The Instigator
Qynze
Pro (for)
Winning
46 Points
The Contender
aguma
Con (against)
Losing
11 Points

The Sky is Blue.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 10 votes the winner is...
Qynze
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/19/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,481 times Debate No: 14433
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (18)
Votes (10)

 

Qynze

Pro

I thank my opponent for joining me in this what I know is likely to be EXTREMELY entertaining debate. By initiating this debate, I expect that he will bind himself by the normal rules of conduct and that he have a good sense of humor and is not in any way offended by my words, unless they directly insult him (which would, by the way, also be a violation of the rules of conduct on my part). On my honor, I swear I will uphold these rules for this debate or else be dishonored.

My side defines this topic as how the human mind interprets the colour of the sky.

I'd also like to take a moment to thank the following people:
My mother, my father, my grandmother on my dad's side, my grandmother on my mother's side, pretty much all of my ancestors, my cousins B. & T., my uncles and aunts, my great-granduncle, my mother, my father - oh wait, already mentioned those -_-. Well, anyway, my brother, my sister, friends AZW, NF, MYH, CKH, AYF, OHF, SMB, TS, SM, CK, ID, MW, MY, UG, and everyone else I haven't mentioned, and their parents, too, for making this possible. Plus I'd like to thank my currently nonexistent descendants-to-be, and my friends' too. Oh, and yes, I'd like to thank my audience, for it is truly the audience that makes a pointless, selfish argument into a (usually) beneficial, productive debate. My name is Chie Hasu, 1st daughter of....well, I shouldn't go into that.

I'll wait for my opponent to post his argument(s) before I begin mine.

I'd like the audience to know this topic was suggested by the contender, aguma, and he has chosen his side, although I initiated the debate.

So yeah - let's have some fun!
aguma

Con

Sunsets. Night. I rest my case.
Debate Round No. 1
Qynze

Pro

Thanks for accepting.

Refutation(s):

In his VERY LONG SPEECH, which, by-the-way, took me 3 LONG HOURS to read, and 2 MORE to correctly interpret, my opponent stated: "Sunsets. Night. I rest my case."

Well, nights and sunsets can be blue, too [1] [2]! Also, please allow me to further define the motion.

[pause (this is when you say 'yes, please do so')]

Thank you. Now, the motion is "The Sky is Blue.", correct? Yes; I believe so. That doesn't mean that the sky must be blue all the time, simply that the sky must be blue at one time or another.


Point(s):

1) The science of it

The truth is, the sky is all colours of the rainbow [3]. Blue is the colour that is scattered the most, therefore that is what our eyes see [3]. More importantly, that is how our minds interpret it, thus proving my case.

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls; mesdames et messieurs; senors y senoras o senoritas; 'tis true: please vote for the Proposition.


Sources:

1. http://mdb7.ibibo.com...
2.
http://fineartamerica.com...
3.
http://spaceplace.nasa.gov...
aguma

Con

is = to be. Not, "was at one point in time". Rather, "exists in this state", i.e. at the current time. But if the motion is defined in this way then this debate is ridiculous. Therefore this debate can only make sense if it is: "The sky is blue most of the time". Therefore this is what I'll be arguing.

1. nights last 12 hours at least, plus fog and sunsets WHICH ARE RED MOST OF THE TIME makes the sky not blue more than 50% of the time
2. SKIES ON OTHER PLANETS - sky and telescope: most common stars are small stars, meaning the matter that went into that solar system's creation was less; therefore the planets are smaller and less likely to hold an atmosphere and the sky is black. This is what occurs on most extrasolar planets. Source: Scientific American.
Debate Round No. 2
Qynze

Pro

Refutation(s):

Con is the one who supplied the motion. If you (the audience) demands, I will supply an unaltered screenshot of aguma's chat in which he wanted to debate the motion "The Sky is Blue" and chose Opposition, or Con. See, audience, Con's rendering this motion "ridiculous" is an object of ridicule itself.

I appreciate the refutations and the way in which my opponent states them. Clearly, he is very accomplished. However, my opponent mentions a source but does not provide it. I must request that he provide a link to the exact source from which he got his information from. I'd also like a source for his first point.

I will accept my opponent's interpretation of this debate as "The sky is blue most of the time".

I would also like to expand on my interpretation of the motion "The Sky is Blue (most of the time).". Earlier in this debate, I stated, "My side defines this topic as how the human mind interprets the colour of the sky." According to dictonary.com, "sky" means "the region of the clouds or the upper air; the upper atmosphere of the earth" [1]. This is the definition I will use, thus rendering my opponent's second point irrelevant. Also, if my opponent is going to talk about the creation of the solar system as such, we might as well take into account all of the planets in existence, which we can't. Therefore any statistics only applying to our solar system are not necessarily accurate and applicable to all of the atmospheres in the universe.

Until my opponent expands his argument I have naught left to refute.

Point(s):

My previous point, which has not yet been properly refuted:

"1) The science of it

The truth is, the sky is all colours of the rainbow [2]. Blue is the colour that is scattered the most, therefore that is what our eyes see [2]. More importantly, that is how our minds interpret it, thus proving my case."



Sources:

1.
http://dictionary.reference.com...
2. http://spaceplace.nasa.gov...

aguma

Con

The truth is, the sky is all colours of the rainbow. Sunsets are red and yellow. Fog is gray. Night is black. More importantly, that is how our minds interpret it, thus proving my case.
Debate Round No. 3
Qynze

Pro

Source?

Without a proper source, your arguments are naught.



Some information to contradict my opponent's currently sourceless points:
  • NASA says the sky is all colours, but mainly blue [1].
  • The Martian sky is BLUE, NASA's pictures are exaggerated: having been colour-corrected they are indeed BLUE [2].

Sources:


1.
http://mynasadata.larc.nasa.gov...
2. http://mars-news.de...


Audience, please vote for the Proposition.

aguma

Con

"the sky is blue" is a generalization just like "george washington was a hero" or "books are made of paper". George Washington wasn't a hero all the time. But he did enough heroic acts to make us remember him as a hero. Books aren't always made out of paper. But they are traditionally. Similarly, when NASA says the sky is mainly blue, they mean that that is what we normally think of when we think of the sky. That does not mean that just because NASA made a generalization, that we should interpret it literally. In fact, it just so happens that google weather says the sun will set at 5:18 PM today (where I live at least), and rise at 7:20 AM. That's around 14 hours of nighttime, i.e. the sky is not blue because the sun is not there to scatter any light, i.e. the sky is black. 14 hours of night, 10 hours of day. In other words, more than half of the day, the sky is not blue.
Debate Round No. 4
Qynze

Pro

I am simply stating NASA as a source for my information, as NASA is a widely - relied on source of scientific observations and information.



Aguma should keep in mind that I agreed to accept "The sky is blue most of the time" as the topic for debate in addition to mine, which was "My side defines this topic as how the human mind interprets the colour of the sky."



Aguma has only mentioned two sources and NO links to them, therefore there is no way for the audience nor myself to validate his evidence. I ask, once more, that he please provide a link to the site(s) he has gotten all of his information from.



Aguma says there are currently 14 hours of nighttime, where he lives, according to Google. Well, adults (keep in mind that children need EVEN MORE) need an average of 8.1 hours of sleep [1]. Let's do some math. 14-8.1=5.9. That means that right now, the average adult LIVING IN HIS AREA sees 5.9 hours of darkness and 10 hours of light, and blue sky - another reason that humans interpret the sky as blue.



Furthermore, the average year round daylight is exactly 12 hours - this is the long night time of the year, where aguma is. So that's 12 hours to see the sky. Well, the math to determine exactly how much daylight we have to see the sky is 24 (total hours)-12 (night hours)=12 (hours to see the sky). 12 (night hours)-8.1 (adult sleep hours, children's hours greater)=3.9 (hours of night). This is the common, subconscious interpretation that humans make – we see more of the blue sky than any other colour. Therefore, currently aguma’s time would be right, but in the face of the rest of the year and how much we humans are actually awake, he is incorrect.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Please allow me to summarize this debate, so far.



From the very beginning, I stated: "My side defines this topic as how the human mind interprets the colour of the sky."



1) In his first contention, my opponent stated: "Sunsets. Night. I rest my case." I replied with: “Well, nights and sunsets can be blue, too [2] [3]!”, plus I provided pictures in which nights and sunsets are blue.



2) I also stated: “The science of it - The truth is, the sky is all colours of the rainbow [4]. Blue is the colour that is scattered the most, therefore that is what our eyes see [4]. More importantly, that is how our minds interpret it, thus proving my case.”



3) Next, aguma said: “is = to be. Not, "was at one point in time". Rather, "exists in this state", i.e. at the current time. But if the motion is defined in this way then this debate is ridiculous. Therefore this debate can only make sense if it is: "The sky is blue most of the time". Therefore this is what I'll be arguing.” I accepted this as the topic, in addition to my earlier “My side defines this topic as how the human mind interprets the colour of the sky.”



4) After that, my opponent claimed: “nights last 12 hours at least, plus fog and sunsets WHICH ARE RED MOST OF THE TIME makes the sky not blue more than 50% of the time”. Once again, no source, and I have refuted this earlier in this post.



5) “SKIES ON OTHER PLANETS - sky and telescope: most common stars are small stars, meaning the matter that went into that solar system's creation was less; therefore the planets are smaller and less likely to hold an atmosphere and the sky is black. This is what occurs on most extrasolar planets. Source: Scientific American.” A source, but no direct link to it – therefore, as stated before, “there is no way for the audience nor myself to validate your evidence.” I refuted this: “Earlier in this debate, I stated, "My side defines this topic as how the human mind interprets the colour of the sky." According to dictonary.com, "sky" means "the region of the clouds or the upper air; the upper atmosphere of the earth" [5]. This is the definition I will use, thus rendering my opponent's second point irrelevant. Also, if my opponent is going to talk about the creation of the solar system as such, we might as well take into account all of the planets in existence, which we can't. Therefore any statistics only applying to our solar system are not necessarily accurate and applicable to all of the atmospheres in the universe.”



6) After this, aguma said: “The truth is, the sky is all colours of the rainbow. Sunsets are red and yellow. Fog is gray. Night is black. More importantly, that is how our minds interpret it, thus proving my case.” And again! How long must we wait, audience, for a proper source from my opponent? I refuted this: “NASA says the sky is all colours, but mainly blue [6]. The Martian sky is BLUE, NASA's pictures are exaggerated: having been colour-corrected they are indeed BLUE [7].



7) And finally, the last point so far: “the sky is blue" is a generalization just like "george washington was a hero" or "books are made of paper". George Washington wasn't a hero all the time. But he did enough heroic acts to make us remember him as a hero. Books aren't always made out of paper. But they are traditionally. Similarly, when NASA says the sky is mainly blue, they mean that that is what we normally think of when we think of the sky. That does not mean that just because NASA made a generalization, that we should interpret it literally. In fact, it just so happens that google weather says the sun will set at 5:18 PM today (where I live at least), and rise at 7:20 AM. That's around 14 hours of nighttime, i.e. the sky is not blue because the sun is not there to scatter any light, i.e. the sky is black. 14 hours of night, 10 hours of day. In other words, more than half of the day, the sky is not blue.” This, too, has been refuted: “Aguma says there are currently 14 hours of nighttime, where he lives, according to Google. Well, adults (keep in mind that children need EVEN MORE) need an average of 8.1 hours of sleep [1]. Let's do some math. 14-8.1=5.9. That means that right now, the average adult LIVING IN HIS AREA sees 5.9 hours of darkness and 10 hours of light, and blue sky - another reason that humans interpret the sky as blue.



“Furthermore, the average year round daylight is exactly 12 hours - this is the long night time of the year, where aguma is. So that's 12 hours to see the sky. Well, the math to determine exactly how much daylight we have to see the sky is 24 (total hours)-12 (night hours)=12 (hours to see the sky). 12 (night hours)-8.1 (adult sleep hours, children's hours greater)=3.9 (hours of night). This is the common, subconscious interpretation that humans make – we see more of the blue sky than any other colour. Therefore, currently aguma’s time would be right, but in the face of the rest of the year and how much we humans are actually awake, he is incorrect.”




Source(s):



1. http://www.netdoctor.co.uk...


2. http://mdb7.ibibo.com...


3. http://fineartamerica.com...


4. http://spaceplace.nasa.gov...


5. http://dictionary.reference.com...


6. http://mynasadata.larc.nasa.gov...


7. http://mars-news.de...



Oh, and thank you, aguma, for suggesting and accepting this debate. Although a bit more intense than intended, I enjoyed it. And thank you, audience, for moderating and making this a complete debate.


Audience, I have refuted, rendered irrelevant, and disproved ALL of my opponent’s point, thus revealing that humans see the sky as blue. For all of these reasons and many more, please vote for the Proposition (Pro).


aguma

Con

...ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense! Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.
Debate Round No. 5
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Qynze 5 years ago
Qynze
0_o nice
Posted by larztheloser 5 years ago
larztheloser
Con made better points but pro provided more analysis - roughly even, so if I would vote, I'd do so according to the time of day.
Posted by Qynze 5 years ago
Qynze
*she

I don't, and I know it, therefore I do keep up the pretense of knowing as to not show my...unease.
Posted by wbid 5 years ago
wbid
Acting like Sheldon
Posted by wbid 5 years ago
wbid
I hate Qynze acting like he knows everything.
Posted by rogue 5 years ago
rogue
This debate was pretty ridiculous. The definitions that were critical were not defined adequately. But, Pro seemed to put more effort into the debate and was more convincing imo.
Posted by Greyparrot 5 years ago
Greyparrot
Yes
Posted by Qynze 5 years ago
Qynze
This is honestly getting very tiring.
Posted by Qynze 5 years ago
Qynze
A 'ridiculous' and 'pointless' debate suggested by yourself, master aguma. -_-
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by danny 5 years ago
danny
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Kraubinator 5 years ago
Kraubinator
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:43 
Vote Placed by SimonN 5 years ago
SimonN
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:70 
Vote Placed by Koopin 5 years ago
Koopin
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:50 
Vote Placed by Grape 5 years ago
Grape
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:60 
Vote Placed by THE_OPINIONATOR 5 years ago
THE_OPINIONATOR
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by CoriEleora 5 years ago
CoriEleora
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:33 
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:52 
Vote Placed by rogue 5 years ago
rogue
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:60 
Vote Placed by KevinW 5 years ago
KevinW
QynzeagumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:70