The 'Alvinnn!!! And the Chipmunks' Characters Don't Look Like Chipmunks.
-->>Full Resolution: The 'Alvinnn!!! And the Chipmunks' Characters Don't Look Like Chipmunks.
Now, I will simply begin my argument by clarifying that as the instigator of this topic~~the BoP (burden of proof), is on PRO. In order to win this debate, she will have to explain exactly why The 'Alvinnn!!! And the Chipmunks' Characters, do not actually look like chipmunks.
To start my case, I will outline a photo of a real life chipmunk:
And now, Alvinnn!!! and his chipmunk friends:
As can be seen, there is a remarkable resemblance and 'The 'Alvinnn!!! And the Chipmunks' Characters' do in fact look like real chipmunks.
Resolution is thus (far) negated.
"Alvin and the Chipmunks"
"Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel"
"Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked"
"Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Road Chip"
If you do not agree, look it up.
'They DON'T look like chipmunks.'
The above photos clearly show that Alvinnn!!! and the chipmunks definitely do look like chipmunks.
'Even my little sisters say so.'
Pro's little sisters do not classify as a valid or reliable source. For example, Pro is 14 years old according to her profile~~therefore, if her sisters are 'little', one would make the reasonable assumption that they are considerably younger and therefore of a child mentality. How are children a so can they possibly give a dependable and accurate assessment on whether Alvinnn!!! and the chipmunks actually look like chipmunks.
'I watch the show, I forget they're chipmunks and think they're human beings but shorter than everyone else.'
Pro is obviously resorting to persona opinion rather than objective evidence. I.E~~I watch a show and say that anyone *and* anything does look the thing it's supposed to be, but that does not mean it's not the thing it's supposed to be.
'However, in the movies listed below, they look exactly like chipmunks.'
Pro has finally negated that Alvinnn!!! and the chipmunks look like chipmunks.
As Pro failed to clarify this in their resolution and round one description, their case still remains negated~~especially as no evidence or real arguments have been provided.
Therefore, vote CON.
But thank you to Pro for this really fascintaing debate, and happy Alvinnn!!! and the chipmunks watching!
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|