The Instigator
cliffsofdover
Pro (for)
Losing
43 Points
The Contender
Logical-Master
Con (against)
Winning
60 Points

Pizza Rocks My World

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/16/2008 Category: Health
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,564 times Debate No: 2696
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (26)

 

cliffsofdover

Pro

Piza iz da bestest food! It iz amazin an it tasts good.

An asss me frend mynameisjonas wuld say, End O' Storiee
Logical-Master

Con

Greetings. First, I'd like to thank my opponent for starting this debate. Second, I'd like to request that voters vote on who provided better arguments.

With that said, let us proceed:

Ladies and gentleman, the burden of proof belongs to my opponent; my opponent must conclusively prove that pizza rocks his world. Now I know what you're thinking: Since he stated that pizza rocks his world, it must be true. However (and respectfully), your presumptions are misguided here. Him stating something about his personal life in a debate that directly concerns the validity of his personal life is not to be considered valid evidence. Besides, another reason such evidence is faulty is that I could merely counter it by claiming that I've met my opponent in real life and know that pizza does not rock his world. In both cases, you would have to take our words at face value.

I believe that there is an objective means of solving my opponent's conundrum. He can drive to my location (which is listed in my profile)(I will set up further instructions via email) and I can have two or three of my campus psychologists mentally examine my opponent. They can examine him and conduct multiple tests that will lead them to the conclusion as to whether or not pizza really rocks my opponent's world. After they conduct their tests, they can posts their results online and you can confirm for yourselves that my opponent was involved in their study.

Again, the burden of proof belongs to my opponent and nothing within his opening argument constitutes as evidence.

As for my position, I'm going to advocate that pizza might rock my opponent's world. This position conflicts with my opponent's since my opponent is advocating certainty.

I now stand ready for my opponent's first rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 1
cliffsofdover

Pro

Logical Master, i c that yoo haf acceptid my debit. No dout it iz so dat u cann mak up 4 declining my chalengez twice en a roow.

Now dat you haff acceptid one uv my debates, eye will show you how teh secund best debatour en this sight (meening mii) willl crush teh turd best debatour on dis sight (meening tu)

First uff, eye wuld like to show you sum piktures uv pizza:
1. http://www.michigan-fundraising.com...
2. http://www.davidos375pizza.com...
3. http://www.personal.psu.edu...

As yu kan see, thees r al piktures uv pizza, and im shure that they loook reely gud to many peeple

It iz a figur uv speach. It dus not litterally rock me, butt i reely likee it. Tuns uv peeple luv pizza.

Read about teh history of piza heer: http://en.wikipedia.org... if theyre iz a history of pizza as big asss dat, it must bee populer.

En a closing statment, eye would like two haf yu go to http://en.wikipedia.org... and read about Pizza in general

Pizza!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Logical-Master

Con

My opponent starts off by providing some pictures of pizza. Although these pictures look mouth watering, I must object by claiming that they hold absolutely no significance on whether or not Pizza rocks my opponent's world.

My opponent then attempts to correct me by claiming that "pizza rocking his world" is a figure of speech, but if you've read round one, you know that I never even claimed that it was not a figure of speed. My argument was that it was my opponent's burden to prove he liked pizza and that merely claiming that he liked pizza would not be sufficient evidence for an online debate.

My opponent then cites a wikipedia article that talks about the history of pizza, but this is yet again a citation which has nothing to do with the argument. Therefore, I urge you to dismiss it.
Finally, my opponent closes by suggesting that I go read yet another wikipedia article which talks about pizza, but like the previous citations, this has nothing to do with the resolution.

So basically, my opponent does not address my arguments (nor the actual topic for that matter), so you can extend everything I said in the previous round and dismiss everything my opponent said in this round.

I now stand waiting for my opponent's final rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 2
cliffsofdover

Pro

rite theyre, yu admit that you liek pizza. You sed that they look mouthwatering, which means that you like it. Actually, they doo haf significance, because this debate is about pizza and they r pics uv piza.

Your wrong! Teh histery of pizza does have sumthing 2 do wif this debate, becuz iff theyre iz a history such as pizza's, then it muzt bee important.

You say i didnot adress anyfing yu sed, welll y wuld eye want to? Yu told mii to go finnd yu, im sry, butt dats a wee bit creepy.

Here iz a definition of Pizza from dictionary.com: Pizza: a flat, open-faced baked pie of Italian origin, consisting of a thin layer of bread dough topped with spiced tomato sauce and cheese, often garnished with anchovies, sausage slices, mushrooms, etc.

Asss you can c, pizza iz actuilly pretty healthy for you, as it hass multiple food groops. Dairy(the cheese), Grain(the crust), Vegetables(mushrooms), Fruit(pinapples and sauce) Meat/Protein(Sausages, Pepperoni, Anchovies)

Actually Mr. Imsogood instead of saying dat eye donut haff enugh proof to proove that pizza is good, why dont yu proove to mii dat it isnt, 4 iff you dunt, i win this debate, because you are not going aganst me (asss you admitted pizza's good) you are simplee asking me for my reesons without haffing any of ur own.

End O' Storiee
Logical-Master

Con

I'll wrap this one up quick.

First, my opponent states that I admit that I like pizza, but this is completely irrelevant. As you can see, the topic concerns whether or not my opponent likes Pizza.

My opponent suggests that the history of pizza must be relevant to this debate, but does not provide any evidence for this statement, so you are free to dismiss it.

My opponent demands that I explain why he would want to address anything I've said.

My answer: It is the job of both debaters to address ALL objections made against their stance.

I told my opponent to go about the method I had listed in my opening argument because it was one of the only ways to present credible objective evidence that would prove he liked pizza. My opponent has refused to do this and has refused to present any valid evidence in this round (for that matter), so he has gone without supporting his case.

My opponent submits a definition of pizza, but this definition has nothing to do with what he is attempting to prove, so you're free to dismiss it.

Next, my opponent attempts to shift the burden of proof by demanding that I prove that pizza isn't' good. First, this is misleading as the goal of the debate concerns whether or not my opponent really considers pizza to figuratively rock his world. Second, it is his burden to prove that it does. Furthermore, I've clearly outlined my stance in my opening argument. I am advocating that pizza MIGHT rock my opponent's world; I'm in favor of possibility whereas my opponent is in favor of certainty. My argument for this has been that there is a lack of empirical evidence to be observed in this channel where we are debating.

Reason to vote con: My opponent has not defended his case and has basically produced irrelevant information in all of his rounds. At the same time, I provided reasons to support my stance. Thus, I urge you to vote con.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
Whereas I will agree that cliff provided more sources than me, I can safely say that we provided an equal amount of reliable source, given that neither of us provided a source that would reliable serve as evidence for the topic. ;-)

Thanks for reading though. :D
Posted by LR4N6FTW4EVA 9 years ago
LR4N6FTW4EVA
Conduct: Logical Master, Cliff put way too many exclamation points.

Spelling and Grammar: Logical Master, Cliff was incomprehensible half of (uv) the time.

Arguments: Logical, Cliff offered no relevant points.

Sources: Cliff, Logical Master only proposed using a source
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
Kleptin- Voting as a Cleaner

I have already voted in this debate, so I will merely explain my votes.

Conduct:

I need not go into detail about Logical Master's conduct, for we can easily see that the category goes to him due to Cliff's complete and total unprofessionalism

Spelling and Grammar:

I could barely understand Cliff, and he had a string of exclamation marks that stretched the page, ruining the entire debate.

Quality of Arguments:

Cliff's arguments would have been made by elementary school children.

Sources:

I actually had to change my vote from Logical Master in this category. Cliff offered more sources which actually supported his point, thus, I must apologize to Cliff for my poor voting and award him the points for reliable sources.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
Fixed the error on this debate. Some people were voting for pro by mistake. Happens all the time.
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
As Kleptin had suggested recently, perhaps the voting boxes are too small for some of the lazy eyed people on this site. In other words, they meant to vote CON, but accidentally voted PRO.
Posted by SportsGuru 9 years ago
SportsGuru
WTH? How does L-M lose this debate?
Posted by SportsGuru 9 years ago
SportsGuru
How is this tied?! Although it could be debated whether cliffsofdover was owned by l-m, he certainly lost.
Posted by Kusfraba 9 years ago
Kusfraba
I doubt cliffsofdover is owned by Logical-Master. I have explored quite a few of his topics, and he strikes me as a noble debater.

Well, my main reason to comment here was that, and maybe it's just me, but the format for this page seems way messed up. Instead of going down, the text shoots off to the side quite irritatingly. Nevertheless, I persevered and read (most of) the debate.
Posted by Kierkegaard 9 years ago
Kierkegaard
Hm...I think it's fairly obvious that cliffsofdover is a fake/dumb account. Whether owned by Logical-Master or not, I couldn't say.
Posted by Darth_Grievous_42 9 years ago
Darth_Grievous_42
Logical Master won hands down. I am not convinced either way that cliffsofdover really likes pizza at all. In fact, I would guess that by the amount of evidence he did not give that he probably does not like pizza at all, and his lack of proof is only because he does not properly know how to express his love of pizza. He could have given examples of his mouth watering at the smell, situations were he will only buy frozen pizza's at the Grocery story, or how a new Pizza Hut deal is the highlight of his life. Rather he let me know how pizza was made. Interesting but not convincing when pertaining to himself.

Also his writing style is rather annoying, as it is neither cute, nor funny, but rather hard to read. Even if his age is 29, I'll have to assume it is a 3 year old with a false account. This would again show his true lack of appreciation for pizza, as he has probably only eaten mash carrots up until now.
26 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 1 year ago
KingDebater
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Robert_Santurri 9 years ago
Robert_Santurri
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:07 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:25 
Vote Placed by gahbage 9 years ago
gahbage
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by massvideogamer 9 years ago
massvideogamer
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by austinrsell 9 years ago
austinrsell
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
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 
Vote Placed by zakkuchan 9 years ago
zakkuchan
cliffsofdoverLogical-MasterTied
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