The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
5 Points

The 'Alvinnn!!! And the Chipmunks' Characters Don't Look Like Chipmunks.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/11/2016 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,708 times Debate No: 84835
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Have you seen this show? Its on Nickelodeon. Alvin, Simon, Theodore, Brittany, Jeanette, and Elenor don't even look like chipmunks.


Debate accepted.


-->>Full Resolution: The 'Alvinnn!!! And the Chipmunks' Characters Don't Look Like Chipmunks.

-->>Position: CON.

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.
Debate Round No. 1


They DON'T look like chipmunks. Even my little sisters say so. When I watch the show, I forget they're chipmunks and think they're human beings but shorter than everyone else. However, in the movies listed below, they look exactly like chipmunks.

"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.

Debate Round No. 2


I think they don't look like chipmunks on the tv show, but in the movies they do.


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!
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by DavidMancke 2 years ago
This may be the best thing I've seen here yet. 100 points to Gryffindor!
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
>Reported vote: Mikal// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: if this gets removed im going to cry.

[*Reason for removal*] This is not an RFD. There was a debate of sorts here, the voter has to justify his decision.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by famousdebater 2 years ago
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had the burden of proof and failed to meet it. They failed to respond to Con's arguments and they also dropped all rebuttals made against their very short case. Since Pro used her younger sister as a source of reliability I also award Con the sources points due to the fact that there is no credibility in using people as sources (unless there are quotes and evidence proving that they said what you have claimed), because you could just make up anything you like. Especially when you make it so general and make it somebody that is most likely not famous and doesn't have any quotes or videos proving that they said something.