The Instigator
ark428
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Arch
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

People are stupid

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 5 votes the winner is...
Arch
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/15/2012 Category: Arts
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 810 times Debate No: 28248
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (0)
Votes (5)

 

ark428

Pro

. I wait for my opponent to say something
Arch

Con

As my opponent has not given any definitions of the word smart or smart in relativity to what, I will assume he's going to let me define it.

People are smart when compared to animals. You don't see ants creating nuclear weapons, now do you? In fact, not even animals, just any organism in general.
Debate Round No. 1
No comments have been posted on this debate.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by iamnotwhoiam 4 years ago
iamnotwhoiam
ark428ArchTied
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: Pro's one round debate with no argument was stupid.
Vote Placed by Wishing4Winter 4 years ago
Wishing4Winter
ark428ArchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: I found this quite amusing actually. The resolution was that people are stupid and pro's argument was for us to look at what his opponent would say. Pro winning this debate could have hinged on Con stating something 'stupid'. However con did not.
Vote Placed by TigerTime 4 years ago
TigerTime
ark428ArchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Once again, no arguments from pro.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
ark428ArchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: didnt even give an argument.
Vote Placed by Niwsa 4 years ago
Niwsa
ark428ArchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: While Con doesn't make a logical connection between intelligence and Nuclear weapons, he still made an argument.