The Instigator
Max.Wallace
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
FuzzyCatPotato
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Search engines accumulated knowledge, each engine burns fuel. Are you fuel?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
FuzzyCatPotato
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/19/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 720 times Debate No: 63536
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (2)

 

Max.Wallace

Pro

Don't get burned by an engine, that is what they do, and by searching, you are fodder. Disagree please, Saint Intelligentio.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Pro states that I am fuel. I respectfully disagree.

Fuel must have a net gain of heat from burning. Because humans are mostly water, it is very difficult to burn one, and really only works well with gasoline. (Don't believe me? Buy a lighter and try burning someone. Too much effort, not enough flames, amirite?)

Because I, as a singular person, without any added starter fluid, am not able to burn well, I cannot be fuel.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
Max.Wallace

Pro

Your infant minded argument, blessed by the Merriam Websters definition, rings truly hollow as to what is fuel. The folks that eat a McDonalds burger are fuel to the CEO's of the rat turd burgers. The people that buy the burger spent their gold on the crap food, thereby fueling the jets of the CEO. Your argument is so fallicical, it is astounding. You must get out of that school as it teaches you that fuel can only be measured in BTUs. Fuel has unlimited definitions.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Pro attempts to prove that I am metaphorically fuel. Since it's possible to make anything into a metaphor, it would be impossible for Con to ever win if we accept that "proving Con is metaphorically fuel". This destroys any hope of fairness in this debate, and so we must reject this debate.

Furthermore, this assumes that I consume food from restraunts. Pro must prove that I consume food from restraunts to prove that I am metaphorically fuel for CEO's jets.
Debate Round No. 2
Max.Wallace

Pro

Try growing a garden without fueling your plants.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Pro has offered no new reasons that I am fuel in Round 3.

---

REASONS TO VOTE CON

Conduct: Pro has repeatedly insulted Con.

Grammar: "Search engines accumulated knowledge" has no verb.

Arguments: Pro has offered one, rebutted, argument as to why Con is metaphorically fuel. Con has offered one, unrebutted, argument as to why Con is not physically fuel and has pointed out that making metaphorical comparisons is unfair and must be disregarded. As such, Con has won.
Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
... ? nac
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
You cannot fuel yourself without a garden, but you can fuel yourself with those that don't have one either.

Saint dick.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
I am sorry fuzzy cat potato, I meant no real harm, my apologies for my bullying conduct.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
I'll make a tasty treat for they, so be it.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
Yep
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
We are flammable, just not highly flammable. We can be burned, just not quickly and easily. In a hot enough environment,we will quickly turn to ash, and feed the fire. That is the truth.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
Yep, my parents always drilled it into my head that I wasn't flammable
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Parents, and the school they fed you to.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
From where did I get my preconcieved notions that I'm not flammable?
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
try.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Max.WallaceFuzzyCatPotatoTied
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: pro stinks.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
Max.WallaceFuzzyCatPotatoTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was rude and grammatically challenged.