The Instigator
Koopin
Pro (for)
Winning
58 Points
The Contender
InsertNameHere
Con (against)
Losing
15 Points

There is not enough evidence to prove that I am not the easter Bunny.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/28/2010 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,051 times Debate No: 11001
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (42)
Votes (14)

 

Koopin

Pro

There is not enough evidence to prove that I am not the Easter Bunny.
I am talking about the Easter bunny that goes around and delivers eggs, no word tricks.
InsertNameHere

Con

Thank you.

My opponent states that there's not enough evidence to prove that he's not the easter bunny. However, I can try to prove otherwise.

Technically speaking, Koopin couldn't be the easter bunny. He/she is defined as being a large rabbit that goes around to children's houses on easter to deliver eggs and other treats to children. This is done in a fashion similar to that of santa claus; the children are sleeping while he comes and must be well-behaved beforehand.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

It is a common fact that it is in fact the children's parents acting as the easter bunny as the easter bunny as described in the myth doesn't actually exist. By this logic, any parent is technically the "easter bunny" for their children. I doubt my opponent has children(at least I hope he doesn't at his age...) or that he breaks into other people's houses in order to give stranger's children gifts. Doing so would have him convicted as a crook.

Also, my opponent also has his religious views listed as "Christian". Easter is traditionally a celebration of Jesus's resurrection after being crucified on good friday. This alone has no relations to a bunny or eggs and this is the holiday my opponent likely believes in as a Christian.

I look forward to my opponent's rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 1
Koopin

Pro

INTRO
==========================
I would like to take this opportunity to show gratitude to my opponent for accepting this debate.
I would also like to thank the audience for reading.
I would like to say that even though this debate seems foolish or troll like, I am attempting to actually have a logical discussion.
Even though this idea seems absurd, when I thought about it, I could not find a way to refute it.
I also thank my opponent for taking this debate seriously.

DEFINITIONS:
=========================

Easter Bunny:
Wikipedia: "The Easter Bunny (or Easter Hare) is a character depicted as an anthropomorphic rabbit.
In legend, the creature brings baskets filled with colored eggs, candy and toys to the homes of children on the night before Easter"

Dictionary: A rabbit of folklore depicted as delivering baskets of colored eggs to children at Easter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Folklore:

Wikipedia: Folklore culture, including stories, music, dance, legends, oral history, proverbs, jokes, popular beliefs, customs, and so forth within a particular population comprising the traditions (including oral traditions) of that culture, subculture, or group.
It is also the set of practices through which those expressive genres are shared.
The academic and usually ethnographic study of folklore is sometimes called folkloristics.
The word 'folklore' was first used by the English antiquarian William Thoms in a letter published by the London Journal Athenaeum in 1846.
In usage, there is a continuum between folklore and mythology.
Stith Thompson made a major attempt to index the motifs of both folklore and mythology, providing an outline into which new motifs can be placed, and scholars can keep track of all older motifs.

Dictionary: The traditional beliefs, legends, customs, etc., of a people; lore of a people.

I accept your definition of Easter Bunny, but let us try to use as little from Wikipedia as we can, seeing that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, therefore can be unreliable.
I am not saying that you can not use it, I am simple asking to keep it to a minimum.

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

Possibilities:

The condition or fact of being possible

ARGUMENT:
============================

There is no sure to show exactly how long humans have been roaming the earth.
Some say billions, some millions, and some thousands.
Whatever one is true, there is no doubt humans have been here awhile.
But yet, there is still so much that has not been proven.
Yes we can hypothesize, Water on Pluto, Aliens, the hidden treasures of the Aztecs…
But we still can not prove that it/they exist or do not exist.
Have you ever seen a purple diamonds that is 5 feet long?
Of course not, but just because you have never seen one does not mean that one does not exist.
It could be underground, maybe a secret tribe in Africa has it.
In most likelihood, the diamond does not exist.
But that does not prove that it doesn't.
We could say the same thing about the Easter Bunny.
There are so many possibilities that I am the Easter Bunny.
I shall list just a few below.

1. I could be a Bunny that knows how to think like a human and type on the computer.

2. I could deliver eggs to children the night before Easter.

3. I could be in hiding so the government won't capture me and take me to the zoo.

4. I could be invisible.

5. I could alter people's thoughts so they don't remember me.

6. I could be an alien from another planet where the laws of physics, order and age do not apply.

7. I could have a special metal suit that keeps me from aging.

8. I could eat a certain plant that makes me able to think like a human and type.

9. I could have a pouch that could fit many eggs in it, yet does not feel heavy.

10. I could take the shape of a dog, cat, or even a human so people would not suspect the Easter
Bunny existing.

In order to prove that I am not the Easter Bunny you would have to prove the things I listed above and more not to be true.
While you may be able to show that the things I have listed are nearly impossible, you can not prove 100% that they are not possible.

In this world there is always a variable, an unknown factor.
Even gravity could be defined as a theory. Read this short paragraph describing gravity.

Modern physics describes gravitation using the general THEORY of relativity, in which gravitation is a consequence of the curvature of space-time which governs the motion of inertial objects. The simpler Newton's law of universal gravitation provides an accurate approximation for most calculations.

Also, read this article.
The existence of tides is often taken as a proof of gravity, but this is logically flawed.
Because if the moon's "gravity" were responsible for a bulge underneath it, then how can anyone explain a high tide on the opposite side of the earth at the same time?
Anyone can observe that there are 2 -- not 1 -- high tides every day.
In any case, two high tides falsifies gravity.

In all likelihood gravity exists, but it could be that every planet has a suction monster that simply pulls things down.
Gravity i more of a religious belief.
People teach these things as fact, even though they are not 100% sure that it is true.
That is why creativity is so limited these days.
Teachers, Political leaders, scientists, parents, they all try to get rid of possibilities.
But just because you say something long and hard enough does not make it true or not true.
Today I saw a boy playing with a spinning top at my church.
He said to his mother, ‘It is a parachute!' The mother looked at him and said, ‘No, it is just a spinning top.'
This simply crushed the boy's imagination.
Although the spinning top was not a parachute, it is still a good example of how people like to end possibilities.
I could sit here and explain how the spinning top could be a parachute, but I am running out of Characters.
Ask yourself this, why did you accept this debate in the first place?
It was probably because you thought without doubt that there is no Easter Bunny.
Is that what you originally believed? Or is that what your parents and school teachers told you when you grew up?

You say that If were the Easter Bunny it would convict me of being a crook. A crook is someone who breaks into peoples houses and takes things. A Easter Bunny leaves eggs in people's yards. How is that being a crook? Even if I were a crook, that does not prove my nonexistence.

Concerning my beliefs,
There still could be an Easter Bunny, why not?

In conclusion, we can not prove that I am not the Easter Bunny.
Remember, the resolution is "there is not enough evidence to prove that I am not the Easter Bunny."
It is not, "I am the Easter Bunny."
Therefore I do not have to prove that I am.
I am not saying that the things above are true, I am simply saying that they could be.
Even if there is a 0.0000001% chance that I am the Easter Bunny I would win this debate and there is.
I await my opponent's response.

Sources:
(1). http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu......
(2). http://www.merriam-webster.com......
(3). http://en.wikipedia.org......
(4). http://en.wikipedia.org......
(5). http://www.bringyou.to......
(6). http://en.wikipedia.org......
(7). http://dictionary.reference.com......
InsertNameHere

Con

My opponent states that the easter bunny myth is a part of folklore. Folklore is generally accepted by most people as fictional stories which means that the easter bunny story is not believed by most people. As a result, it would be impossible for my opponent to be the easter bunny unless it was accepted and believed by everybody. My opponent could be the easter bunny in people's imaginations only.

Imagination:

1. the faculty of imagining, or of forming mental images or concepts of what is not actually present to the senses.
2. the action or process of forming such images or concepts.
3. the faculty of producing ideal creations consistent with reality, as in literature, as distinct from the power of creating illustrative or decorative imagery. Compare fancy (def. 2).
4. the product of imagining; a conception or mental creation, often a baseless or fanciful one.
5. ability to face and resolve difficulties; resourcefulness: a job that requires imagination.
6. Psychology. the power of reproducing images stored in the memory under the suggestion of associated images (reproductive imagination) or of recombining former experiences in the creation of new images directed at a specific goal or aiding in the solution of problems (creative imagination).
7. (in Kantian epistemology) synthesis of data from the sensory manifold into objects by means of the categories.
8. Archaic. a plan, scheme, or plot.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

The act of imagining things is a mental process which involves images of things that aren't actually present. As my opponent is physically present and the easter bunny is not, it is a fragment of his imagination that he's the easter bunny. He just imagine that he is.

As for the various possibilities my opponent provided as to how he could be the easter bunny, they are yet unable to be proved correct or incorrect by science. My opponent imagines them to be true so he can be the easter bunny which then again is the work of his mind.

My opponent also claims not to be a crook. Even if this is true he would still be convicted for trespassing onto other people's property. This doesn't happen to the easter bunny because he's imaginary, inside people's minds.
Debate Round No. 2
Koopin

Pro

Thank you for posting your next argument.

So you claim that something is only real if everyone thinks it is?

This is a logical fallacy.

I noticed that you are Muslim, most people do not believe that your religion is true.

So does that mean your religion is only Imagination?

Same could go for Atheism, Christianity, Mormons, ect…

As I said in my previous argument, just because we say and think something is false does not make it false.

If everyone but one person said that there is no sky, would that make the sky disappear?

No, the sky would still be here.

Thought can not change anything.

So you admit that I could be the Easter Bunny in my imagination, yes that is true.

But I also could be the Easter Bunny in real life.

You also can not prove that I am just imagining.

Where is your solid proof that the Easter Bunny does not exist?

You have failed to provide it.

There is not much more I can say this round.

You have made it clear that I am most likely not the Easter Bunny, but you still have not 100% confirmed it.

I look forward to your next argument.
InsertNameHere

Con

I state that my opponent is not the easter bunny in real life. It is impossible as it is a myth created by children's imaginations. Many parents often confess to their children that there's not really an easter bunny, but that it's them taking on the role of hiding the eggs on easter. The easter bunny only becomes a part of a child's imagination if their parents allow it. This proves that there's no definite proof that the easter bunny exists. Even if he did my opponent isn't the easter bunny. There are pictures of a human Koopin on his profile thus eliminating the fact that he could be a bunny. One cannot be human and bunny at the same time unless it's in their imagination(just like people could imagine the sky disappearing, but it wouldn't actually disappear). My opponent imagines he's the easter bunny rather than actually being the easter bunny. Plain and simple.

I thank my opponent for a fun and clever debate. Cheers!
Debate Round No. 3
Koopin

Pro

Thank you for posting your next argument.

There are many things wrong with it though.

You claim that it is a myth created by children's imagination, this is wrong.

Your very own source says that the Easter Bunny seems to have its origins in Alsace and southwestern Germany.

No where does it say that it was created by a child's imagination.

It also does not say that the Easter bunny is a myth.

The fact is that no one knows exactly where it came from, but it was first mentioned in German writings.

You say that Parents confess to their Children that the bunny is not real.

Let me ask you something, do parents know everything?

If one of your parents told you that you are a Atheist does that make you an Atheist?

If your Parents tell you that your hair is green, does that make your hair green?

If your parents tell me that your whole religion is wrong, dumb, and foolish, does that make your religion wrong, dumb, and foolish?

Humans are not perfect; therefore they can not know everything.

The reason parents tell their kids that there is no Easter Bunny is because it is most likely that the bunny does not exist.

In reality, parents can not prove to their children that the Bunny is real or not real.

You say that there is no definite proof that the Easter Bunny exists.

If you re-read my round 2 argument you will realize that I am not trying to prove that I am the Bunny.

Rather, you must prove that I am not, which is impossible.

Take my religion; I can not logically prove to everyone that my God exists.

Does that make him nonexistent? Same thing with your religion, and Atheism.

You say that because there are pictures on my profile of me, makes it impossible for me to be a bunny.

Well first of all, pictures never tell the truth.

That could be some random person I found on the internet.

I will prove that by uploading a random person to my pictures here: http://www.debate.org...

Secondly, read my argument in round 2.

I state that I could possibly turn into a human, dog, or cat.

I do not have to prove any of this, you must prove that I am not the Easter Bunny which you have failed to do.

It would seem that you have given up; there is still one more round. you still have not refuted all the possibilities. Even if you refuted my possibilities I listed, you would still have to disprove every single possibilty. I look forward to your response.

Audience, I urge a Pro vote.

Sources:
(1). http://www.debate.org...
InsertNameHere

Con

I apologize for not realizing there was a fourth round. Now to continue...

Sources may say that the easter bunny has its origins in Southwestern Germany, however these origins lie in the imaginations of German children rather than an easter bunny actually existing in Southwestern Germany. I highly doubt my opponent is German(according to his profile he is American) or hundreds of years old.

Also, I highly doubt bunnies can type or use a computer so if my opponent was the easter bunny I doubt he would be using a computer. If the easter bunny really was a super intelligent rabbit he would have no reason to use a computer even if he could. :) He would know everything that's going on anyway just like how he would know if children were bahaving or misbehaving.

Parents are able to confess the non-existance of the easter bunny as in reality they're actually the easter bunny. The children just believe the easter bunny exists because of their parent's actions in secrecy. However, the same cannot be said about religious beliefs. A child's parents isn't God as that goes against the complete Abrahamic view of God.

I aslo would like to bring up my opponent's point that humans cannot know everything. This is a true statement thus making it impossible for any one human to be the easter bunny as he supposibly knows stuff that any human does not. So once again, I say that it's impossible for my opponent to be the easter bunny.

I'll like to thank my opponent for a fun debate and please vote con!
Debate Round No. 4
42 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
ahhh... old debates. I remember when INH was Muslim, like here. And when Koopin still did these awesome debates. *happy*
Posted by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Ore_Ele
you're not debating me now, go ahead and tell.
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
I would have refuted DNA easily. I will not tell how yet, I am still debating Ore...
Posted by Ryft 6 years ago
Ryft
A fun and interesting debate, given its philosophical consequences. Too bad that InsertNameHere simply begged the question (logical fallacy) throughout the entire debate. That was disappointing.
Posted by InsertNameHere 6 years ago
InsertNameHere
Curious18, you're a genius! I could have argued about DNA and how Koopin's DNA could be tested for rabbit DNA! Why didn't I think of that? :'(
Posted by lziggyrun12 6 years ago
lziggyrun12
I cannot believe I just read a debate on the easter bunny..
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
The justice system can only get 99.9% proof.
Posted by curious18 6 years ago
curious18
DNA

but if it wasn't possible to someone actually being a human, then wouldn't the justice system have a hard time convicting anyone of murder?
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
How?
Posted by curious18 6 years ago
curious18
not over the internet, but in person I could ;)
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by ethopia619 6 years ago
ethopia619
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
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:61 
Vote Placed by I-am-a-panda 6 years ago
I-am-a-panda
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Vote Placed by twsurber 6 years ago
twsurber
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
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:23 
Vote Placed by Kahvan 6 years ago
Kahvan
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
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:34 
Vote Placed by Ryft 6 years ago
Ryft
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:51 
Vote Placed by ilovedebate 6 years ago
ilovedebate
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
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 TheSeeker 6 years ago
TheSeeker
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
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 Nails 6 years ago
Nails
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 wonderwoman 6 years ago
wonderwoman
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Vote Placed by philosphical 6 years ago
philosphical
KoopinInsertNameHereTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:51