The Instigator
SuperDanyluk
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
WeirdJohn12
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Star gate better then star wars

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  
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/20/2011 Category: Arts
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,485 times Debate No: 15490
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

SuperDanyluk

Pro

Star gate is better then star wars for verious reasons first of all the weapons could disenegrate a lightsaber.
WeirdJohn12

Con

First of all nothing can destroy a light saber. The blaster rifle can blast through anything and it just bounces off. So your first argument is invalid.
Debate Round No. 1
SuperDanyluk

Pro

Nope because the v sniper gun created by the Gawool has meany purposes for instance one shot will parilize the saber two shots it dies and three shots disinagrates anything.Say Darth Vader attempts to take over earth S.G. 1 would take him and his army out i a heartbeat 3 shots a Vader is just dust.And Vaders stormtroopers are not siths so shoot them down with r.p.gs and rocket launchers no more Vader.
WeirdJohn12

Con

First a light saber can not die and the light saber can not be paralyzed. My second argument is that the emperor has a large army full of a variety of soldiers. The emperor also has a spaceship that blows up planets. The emperor also has the force and Vader. So I believe the star gate army will lose to the empire.
Debate Round No. 2
SuperDanyluk

Pro

yes but the empor wouldnt destroy earth he would find evil people on earth for a sith that and the aincents have a speacial forcefeild that ca deflect anything destroing the death star.
WeirdJohn12

Con

First you said the Emperor wouldn't destroy earth and find evil people for sith. If this statement is true then why did the emperor only have one apprentice. The emperor only cares about taking over the universe. Then you said the ancients have a force field that can deflect anything well so did the planet that the Death Star destroyed and the empire just attacked over and over until the planet is all out of defenses.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Addison_Barton 3 years ago
Addison_Barton
Call me bias, but i dont even need to view this debate to say: Star Wars kills stargate. Nothing can beat star wars, star wars allways wins. Enough said.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by bcresmer 2 years ago
bcresmer
SuperDanylukWeirdJohn12Tied
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: this was just a poor debate. no sources, grammar sucked
Vote Placed by thedude346 3 years ago
thedude346
SuperDanylukWeirdJohn12Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Con made coherent, logical arguments. Pro couldn't keep a single train of thought, was all over the place. But the whole thing could've been longer.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 3 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
SuperDanylukWeirdJohn12Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had little warrant and needs to be beaten with a dictshunairey.
Vote Placed by Haasenfeffor 3 years ago
Haasenfeffor
SuperDanylukWeirdJohn12Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: wow..... fail?
Vote Placed by Zealous1 3 years ago
Zealous1
SuperDanylukWeirdJohn12Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Sorry, but this was a really lame debate. First off because there was some really bad grammar on the Pro side, but also because the character limit must have been low and the argumentation was really weak. Pro was just claiming the gun could disintegrate a lightsaber, while Con claimed the lightsaber is invincible. I didn't really get Pro's argument. Con was right in saying that blasters bounce off. Which one is right? Use a higher char limit next time, at least.