a sound argument, if I didn't disprove any, which is not true (-see 4.)
2. Cancer is too complex
- I stated that cancer risk is very complex, NOT that cancer is complex*. And it is. The source provided showed a tremendous amount of things that influence cancer risk, therefore to argue that it is complex it sound. I admit that I could have phrased that in more detail, like some other arguments -see 3.
* That's the second time I've been deliberately(?) quoted wrongly
3. Source towering/ null arguments due to missing explanation
- I admit that I did not bottle-fed my opponent with my arguments. Because I expected that an intelligent person will treat my arguments intelligently:
If insomnia is a medical side effect of caffeine (sourced it) than stating that bad sleeping habits occur is absolutely coherent (The second source was probably towering because it wasn't actually necessary). I don't see why I need to explain how insomnia is supporting poor sleeping habits (because it's a sleeping problem). I did not show why poor sleeping habits are bad but it's not like that is actually a controversial thing. Therefore I admit, that I covered a lot of ground by making my arguments shorter than they should have been. But at points where logical thinking would have automatically connect the dots:
"fungus that travel by wind would be inhaled anyway." Seriously, if you have a plant, than this plant shares your environment. And if your plant takes in hidden toxins from the air then you cannot avoid inhaling it yourself. Therefore fungus and toxins in your plant would be previously inhaled anyway. That is plain logical so I really don't see why I'd spent characters on explaining that. You can prove that 1+1=2, but you rarely have to, because it's obvious.
4. Failed to refute some arguments
(1) Coffee pleases everyone. Coffee cannot logically please everyone, because then everyone would drink and enjoy coffee, without any exceptions. Probably should have taken advantage of that absurd statement. I did honestly not think it was written with seriousness and just a humorous provocation.
(3) Overdosing and serious illness. Serious is a matter of perception, and I have shown that the side effects of much caffeine is not something to ignore. I therefore did refute that argument.
(4) Drawbacks of tea. Con f.i. outlined antioxidants as a drawback and I showed that they are also a benefit. That is a relativisation because there are antioxidants in tea. And the other drawback was that "tea has nothing". That is logically disproved by showing that tea has "something" to offer (like good taste or selection). That was automatically refuted, without me addressing this statement directly. Again did I not take advantage of that stereotypical argument and I think that shows good sportsmanship rather than poor debating style.
(5) Premise of moderation. I showed that the same amount of tea is less harmful than coffee and therefore the premise of moderation has been addressed ("Just imagine drinking two liters of coffee each day."). A moderate amount of tea is already an overdose of coffee; Therefore this argument has been addressed AND disproved.
5. The only way to make coffee is with a espresso machine. A Bialetti, a filter extension, a automatic tap-machine are not all "espresso machines" (they work differently), but are all tools and that still makes them extra-equipment. And if I see a direct quote ("[...]") that isn't exactly quoting what I said, than it is per definition a wrong quote, and I have every right to object that.
6. Lack of evidence that tea can also be flavored with additions like lemon, milk, sugar or syrup. To demand evidence here is valid but a bit "playing possum"; but no worries, tea with extras is an old tradition:
She asked, “Take milk?” or “Sugar?” and though I answered, “No,”
She put them in, and told me that I “must take it so!”
- Small and Early / Tudor Jenks (1857 - 1922)
Art and Culture | My opponent failed to address some statements here and disobeyed his own rules.
1. Historical irrelevancies. I tried to explain why history is not irrelevant and as we both used statements that refer to the history of our beverage I think it's inappropriate to just turn it down by stating them unexplained as "irrelevancies".
2. Supply and demand is a new statement by Con and it's not even sourced that the demand for coffee is higher than the one for tea.
Evaluation | Coffee (slightly) reduces cancer risk (Con: "Coffee reduces cancer risk more than tea."). It doesn't cure cancer. Con is hasty to compare a indirectly linked disease (=many factors influence the risk) to directly likable dehydration symptoms (=only coffee is the reason for the symptoms) by saying "Which do you prefer? Stage 4 cancer or dehydration?".
Stress | Is not just subject. Tea physically reduces stress. It was a scientific approach to an emotional benefit. Should not be turned down because it's "emotional" without further explanation why "coffee pleases everyone".
I don't claim | that...
* my style/strategy/conduct are flawless - I admit that some of my arguments could have been more detailed.
* coffee has NO benefits (what is still in BOP boundaries)
* tea has NO downsides ( -"-)
But | I've shown that tea...
* also influences cancer risk (con's only argued health benefit)
* has additional and immediate health benefits (f.i. when you have a cold)
* has immediate mental health benefits (stress)
* is cheaper
* is at least a match in terms of diversity
Also | I have pointed out
* where my arguments indirectly and/or directly disproved what Con argued that I did not address at all
* where my opponent freely paraphrased me and sold it as a direct quote ("[my words]")
therefore: where my opponent shows conduct flaws himself
Thanks, for this challenge
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by GOP 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: I think Pro has may have misquoted Con a lot, but I would have to give Themba the win. To begin with, the resolution is "ON BALANCE, coffee is more beneficial than tea." One of the strongest points Pro made was the one about how antioxidants can contribute to cancer and how coffee can decrease cancer risks. While Con mentioned diversity, art/culture, etc, I think defeating cancer is more important than some emphasis on the things that Con mentioned. When we're talking about cancer, we're talking about something that puts an individual's life ON THE LINE. Again, since the resolution contains the word "ON BALANCE", I feel that the benefits of coffee outweigh the benefits of tea especially because of cancer. The other points that Con made were good, and Pro did have a hard time trying to argue for how coffee is diverse. However, one's health can be fine without diversity or the emphasis on art/culture.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.