The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

The Internet can help you survive a Tornado.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
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: 12/17/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 899 times Debate No: 42314
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




This topic on the BBC site made me wonder: can the internet help you survive a tornado? The answer is yes.

Yahoo Answers
: There's all this windy stuff and it's blowing me across town. What is it and what should I do? Please answer as soon as possible

Responses (4)
Knitted_trumper: did you fart? If so, cut your nose off
Source: my brain
AthleticMan7: try running in the opposite direction!
NotaBig: Turn off your fan!
Robin1: Stop flying!
Forum Topic: advice please
SwirlyWhirly0118999: What should I do in the event of a Tornado? Please respond A.S.A.P
KingDebater: l What should I do in the event of a Tornado? Please respond A.S.A.P
Just wait a bit longer. That's what I'd do.
RoyLatham: Instigate a debate about it with me as your opponent and I'll win.
Yay842: No
Airmax1227: l What should I do in the event of a Tornado? Please respond A.S.A.P
PM me and I'll be able to verify the answer.
PryorPirate93: Hey, guys! I'm back!
Rational_Thinker1991: l What should I do in the event of a Tornado? Please respond A.S.A.P

DDO Ripoff #6252765: advice please
SwirlyWhirly0118999: What should I do in the event of a Tornado? Please respond A.S.A.P
Qopel: I won't tell you because you're stupid and don't understand the burden of proof.

6 People like this
Johnny Funny: *Tornado
34 people like this

5 Retweets 2 Favourites
JUMMY PING @slickmates

17 Years Ago
No Replies
A. Shut up anon

So you see, the internet really can help you survive a Tornado. Even if those methods don't work, you could still just sell the Tornado on eBay (think of the money you'd get from the postage and packaging!) or just e-mail it to Mars or something. What I'm saying is that the internet is a wonderful place.

Thank you.



I will be taking the stance that the internet would be useless in a tornado. This is clear because there is only one thing that can save someone from a tornado: the movie Sharknado.

The movie Sharknado is the story of a small group of people trying to survive a massive coastal storm. Eventually, they realize that their only hope is to fly helicopters near the tornadoes and drop improvised explosives into the vortexes. This heats the spinning cold and hot air, equalizing the temperature, which neutralizes the tornadoes.

Now, technically the information I posted is now on the internet, but that doesn't make it viable. BECAUSE I'M NOT A CREDIBLE SOURCE OF INFORMATION, JUST LOOK AT THE STUPID RANDOM STUFF I'M DOING SWAGSWAG#YOLOSWAG ROFLCOPTERDINOSAURSCAPSSPAMLOLLOLjk!!!!!!!!!!


1. Yahoo Answers
1a. The responses this person received wouldn't have helped him at all due to the fact that for four answers, there is only one source, the brain of Knitted_trumper. Knitted_trumper thinks that the best solution to a tornado is cutting your nose off, so it seems that his brain is not a very credible source.

2a. was clearly useless because the thread ended with the deactivation of the inquirer's account due to loss of life.

3. CreateDebate
3a. CreateDebate is an inferior DDO mimic, so if the original can't save the inquirer, the copy won't either.
3b. The inquirer didn't even receive a helpful answer.

4. Facebook
4a. The inquirer did receive an answer that was helpful, but it would not help them survive a tornado.
4b. Even though the answer was helpful, most people would be offended by the correction, and change nothing in their spelling.

5. Twitter
5a. No one who values their own safety would help someone in a tornado by using Twitter. To do so, they would have to send a Tweet, which implies that they are a bird. Now, if a bird gets close enough to a tornado for a victim to hear them tweet, the bird would be trapped in the vortex as well.

6. Myspace
6a. In the post, it clearly says '17 years ago' for the date of the question. It still has no answers. This is because everyone who used to use Myspace is watching Sharknado instead, because they understand that it's a more viable option.

7. Ebay
7a. Most Ebay auctions run for a week or more. If you cut down on that time, you're running the risk of getting no bids. Even buy-it-now isn't really a viable option, when people see that they will actually think before they bid, because they know for a fact that they will have to pay. Sharknado, on the other hand, only takes 86 minutes to play.
7b. There's no guarantee the tornado will even sell, unlike watching Sharknado. With Sharknado, you will get the same reliable solution every time.
7c. If the buyer receives the tornado, if it doesn't meet their expectations they have the opportunity to send it back, or worse, give negative feedback.

8. Email
8a. For an email, and the tornado that is linked to be received, the person you are trying to send it to must log on and open the email.

I have demonstrated that Sharknado is quicker and more reliable than the internet for tornado help. Therefore, there is no logical reason to use the internet, rendering it useless.

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 1


Introduction to R2
So we come to the close of this debate, where I have definitely won.

-KingDebater, winner.

The debate bit
Con's case is actually self-refuting.

P1) If Con is correct, Con is wrong.
P2) If Con is not correct, Pro is correct
C) Pro is correct.

This should be a given, but I will give an argument supporting the fact that I'm 100% correct and there's no questioning that.

P1 - Con said he is not a credible source of information.
P2 - This is a given. If Con isn't correct, then I am because he is claiming positively that the only thing that can help you during a tornado is the film 'sharknado'.
C - This is obvious.

Con's "rebuttals"
1. Con doesn't refute this argument, he just gives his lame old stupid dumb opinion, which is that Knitted_Trumper's brain doesn't appear to be a credible source.
2. That wasn't due to his death, that was because the moderators on DDO are biased. Con just makes that illogical dumb stupid lame baseless assumption.
3. a. CreateDebate may be the lamest thing on the internet ever, but it can still help you in the event of a tornado just as DDO and every other site can, including this little ditty of a site page: []. This web page helps you because it alerts you of the fact that clutching aimlessly in the hope that you'll grab a christmas tree is probably futile.
b. Qopel does actually give a good answer. He says you need to understand the burden of proof and you do because if you don't understand something basic such as the big burden of popular proof, how are you supposed to understand something complicated such as how to survive a tornado?
4. a. This is another of Con's dumb baseless not-well-thought-out assertions. If you don't understand something basic such as spelling, how are you supposed to understand something complicated such as how to survive a tornado?
b. They wouldn't, because all facebook users are clever, logical, sophisticated, and intellectual intellectuals who would be as pleased as could be with a loyal user pointing out a slimy spelling mistake, no matter what the scenario!
5. They must be a bird, but obviously they must be some kind of super-sophisticated bird of a superior species because they can fly AND type on a keyboard correctly (in English), which means they are better than humans and so a good source of information.
6. Unlike all the more popular children on this site, Con doesn't spend all his time logged into myspace and so doesn't understand how it works. Viewing replies is a whole other funny function! All those in the minority, go and achieve a myspace account!
7. a. But I would buy a tornado, wouldn't you? It would be rather funny if 'twas shipped in a jar, as then there'd be the possibility that in the future, one could open the jar and accuse another human of trumping! Oh, what joy!
b. There is, everyone wants to buy a tornado for reasons I have just described!
c. The feedback would certainly be 100% positive, as it would be a waste of the occassion to not say "Your tornado blew me away!".
8. Unlike us normals, Con does not check his electronic internet text mails every two seconds so he doesn't understand that he's completely wrong. Everyone is always logged onto their e-mail!

Thank you.

Sites that will help you survive in the event of a tornado



I would like to thank Pro for this excellent debate. I would also like not to lose because of conduct points(Not that I plan to, but it never hurts to be sure.).

Pro first provides an extremely flawed argument pertaining to my claim that I am not a reliable source. He first assumes that because I am an unreliable source that I am incapable of representing correct information. This is incorrect. I hold many correct beliefs, like 2 + 2 = 4, and 9 x 5 = 42(in base thirteen, that is). His second error is assuming that if I am wrong(which I'm not), he is by default right. If I am wrong, then Sharknado is either not helpful, or there are other things that are helpful. Both of those possibilities present a chance that the internet is useful, however, that is only a chance, and does not constitute a victory for Pro.


1a. By Pro's own logic, my lame old stupid dumb opinion is correct. Pro would accept that I am not a credible source due to a few lines of unintelligent text, and Knitted_Trumper has committed an identical crime, stating that the best thing to do in a tornado is 'cut your nose off'. The nose could be extremely useful in a tornado, or any high-wind situation, as a sort of rudder, Just turn your head to change the direction of flight, or flare your nostrils to slow down. Any brain that would suggest to dispose of such a valuable asset is clearly not intelligent, much like my lines of gibberish. Therefore, as Pro has stated that I am not a credible source, it is clear that neither is Knitted_Trumper's brain.

2a. Con says it himself: The termination of SwirlyWhirly0118999's account was not because of his death. However, he does concede to the fact that SwirlyWhirly018999 died before their account was terminated, and we can see his account was terminated shortly after a request for help in a tornado. It's incredibly likely that his death was caused by the giant spiraling vortex of debris rushing towards him.

3aa. You attempted to say that since one website could help in a tornado, any website could, thus disproving my point. The issue with that is that the link you posted actually has no relevance to tornadoes whatsoever. It's just the word 'NO'(and presumably, 'YES', on Christmas, but it still wouldn't do any good.) and a bunch of spinning flags.

3ba. Con says that Qopel's answer was helpful, implying that being told they didn't understand somehow helped SwirlyWhirly0188999 survive a tornado. However, SwirlyWhirly still died, which shows that Qopel's answer clearly wasn't helpful.

4aa. In my defense, I remember auto-correcting that typo. It was originally 'speling', and seems to have been"corrected" to 'spellling'.

4ab. This argument is essentially the same case as the last one. The answer was not helpful, and stupidity of the inquirer does not affect the validity of the answer.

4ba. I'll concede this point. . . Due to the fact that it has absolutely no significance towards the resolution. Spelling corrections are helpful, but not for surviving tornadoes.

5a. It doesn't matter if they are a super-bird or pigeons, if they are within tweeting earshot of a person in a tornado, they will literally be torn to pieces by the wind.

6a. I'm not going to lie, I don't have a Myspace account. But, if you look at what you originally posted for Myspace, it clearly says 'No Replies' at the bottom. I don't need an account to know what that means. . . It means that everyone is watching Sharknado.

7aa. and 7ba. That is assuming the auction is allowed to reach it's conclusion. There have been more than a few sketchy auctions on Ebay (and Iceland, to name a few), and most are quickly ended by the Ebay moderators. Most people wouldn't take one seriously if they listed a tornado for sale.

7ab. and 7bb. If you search for a tornado on Ebay, you will get a multitude of items that appear before the actual thing. 40,144 results appeared for the word 'tornado'(as of 12/18/13), and none of them were actually tornadoes.

7ca. However, there would be some people who would be dissatisfied with the technical specs of the tornado. This is understandable, as you would have no good way to measure it from the inside, but incorrect item specifications would clearly result in dissatisfied customers.

8a. Clearly, everyone isn't always logged onto their email. How else would I have been able to access this?

I have refuted Pro's refutations, leaving him with no remaining examples to prove why the internet can be helpful, and to fulfill his BOP.

Vote Con!

Debate Round No. 2
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by KingDebater 2 years ago
That's what I'll do then.
Posted by Anon_Y_Mous 2 years ago
Okay. If no one accepts, feel free to challenge me if you still want to debate this.
Posted by KingDebater 2 years ago
There is a criteria, it's
age: 20-90
10+ debates
member who is ranked as good as or better than me

I think that's reasonable criteria.
Posted by Anon_Y_Mous 2 years ago
Is there actually a criteria for this debate, or is it impossible to accept?

I'll accept this if you decide to remove the criteria.
Posted by Romanii 2 years ago
First of all, the debate should be in the "funny" section.
Second of all, you should be Con.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Walrus101 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Reasons for voting decision: First of all, I expected this to be a rather interesting debate. One side managed to keep me entertained, one made me facepalm. KingDebater clearly had no respect for his opponent, and is also not a very bright individual. Spelling and Grammar could not be overlooked since Con had a slip up. However, that does not change the fact that pro is an idiot. I'm sorry pro, but "Your wrong" is really not a valid point in my head. Your sources weren't really sources, just subjects of stupidity. To test this debate, I personally found a tornado and tested both theories. After turning to the internet, I discovered that most were inconceivably stupid. Afterwards I watched Sharknado and found myself dropping a bomb in the Tornado, neutralizing the threat. This is a discovery that cannot go missed. Also, the Queen is no ninja banksy. And one last thing. They forgot to add conservatives