The Instigator
muslimnomore
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
derogatory
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Potassium is an element of the periodic table

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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 1 vote the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/27/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,344 times Debate No: 41355
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)

 

muslimnomore

Pro

Potassium is an element on the standard periodic table. It's atomic symbol is 'K'. Its atomic number is 19. Its average atomic mass is roughly 39 amu.
Here is proof that potassium is on the periodic table:
http://www.webelements.com...

Con must prove that potassium is not on the periodic table. Good luck.
derogatory

Con

I ask you, have you ever seen the components of potassium, I.E the electrons, protons, neutrons. You base your claim on the assumption that everybody is right about what 'potassium is composed of' and to be honest, If i am correct we can't even see an electron so we assume that it has an equal number of electrons and protons (provided its in its neutral state), another thing which makes me sceptical of the electron presence is the fact we can't actually determined its orbits around the nucleus.

I would also like to mention potassium is a label for an element, there might be another language where they use an alternate name for potassium in which case potassium is not an element in there language, so it is also a matter of perspective.
Debate Round No. 1
muslimnomore

Pro

You're actually quite right in my aspects.
However, currently, the best explanation of our observations of matter is atomic theory. It helps us understand our observations and make accurate predictions about the behaviour of matter.
The periodic table helps us study and develop this theory.
It is an indisputable fact, that periodic tables have potassium listed on them.
Could there be some flaws in atomic theory as it stands? Sure. In fact, for the past few decades we have been developing, correcting and advancing this theory by leaps and bounds
However, this does not make a difference.
For example, everyone is certain that the story of the Cinderella is fictional. This does not change the fact that within this fictional story, the Fairy Godmother is a character.
The topic of the debate is not "Potassium exists" or "Potassium's agreed-upon value of average atomic mass will never change because no new isotopes of potassium will ever be discovered". The topic states that Potassium is listed on the periodic table, and it clearly is.
As for your point about other languages, 'potassium' is actually the IUPAC name for this element. The "I" in IUPAC stands for 'international'. All scientists around the world use the same periodic table no matter what their mother tongue is.
derogatory

Con

Firstly we must define what must be on the periodic table,

The periodic table consists of elements as you quite rightly said. If it is not an element it is not meant to be on the periodic table and hence if potassium is on the periodic table it must be an element. This is why we must debate the fact whether potassium exists or not because if it doesn't then it does not exist on the periodic table, and not only potassium but essentially all other elements. There is no one periodic table which we can just rely on and say potassium is on this therefore it exists on the periodic table, equally I could make up a periodic table with potassium missing and say this is a periodic table without potassium on it, thus I have proved potassium doesn't exist. There is a difference between 'A' periodic table and 'The' periodic table. So essentially you need to prove to me that potassium is an element.

Furthermore, THE periodic table has been finished because it clearly isn't there are at least thousands of 'elements' which are predicted so it is subject to reliability.
Debate Round No. 2
muslimnomore

Pro

Firstly we must define what must be on the periodic table,
The periodic table consists of elements as you quite rightly said.

ok



If it is not an element it is not meant to be on the periodic table and hence if potassium is on the periodic table it must be an element.
Potassium is an element

This is why we must debate the fact whether potassium exists
We must not debate this because the substance known as potassium most certainly exists. It has many applications. When you eat bananas you consume potassium.

There is no one periodic table which we can just rely on and say potassium is on this therefore it exists on the periodic table,

Yes there is. All classrooms and scientists around the world use essentially the same periodic table with the same arrangement and selection of elements. Many thanks to Mendeleev for coming up with this arragnement of elements.

equally I could make up a periodic table with potassium missing and say this is a periodic table without potassium on it, thus I have proved potassium doesn't exist.

You could say that but you would be wrong. Furthermore I mentioned that I was referring to the standard periodic table.

There is a difference between 'A' periodic table and 'The' periodic table. So essentially you need to prove to me that potassium is an element.

The second statement in no way follows from the first one. It's like saying " 'the' story of Cinderella is is different from 'a' story of Cinderella, therefore you need to prove that Cinderella is a character."

The periodic table was first put together by Mendeleev and always has had Potassium on it. It almost certainly always will.


Furthermore, THE periodic table has been finished because it clearly isn't there are at least thousands of 'elements' which are predicted so it is subject to reliability.
It has been fnished? What does that even mean? Read what you just wrote here. Does it make any sense to you?

You are made - in part - of potassium: http://umm.edu...


Potassium exists: http://www.rsc.org...

Potassium is indisputably a part of the standard periodic table: http://www.rsc.org...

Is there any debate topic I can come up with, that no one would debate? I wonder.
derogatory

Con

Hi, would just like to say I felt like arguing a very one sided point such as this to see if I had a chance..

Next I would like to clarify that I meant the periodic table is not finished I would of presumed you would of caught on by the latter part of that point but I take the hit for not going over my argument.

We now need to enter the realms of scepticism and history, if you might recall there was once a time when we believed the world was composed of 4 elements and when we thought the earth was square, we would of been ridiculed if we thought otherwise and quite wrongly so as we can clearly see hence we must realise that we can't always accept things and must always test things and this is what some scientists do, there are albeit a couple of axioms but nevertheless we must always treat things with the possibility of it not existing otherwise you rely on other people to much.

Just to point out the periodic table that exists now is very much different to the one devised by Mendeleev thanks to scientists such as Marie curie.

Now I would like to clarify elements existed before Mendeleev he only invented the periodic table for I guess public convinence there were others before him who hinted at the fact of a periodic table but anyways regardless of whether he decided potassium was an element and regardless of whether it is taught at schools can you be 100 percent certain and I am not sure you can be. I'm sure you can understand the standard periodic table is liable to change like so many other things it is not absolute/a statement of nature even if elements are, if that makes any sense.

Btw your analogy of Cinderella is very good and I might of jumped a bit to far ahead from thought process to computer but I will explain. If Cinderella is in a Cinderella book but not in THE Cinderella book then she is not a character in the book. Similar to how you can get bootleg Pokemon games with weird characters but they aren't actually in THE Pokemon franchise.

This concludes my argument and THE argument!
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by muslimnomore 3 years ago
muslimnomore
never said you were.

self-assed... hmm.. that's a new one.
Posted by dtaylor971 3 years ago
dtaylor971
I'm not Muslim; I'm Jewish. Religion has nothing to do with it. You are just a self-assed motherfcker.
Posted by muslimnomore 3 years ago
muslimnomore
It's just too much fun learning what big butthurt a-holes keyboard warriors like yourself can be.
Posted by muslimnomore 3 years ago
muslimnomore
Wasn't shying away. I agree I should be banned so being con would not have made any sense. You wouldn't stop challenging me to the same debate again and again. I felt like you were obsessed with me. Much like a psychopath would be obsessed with someone who insults his religion.
Please do report me, I am addicted to this site and need to get away from it. I need to spend time away from butthurt a-holes like you and spend more time pleasuring myself.
Posted by dtaylor971 3 years ago
dtaylor971
That was weak shying away from my debate.
Posted by muslimnomore 3 years ago
muslimnomore
hahaha.. it happened!
Posted by Scy 3 years ago
Scy
The topic is not really debatable so good luck finding a con.
Posted by muslimnomore 3 years ago
muslimnomore
The only reason I started this debate is to see who possibly could do so. I didn't think anyone would debate me in any of my other debates either.
Posted by TetsuRiken 3 years ago
TetsuRiken
I hate to be the d*ck that asks but who would debate this with you.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
muslimnomorederogatoryTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Spam debate for easy win. Voting all zeros to express distaste for the spam debates.