The Instigator
helgrenk
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Winner2
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The Chinese invented gunpowder, not the Europeans

Do you like this debate?NoYes-6
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/4/2012 Category: Science
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,938 times Debate No: 24074
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (0)

 

helgrenk

Pro

After reading a number of sources on the matter, it appears as much as certain that the Chinese historically invented gunpowder. There were instances of European claim with Roger Bacon who first wrote about it, and the assertion that guns were created by a German man who doesn't in fact exist. The primary argument against the Chinese inventing gunpowder is that there are only secondary sources citing primary Chinese sources. But gunpowder spontaneously appeared on the European stage and after the Chinese sources appeared. Is there any proof that the Chinese really didn't invent gunpowder?
Winner2

Con

I accept this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
helgrenk

Pro

helgrenk forfeited this round.
Winner2

Con

My opponent has forfeited.
Debate Round No. 2
helgrenk

Pro

helgrenk forfeited this round.
Winner2

Con

Winner2 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by drafterman 4 years ago
drafterman
A major flaw in this resolution is the fact that an "invention" need not be the first of its kind. So long as someone came up it via their own imagination, it is an "invention" even if they were not the first to do so, so long as they were not influenced by the already existing varient.

No practical exploitation of this flaw, as I can't seem to find anything that suggests there were independent developments of gunpowered, all having spread from China.

Ah well.

*puts down new sniper rifle*
Posted by Man-is-good 4 years ago
Man-is-good
Eh.....Debating this would be too one-sided, with the earliest evidence already demonstrating the formation of gunpowders with high levels of nitrates within them in early Chinese manuscripts.

However, as Larze said, I suppose an entire theory can approach the exact definition of gunpowder and what form; this may be tangential on what invent means across spans of time. Scholarly analysis--and common sense say that such a fact is true, but then again--this approach can be used, but is more rooted on perspectives of history than with facts.
Posted by FlameofPrometheus 4 years ago
FlameofPrometheus
Welp it useless debating a historical fact.

I suppose someone could run a theory of arguement ( Theory In LD- means to argue the rules of arguements) and derail this entire thing
Posted by bossyburrito 4 years ago
bossyburrito
Zaradi, DO IT NOW <:)
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
Someone should just de-rail this debate. I mean, it's obviously not debatable. No one is going to really miss this debate if someone de-rails it. So why not?
Posted by frozen_eclipse 4 years ago
frozen_eclipse
look at the wu ching tsung yao.......this is the first ever record of gunpowder
Posted by whyt3nn3rdy 4 years ago
whyt3nn3rdy
One-sided debate. GTFO.
Posted by mee2kool4u369 4 years ago
mee2kool4u369
This is something I have known for over 60 years.
Posted by larztheloser 4 years ago
larztheloser
Depends what formula of gunpowder is being talked about.
Posted by TheOrator 4 years ago
TheOrator
You might want to paste an actually debatable topic. Like it was wrong for the Europeans to use Gun Powerd, or the European manipulation of China or something like that. I doubt anyone is going to take up a topic where they have to debunk a non-disputed historical fact. It's like Dairygirl's trying to get people to prove medical studies wrong :P
No votes have been placed for this debate.