The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Tornadoes are God's farts.

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/28/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,304 times Debate No: 34259
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)




Tornadoes are a weather condition that nobody can explain. This is because Tornadoes are God's farts, and God "Hasn’t been scientifically explained yet!". It all makes perfect sense when you think about it. Tornadoes come from the sky, and that's where God lives.

"Experience the divine trumps of the lord!" I hear the preaches cry "Allow the blessed farts of God almighty to carry your special soul into hoppin' heaven!"

You see, even God needs somebody to pull his finger at one point or another, so we should not laugh like hyenas at the concept of God blowing one out once in a while.

So that's what I want to debate today, whether Tornadoes are God's farts. I hope for a good debate.

I thank you.



Thank you for coming to tonight's debate. I hope you will find this debate to be both short and enlightening.

KingDebater has invoked the universally recognized premise that if X can't be explained, then God did it. Since he and I agree on this premise, it should not be an area of contention between us.

The only question for the purposes of this debate is exactly what God does when a tornado happens. Are they really pharts, as Pro thinks, or are they merely the swirlies in God's beverage, as I think?

I submit that they are the swirlies in God's beverage, and not pharts, for the following reasons:

1. Because if you stick a spoon in a cup of hot chocolate, it will make a swirly. Sometimes, it'll make two swirlies, which is consistent with the fact that in most storm systems that contain tornadoes, there are usually more than one.

2. Because tornadoes are made of liquid. A cloud forms when vapor in the sky condenses into water droplets, and tornadoes come from clouds.

3. Because tornadoes are associated with solid objects being thoroughly mixed and blended, the same way the powder in Carnation instant hot chocolate gets mixed up when you use a spoon to stir it into hot water.

4. It has not been established that pharts actually cause swirlies, whereas stirring beverages does.

5. Pharts are gaseous compounds, whereas tornadoes are liquid mixtures.

6. Pharts stink, but tornadoes don't.

7. Pharts are not used to stir up debris the way particles are mixed into beverages.

8. When people phart, they say, "Excuse me," but they don't say "excuse me" when they mix their drinks. When tornadoes happen, God never says, "excuse me."

9. You can light a phart on fire, but you cannot light a tornado on fire.

10. Tornadoes have been known to rip through neighborhoods where people live, and it is much more polite to stir your beverage among people than to phart among people.

There you have it. Ten good reasons to prefer my explanation over Pro's.
Debate Round No. 1


I thank Philochristos for accepting this debate.

I've explained that I feel that Tornadoes are the product of God taking a trip to tootington. I may be an atheist, but even I have to admit that God exists.

Con seems to think that Tornadoes are swirlies in God's drink, and he made up a bunch of reasons why. I'll counter them here:

1. And people usually have trumping streaks too. Just be in a room with my mum for a minute and you'll know what I mean.
2. Hang on, no they're not.
3. This supports my theory too because solid objects fall out of bums too.
4. God is majestic: he can do that sort of thing.
5. God's farts are liquid, I think. It is philosophical fact.
6. God is majestic: his farts smell lovely. You'll have to get sucked up by a tornado one day.
7. As I've said, solid objects fall out of bums.
8. God does say 'excuse me' but it's just that God's voice is so high-pitched that only dogs can hear it, that explains why they're always flipping mental beasts. Either that, or God is one rude dude.
9. How do you know? Have you ever tried?
10. I get blown away to all sorts of places when a family member does one. This means Con l-l-l-l-l-l-loses.

Here are my ten:

1. Tornadoes are windy, which is like a fart.
2. Tornadoes are all swirly and make things fly up into the air, and I fly up into the air whenever some gas bag breaks wind.
3. You can drink a drink, but you can't drink a tornado (trust me, I've tried).
4. If Tornadoes were swirlies in God's drink, then you'd get Tornadoes in all sorts of flavours. But you only get plain.
5. The phrase 'break wind' means to fart, and tornadoes are wind.
6. It's a known fact that God trumps, and if tornadoes aren't God's farts, then what are?
7. People hate farts and people hate tornadoes. People like good ol' swirlies.
8. Swirlies don't have much space to move, but farts do.
9. Swirlies don't last long, farts linger for absolutely ages.
10. Swirlies don't do damage: farts do.

I thank you.

God's farts.



Response to Pro's 10 reasons:

1. Tornadoes happen BECAUSE of wind, like swirlies. Their are not wind itself, like pharts.

2. People fly up in the air for all sorts of reasons, but only tornadoes have this affect on everything, like swirls in a beverage.

3. The reason we can't drink tornadoes is because we're not God, but obviously GOD can drink a tornado!

4. Torandoes DO come in different flavors: Trailer park, city, field, forest, farm, ranch, etc.

5. Again, tornadoes are not wind, and they don't break the way pharts do.

6. Asked and answered.

7. Some people don't like mixed drinks, so this is irrelevant.

8. Tornadoes are limited to storm systems the way swirls are limited to the glass.

9. Swirlies behave the same way tornadoes to. They start off weak, get strong, then get weak again. Pharts aren't like that.

10. Swirlies DO do damage. Have you ever seen a tornado???

Defense of my 10 reasons

My ten reasons are obviously superior to Pro's ten reasons, and he negates them with mere assertions. For example, his answer to number 2 is "No, they're not," and that's it. Some of his answers make no sense at all. For example, he says God's pharts are liquids. But that's like saying God's circles are square. A phart is, by definition, not a liquid. Pro is confusing a phart with a shart. While related, they are not the same thing. One can be entertaining; the other is never entertaining. Pro claims that God says, "Excuse me," but we can't hear it because his voice is too high pitched. But as everybody knows, God's voice is very low pitched and audible. It has been compared to the sound of thunder, which rumbles as we all know. Pro's response to number nine is not even a response; it's a question.


Pro is trying to be silly, but this is a serious issue. I proved beyond all reason that tornadoes are the swirlies in God's beverages; they are not God's pharts. Pro's position is theologically incorrect, and even dangerous. As a theistic atheist, he should consider changing his mind.

Debate Round No. 2
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by philochristos 3 years ago
I think we can all agree it's a joke debate. But the best joke debates, in my opinion, try to give the illusion of making sound arguments. For example, Nur-Ab-Sal proved that the earth is hollow:
Posted by philochristos 3 years ago
Maybe. It's up to the voters now.

I should've pointed out that your response to my number 2 contradicts your response to my number 5.
Posted by KingDebater 3 years ago
But then again, I suppose it depends on whether the voters judge it as a normal debate or a joke debate.
Posted by KingDebater 3 years ago
I think you've won this one.
Posted by leojm 3 years ago
Interesting..... :/
Posted by KingDebater 3 years ago
This is a joke debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Nur-Ab-Sal 3 years ago
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con advanced ten very good reasons to believe that tornadoes are whirlpools in God's drinks rather than some sort of flatulence. I was immediately convinced of Con's side, and seeing as Pro neither adequately responded to these contentions nor successfully defended his case against objections, I must award Con the arguments points.