The Instigator
GamerXKid
Pro (for)
The Contender
Youraverageunicorn
Con (against)

The Existence of the Lochness Monster, and other monsters

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
GamerXKid has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/23/2017 Category: Places-Travel
Updated: 3 weeks ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 173 times Debate No: 104588
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

GamerXKid

Pro

The Lochness Monster is a cryptid that reputedly inhabits Lochness, a lake in the Scottish Highlands. It is similar to other supposed lake monsters in Scotland and elsewhere, though its description varies from one account to the next, with most describing it as large. Nessie does in fact exist because of NUMBEROUS sightings.
Youraverageunicorn

Con

I will be debating under the impression that the lochness monster is not real.

As for the first round I don"t have much to say because I would like to refute my opponents points and create an argument in the next round. As for this round, the only other thing I want to say is my opponent used absolutely no evidence for the one point they made.

I look forward to the next round!
Debate Round No. 1
GamerXKid

Pro

Hey, I have tons of evidence there were multiple sightings, pictures, and videos. Here is the latest sighting. Wednesday 15th June 2011
Foyers shop and cafe owner Jan Hargreaves and her husband Simon believe they caught a glimpse of "Nessie". It was while taking a break on the store's front decking, looking out to the loch, when Mrs Hargreaves and kitchen worker Graham Baine spotted an unusual figure cutting a strange shape on the loch. "We were standing looking out and saw something that looked bizarre," said Mrs Hargreaves. "I said to my husband to come and have a look. "We stand here all the time and look out and see boats and kayaks but it didn't look like anything we have seen here before." Despite the unidentified creature being quite a distance from their vantage point, Mrs Hargreaves said it had a long neck which was too long to be that of a seal and it was black in appearance. "It went under the water and disappeared for probably 30 to 40 seconds and then came back up again," said Mrs Hargreaves. "It was around for a good four to five minutes. It was just so strange." Keen to stress she is not seeking publicity, Mrs Hargreaves does firmly believe what she saw was the Loch Ness Monster. "It was so exciting," she said. Nessie hunter Steve Feltham said he heard about the possible sighting when he popped into the store and believes because it was from residents rather than tourists, it is more credible. "I'm excited by the fact it was locals who had seen it," said Mr Feltham. "It's quite a distance from the shop to the water and they watch everything that goes on there." What particularly excited Mr Feltham was that it was from the exact same vantage point where Tim Dinsdale shot the best footage of the legendary creature back in 1960. "I'll put the sighting with the other sightings," said Mr Feltham. "I will also continue to carry out surface observations." The sighting was recorded between 2.30pm and 3pm.
Youraverageunicorn

Con

Once again, my opponent usd quotes but had no link to their evidence, let alone where he found it.

I'm aware that people have claimed many sightings of the Loch Ness monster. I'm here to prove that what they saw is not the Loch Ness monster.

Nessie was made in Scotland as an attraction for tourists, so when people claimed they saw Nessie, they were either faking it or saw a different animal.

Most of the sightings weren't convincing enough

In 1852 someone claimed to have seen Nessie, but it turned out it was just a horse taking a bath in the water.

The "monster" people could have really seen, was possibly a surviving plesiosaur, which is a very popular and reliable theory.

The Loch Ness lake is not big enough to hold Nessie. Nessie has been described as a fairly big creature, but the lake is only so big, you would see the creature wayyyy more often.

Nessie has often been described as a reptile, meaning she's cold blooded. But the Loch Ness would be too cold to sustain Nessie if that were the case.

Most sightings are misidentified subjects, and the way Nessie has been described, I don't think it's possible for this "monster" to be real. Like I said, this was a creature that was made up to attract tourists and most sightings could easily be another thing.

https://www.thesun.co.uk...

http://hoaxes.org...

http://thescienceexplorer.com...
Debate Round No. 2
GamerXKid

Pro

Ahhh... my opponent lacks belief of God"s creation. We don"t necessarily if know if God didn"t create Nessie. Up to two thirds of the plant and animal species in the world's oceans may be undiscovered, according to the largest study of the oceans' biodiversity ever conducted.

The new estimate, which suggests that there may be as many as 1 million species of non-bacterial life in the world's waterways, is based on research by 270 experts from around the world. The estimate is considered to be the most accurate yet, and is far lower than some previous estimates.

"Ten years ago, we thought there were at least 10 million species in the ocean, now we think it's less than 1 million," says Ward Appeltans, a marine biologist with the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). "It means that eventually, we might be able to describe most of the unknown species. If you consider fish, we estimate there are 5,000 species still undescribed. We're discovering 150 new species of fish every year " 30 years at that rate, and it's mission accomplished."
June has been declared National Oceans Month, via a writ from the White House a few days ago, and this week communities around the planet will mark World Oceans Day.

The flurry of recognition seems appropriate for a region that covers 70 percent of the Earth's surface and provides about half the air we breathe, courtesy of the microscopic, oxygen-producing phytoplankton floating in it.

Yet much about the planet's oceans remains a mystery. As of the year 2000, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) estimated that as much as 95 percent of the world's oceans and 99 percent of the ocean floor are unexplored.

Exploring these regions deep below the ocean's surface is difficult, time-consuming and expensive. Which hasn't stopped people from trying " and making incredible discoveries along the way.

Light refracts off a comb-jelly, a species found in the Arctic, producing stripes of rainbow color. Polar waters are home to many species seen nowhere else on earth.
Light refracts off a comb-jelly, a species found in the Arctic, producing stripes of rainbow color. Polar waters are home to many species seen nowhere else on earth.
Credit: Kevin Raskoff, MBARI, NOAA/OER.
Known unknowns

Shallower parts of the ocean, and those closer to coastline, have understandably gotten the lion's share of investigation.

What's been fairly well explored is about one Washington Monument down into the ocean " about 556 feet (170 meters) " said Mike Vecchione, a veteran scientist with NOAA and the Smithsonian Institution.

Impressive, perhaps, yet the average depth of the planet's oceans is 13,120 feet (4,000 m), the height of many peaks in the Rockies and the Alps. [Infographic: Tallest Mountain to Deepest Ocean Trench]
https://www.livescience.com...
https://www.usnews.com...-
Youraverageunicorn

Con

God's creation
I'm not really sure why you brought this up. This isn't a debate on beliefs around religion. You could've said it was already existing but I don't think you should bring god into this so I choose to drop this argument

You used conditionality which is unfair. Plus, your most recent argument has zero uniqueness.

Since you dropped your old argument, I guess all I have to respond to is this.

Species
This has no evidence as to why Nessie exists or not. None WHATSOEVER. You're just claiming that there's a huge amount of species not discovered. Not only does that not prove whether or not Nessie exists, I already said that Nessie was claimed to live in Loch Ness. That's where she's "located" and that's why it's an attraction. Your argument has no stance because you're talking about the rest of the world and my argument was that she wouldn't be able to fit in the Loch Ness and she can't adapt to the space.

Dropped arguments
You dropped:
1. Adaptation
2. Alternative sighting
3. Misindentified sightings

I look forward to the next round
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Youraverageunicorn 3 weeks ago
Youraverageunicorn
Make sure to have a link to your evidence
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.