The Earth can be destroyed.
Debate Rounds (3)
I just learnt in my geography class that the Earth's orbit changes every 40000 years or so, it may cause the Earth to increase distance from the red giant Sun.
I ask pro to act on round 1's explanation.
And, I've search the meaning of the word "destroyed" in the internet and dictionary.
The meaning is "unable to restore" or "to completely consume". The global warming, nuclear threats can also cause the Earth "unable to restore" or "to completely consume"
Also, I said technically round 1 is the extension of the resolution, which deems your next argument invalid as well.
You cannot deny that there are lots of dangerous thing that can destroy Earth in the universe.
Because of the above reason, I agree the topic.
P.S. The title's coverage is too large, next time you should add more key words.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 8elB6U5THIqaSm5QhiNLVnRJA 1 year ago
|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||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Literally impossible resolution to deny. Con even conceded that nukes and global warming are both viable things that could destroy the Earth but not annihilate it. Pro successfully explained the exact definition of destruction and therefore won.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.