The Instigator
yomama12
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

People are the cause of most animal's extinctions

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 3 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/9/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 885 times Debate No: 52040
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

yomama12

Pro

Humans are the cause of most animal's extinctions! We need to stop or else we might wipe out entire ecosystems!
Wylted

Con

That's simply not true. Humans didn't even exist yet when most animals went extinct, but go ahead and state your case.
Debate Round No. 1
yomama12

Pro

I'm not talking about the dinosaurs, I'm talking about creatures like the dodo. anyway, first I'm going to share the sad story of the Passenger Pigeon, a creature that WOULD be alive today if it wasn't for humans...

http://www.damninteresting.com...

This sad story indicates man's dark side.
Wylted

Con

Your sad story does nothing to affirm your resolution. We are debating whether humans are responsible for most animal's extinctions.

Your premise is that it's sad humans caused the extinction of the dodo. However, sad it might be, it only proves humans are responsible for the Dodo's extinction.

Besides that, you never specified you weren't discussing prehistoric animals.
Debate Round No. 2
yomama12

Pro

Sorry for not specifying but humans didn't even exist at the time of the dinosaurs. Anyway, lets get started on some reasons, shall we.

Reason number 1: over hunting and or fishing. A species that met this sad fate was called the Tasmanian Tiger. Farmers were upset that they were killing livestock, so what do they do? They put a bounty for them and wipe them off the face of the Earth! The last Tasmanian tiger passed away in a zoo in the 20th century. Luckily, we have DNA of this lost species, if we can make cloning more productive, Tasmanian citizens may hear the cry of this beautiful creature once again in the twilight.

Reason number 2: Deforestation. Over half of the known plant and animal species live in the rain forests. But more and more rain forests are disappearing every day. Sadly, some of the creatures could not be saved, but we can still help others by cutting down on deforestation (pun not intended). We already have enough buildings and other crap, People! We don't need more room!

Even if you vote for con, I hope you can start to understand the importance of keeping these creatures alive for future generations to enjoy
Wylted

Con

There is a few problems with my opponents arguments.

1. The resolution is being argued by him. He has yet to make an argument that supports his resolution.

2. Even if humans we do change the resolution to; Humans caused most of the animal extinctions, since they began to exist on this planet. We still have a problem. The problem is that he has shown how mankind makes animals extinct. He hasn't shown that mankind makes most animals extinct.

3. My opponent is trying to debate a fact. If he finds some stat that confirms humans have caused most animals extinctions, since they arrived on the planet. We still have a problem. It's un-debatable. Facts just aren't worthy of debate.
Debate Round No. 3
yomama12

Pro

vote pro.
Wylted

Con

"Vote Pro"

I think he means vote con. My opponent's premises don't support his conclusion even in his newly amended resolution. Here is what his argument looks like slightly simplified.

Premise- Humans are the cause of some extinctions.

Conclusion- therefore they are the cause of most extinctions.

It's pretty obvious the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise. His argument is not logically valid.

Vote con
Debate Round No. 4
yomama12

Pro

yomama12 forfeited this round.
Wylted

Con

Thank you pro for this debate.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
You live, and you learn.
Posted by yomama12 3 years ago
yomama12
I also apologize. i was not here during my third round, i was visiting my grand mother. and during the fourth round my jack*ss of a brother must have gotten on. i am sorry.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
It looks like I made a lot of typos on my last argument. I'm sorry.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
yomama12WyltedTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Going to agree with con that pro conceded, as pro did not contest that interpretation (the argument would still favor con, as insufficient evidence was given to suggest humans cause more than a handful of extinctions).
Vote Placed by Sswdwm 3 years ago
Sswdwm
yomama12WyltedTied
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 simply did not satisfy hid BoP, as Con pointed out.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
yomama12WyltedTied
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: yomama12, this is why you choose your wording with care. "People are the cause of most animal's extinctions," grammatical errors aside, means throughout all time. You could have specified in your first round that you meant "...in the last 10,000 years or so," but you didn't. We immediately assume all of time. Con's right that most animal extinctions occurred before we ever became a species. Ergo, that's a loss for you. I'm also giving Con conduct for the forfeit and the "vote pro" round. No one gets sources because Pro's sole source didn't prove his point and Con didn't use any. Grammatical errors are few enough that I won't allocate points there.