The Instigator
nonprophet
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Skynet
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The gas powered car was the worst invention ever.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 with Elo Restrictions Point System: Select Winner
Started: 5/20/2014 Category: Cars
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,387 times Debate No: 55122
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

nonprophet

Pro

First round is for acceptance ONLY
Skynet

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
nonprophet

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

The first thing I want to point out is the enormous loss of life gas powered cars cause.
According to the Canada Free Press
"World traffic injuries are taking the lives of 145 people every hour of every day (totaling 3500 per day). This is more than two a minute and adds up to something like 1.3 million people dying on the world’s roads each year and a further 20 to 30 million people suffering injuries, often debilitating ones"
http://www.canadafreepress.com...


If you consider the fact that the gas powered car has been around for over 100 years, the amount of innocent human lives lost is overwhelming.

Lets also look at the cost of these accidents:

According to the association or safe international road travel
  • Road crashes cost USD $518 billion globally, costing individual countries from 1-2% of their annual GDP.
  • Road crashes cost low and middle-income countries USD $65 billion annually, exceeding the total amount received in developmental assistance.

http://www.asirt.org...

Even worse than crashes is the amount of pollution gas powered cars cause.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists:
"Today’s on-road vehicles produce over a third of the carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides in our atmosphere and over twenty percent of the global warming pollution.:
http://www.ucsusa.org...


According to EV Car pollution Facts:
CO2 emissions from U.S. cars & trucks alone is about 1 million TONS per day
Hong Kong residents are heading to the Emergency Room in increasing numbers
and passing away at the rate of 3,200 per year or nearly 10 per day due to bad air.
Some 4,000 London residents per year face early death to car pollution according to
a report by the Kings College in London.


The amount of damage caused by car crashes and pollution combined is mind-blowing.
The ultimate problem from gas powered cars is not crashes or illness from pollution. It is global warming.

I don't want to just cut and paste all the statistics on global warming, but the evidence is overwhelming that man made pollution (mostly from gas powered cars) is causing a greenhouse effect that can eventually make the human race extinct.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com...


http://www.justfacts.com...

http://www.nrdc.org...

In Summary:
The gas powered car has caused millions of deaths due to crashes, caused millions of deaths due to pollution, has added many tons of Co2 to the atmosphere, contributing to global warming and will ultimately destroy life on this planet if it continues. No other invention comes close to that kind of destruction.

Skynet

Con

Interesting debate topic.

My opponent used two reasons to try to prove gas powered cars are THE worst invention ever.

1 Loss of life due to accidents.
2 Destruction by pollution.

First point from the Canada Free Press article my opponent cited: Cars are apparently not the primary villain in automobile deaths. It's the drivers, and conditions."How to fix the problem? New York City in one example. The City has worked very hard to improve road safety by a combination of engineering innovations, stronger enforcement, and public information campaigns. For instance, by engineering traffic signals and expanding medians, they’ve given people more time to cross wide streets safely. They’ve expanded bike lanes and seen a rise in safety for everyone on those roads. Since 2004, there have been fewer traffic fatalities each year on New York streets at any time since the year 1910, which was the first year these kinds of statistics began to be kept. "

So as far as traffic fatalities, there is no direct link between the actual invention of gasoline powered automobiles and death. Millions of people travel safely by car every day. And the gasoline powerplant certainly has even less to do with why people die in car crashes. Unless my opponent can show that they are less safe than any other type of powered car.

Second point: Gas powered automobiles do cause a great deal of air pollution. However, this does not make them the worst invention ever. They serve useful purposes that have nothing to do with pollution that outweigh the drawbacks. Gas powered cars allow many millions of people to go to and from work, school, stores, recreation, and hospitals. The availability of an inexpensive mass produced Ford Model T shrank the world for Americans, and much of the rest of the world. Gas powered cars are a vital key in evacuating people before natural disasters.

Now, really, all I need to do is show that there is an invention that kills more people than gas powered cars, and serves less useful purpose.

Recreational Tobacco is less useful than a gas powered car. You can't use it to get to work, escape a flood, or go to the hospital. At least as a mode of transportation, more like a reason. I guess you could use it as a fuse for a McGuiver style bomb. But it's only real purpose IS to create pollution. Pollution that isn't filtered through catalytic converters or monitored by O2 sensors for cleaning before it's dumped out of the way. This pollution is meant to be inhaled directly by humans, and occasionally monkeys.

1.3 million people die a year from car accidents, but according the World Health Organization, more than 5 million people die from recreational tobacco use.
http://www.who.int...

As far as carbon emmissions contributing to global warming: First off, even though I don't buy into man-made global warming, I will not be totally dismissive of my opponent's fears of it. Consider this: The gas powered automobile has only been around about 120 years or so. Widespread tobacco use has been around since the discovery of the Americas by Columbus. 500 years. It's been putting out carbon dioxide way longer. It's addictive. Cars, not so much. If an alternative to gasoline powered cars catches on and there aren't hardly any left in the future, chances are high that tobacco will still be around, and popular. Considering the amount of carbon released by burning most of the 7 million tons (+/-) of tobacco produced every year, the heavy deforestation in underdeveloped countries that grow it, tobacco may well be a lingering and addictive contributor to green house gasses far more difficult to eliminate than gas cars. Lots of people can't afford cars in this world, but they can scrape together a few bucks for a bag of tobacco and roll up strips of old newspaper.

http://www.tobaccoatlas.org...

Tobacco is used almost exclusively for recreation, through pollution directly into the human body, and is highly addictive.

Gas powered cars are useful for transportation, which is vital for human life.

Gas powered cars are not the worst invention ever.

Even if there is something worse than tobacco, I have demonstrated it isn't gas powered cars.
Debate Round No. 2
nonprophet

Pro

My opponents arguments are almost laughable.

It doesn't matter if the accident problem can be fixed in the future. The damage has already been done.
The debate is "The gas powered car was the worst invention ever."
Not "The gas powered car will turn out to be the worst invention ever."

My opponent claims "there is no direct link between the actual invention of gasoline powered automobiles and death"
Where is the evidence for that? What backs that up?

My opponent makes the claim "Millions of people travel safely by car every day"
That is the "ad populem" fallacy. That doesn't change the fact that millions die from accidents every year from gas powered cars.

My opponent says " Unless my opponent can show that they (gas powered cars) are less safe than any other type of powered car.
As a matter of fact, I can
http://www.teslamotors.com...

My opponent wants to say that gas powered cars provide more good then harm. A planet destroyed by global warming is far worse than anything good a gas powered car can do.

My opponent claims that "Gas powered cars are a vital key in evacuating people before natural disasters."
He fails to mention that electric cars can do the same thing.

Then my opponent wants to compare Recreational Tobacco to gas powered cars.
The thing is, tobacco is not an invention. It is a discovery.
Things that grow naturally are not invented. They happen by nature.
We are talking about inventions here, not discoveries.

I'm sorry, but my opponent failed to make any valid points.
The gas powered car is, in fact, the worst invention ever.
Skynet

Con

I'm going to go through my opponent's final argument line by line. I don't know why I'm keeping up this charade of addressing the audience. You're only here for the "exchange of ideas," hence no voting.

My opponents arguments are almost laughable.

Starting off by berating your opponent. Perfect way to start off a civil exchange of ideas.

It doesn't matter if the accident problem can be fixed in the future. The damage has already been done.
The debate is "The gas powered car was the worst invention ever."
Not "The gas powered car will turn out to be the worst invention ever."

I've already shown evidence the accidents are mostly the fault of operators and less-than-ideal civil engineering.

My opponent claims "there is no direct link between the actual invention of gasoline powered automobiles and death"
Where is the evidence for that? What backs that up?

The first article you cited in R2 where most of the problem in NYC was solved through means OTHER than taking people out of gas powered cars.

My opponent makes the claim "Millions of people travel safely by car every day"
That is the "ad populem" fallacy. That doesn't change the fact that millions die from accidents every year from gas powered cars.

The debate is not whether people die in cars. It's about what the worst invention is. I've shown an invention that kills more people.

My opponent says " Unless my opponent can show that they (gas powered cars) are less safe than any other type of powered car.
As a matter of fact, I can
http://www.teslamotors.com......

One electric car. Not the only one ever made, by any means. You still didn't make it clear how a gas powered engine makes the car less safe, accident wise. When the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash tests cars, they drain all fluids except a dye in place the gasoline. They are inoperable, and therefore a nearly irrelevant variable.

(1 minute in)
(I could not find info on prep for NHTSA tests, but I see no fluid spills in any of thier videos, either.)
Would the Tesla be less safe with an appropriately sized gas engine? The type of power plant doesn't really matter in a crash test.

My opponent wants to say that gas powered cars provide more good then harm. A planet destroyed by global warming is far worse than anything good a gas powered car can do.

Irrelevant. Tobacco's ONLY purpose is to produce pollution. It too emmits carbon and what's more are addictive. They are more commonly used among the global population, and more easily aquired. They are the worse invention.

My opponent claims that "Gas powered cars are a vital key in evacuating people before natural disasters."
He fails to mention that electric cars can do the same thing.

So they're both equally good for that. No points made.

Then my opponent wants to compare Recreational Tobacco to gas powered cars.
The thing is, tobacco is not an invention. It is a discovery.
Things that grow naturally are not invented. They happen by nature.
We are talking about inventions here, not discoveries.

Tobacco requires processing before being used recreationally.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
But if it's just a discovery, then cars are nothing more than processed raw materials discovered in nature, so they are discoveries too, and not an invention. Your argument is invalid.

I'm sorry, but my opponent failed to make any valid points.
The gas powered car is, in fact, the worst invention ever.

Since there aren't any voters, and this is "supposed" to be an exchange of ideas, as you say it is, you lose:
You did not convince me.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by nonprophet 3 years ago
nonprophet
I didn't convince you and you didn't convince me...so it's a tie. It was an exchange of ideas, not an attempt to convince anybody of anything.
Posted by nonprophet 3 years ago
nonprophet
Just because there is no voting, doesn't mean there's no audience. So far this debate has been viewed 113 times.
No votes have been placed for this debate.