Peanut butter does not contain nuts.
Debate Rounds (3)
Peanut butter consist primarily of ground peanuts, which are not nuts. 
The other ingredients in peanut butter are not nuts either. For example, the ingredients listed for Jif peanut butter is:
"MADE FROM ROASTED PEANUTS AND SUGAR, CONTAINS 2% OR LESS OF: MOLASSES, FULLY HYDROGENATED VEGETABLE OILS (RAPESEED AND SOYBEAN), MONO AND DIGLYCERIDES, SALT." 
None of those ingredients are nuts. So it can be concluded that peanut butter does not contain nuts.
I can put some nuts on my peanut butter, and it would be a peanut butter product that contained nuts.
Once again, Pro must show that there is not a SINGLE INSTANCE of peanut butter containing nuts, and so far, has not done so.
Con interprets the resolution as: ALL peanut butter contains no nuts. I will argue that this interpretation is wrong.
Take the statement "grass is green". It is understood to mean "grass is generally green" and is therefor accepted as true. Saying "Grass is green" doesn't imply "There does not exist a non-green blade of grass" or "You cannot spray paint grass to be a color other than green". And by extension, "peanut butter does not contain nuts" means "peanut butter generally does not contain nuts" as opposed to my opponent's interpretation.
If I wanted to pull the same trick my opponent tried, I could argue that the resolution should be interpreted as "SOME peanut butter contains no nuts", in order to skew the debate in my favor, but I trust judges to go with the more balanced and fair interpretation I argued for.
I proved that Jif peanut butter does not contain nuts, and my opponent dropped that argument. And since Jif peanut butter is the most popular peanut butter brand , it is an ideal representative of peanut butter in general, which shows that peanut butter generally does not contain nuts.
Although I do have BoP, it is unreasonable to expect me to show that every major brand of peanut butter does not contain nuts do to the 2000 character limit. On the other hand, if a major brand of peanut butter did contain nuts, all my opponent has to do to win is to post it and show that the ingredients include nuts. If my opponent doesn't give an example of a major brand of peanut butter containing nuts, then either A) it doesn't exist, or B) it exists, but he was too lazy to find and post it. Given that my opponent showed he is motivated to try to win in his previous argument, it can be assumed that if he doesn't show a major brand of peanut butter containing nuts, then it is because it doesn't exist.
This is completely unfair of you. All terms of the debate must be discussed in the 1st round by the instigator, otherwise, they may be disregarded. It's far too late for you to change the debate.
"If I wanted to pull the same trick my opponent tried, I could argue that the resolution should be interpreted as "SOME peanut butter contains no nuts", in order to skew the debate in my favor, but I trust judges to go with the more balanced and fair interpretation I argued for."
Either way, the debate wasn't fair because of course peanuts are not nuts. You *did* skew it in your favor because if my argument doesn't count because it apparently wasn't what you were expecting, then what did you want me to debate? Peanuts are not legumes? This isn't a debate about peanuts, if that's what you mean, it's about peanut butter. If my opponent can be unfair and skew the debate in their favor, so can I.
"I proved that Jif peanut butter does not contain nuts, and my opponent dropped that argument. And since Jif peanut butter is the most popular peanut butter brand , it is an ideal representative of peanut butter in general, which shows that peanut butter generally does not contain nuts."
Once again, you never showed that in the resolution or the first round, so it isn't fair for you to tell me I *should* have interpreted in a specific way, and jif peanut butter is one brand. The resolution said nothing about jif peanut butter.
Also I put two almonds in a "jif peanut butter" and made it my profile pic, so now there officially IS a peanut butter that contains nuts.
It is unreasonable for me to show peanuts are not legumes.
So in short, you weren't fair either, you had the BoP, I proved you wrong, and you were too late to change my interpretation of the resolution.
The character limit is astoundingly short so...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by David_Debates 3 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Pro leaves 3 key terms undefined in the debate: peanut butter, contain, and nuts. As Con points out in round 3, "This is completely unfair of you. All terms of the debate must be discussed in the 1st round by the instigator, otherwise, they may be disregarded. It's far too late for you to change the debate." Arguments: Pro attempts to show how one brand of peanut butter (Jif) does not contain nuts, but instead, contains legumes. However, Con reverses this upon Pro, pointing out that since Pro did not define any of his terms, thereby giving Pro the burden to "show that there are no instances of peanut butter containing nuts." As the rounds progressed, Pro was unable to meet that burden. In the end, therefore, arguments go to Con for sufficiently disproving Pro's undefined, unspecific case.
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.