The Instigator
Benshapiro
Pro (for)
Losing
8 Points
The Contender
dragon_slayer489
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Trees should be planted under 5 feet beneath the earth

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 5 votes the winner is...
dragon_slayer489
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/17/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 575 times Debate No: 35677
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

Benshapiro

Pro

I say they should not because that would harm the earths atmosphere
dragon_slayer489

Con

as in fact the trees if they where under the earth no o2 or cor would be around its not trees that hurt the worlds atmosphere its people and there cars.As a fact they can cause over next 10years there will be a little chance of a ozone layer even being there.
And i end my case
Debate Round No. 1
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Jegory 4 years ago
Jegory
You are Pro the statement, yet you are arguing against it :S.

In future, if you want a decent debate, make it more than one round long.
Posted by JustinAMoffatt 4 years ago
JustinAMoffatt
Everyone, I'd advise against accepting this.

I believe this account is set up as a "votebomb", or merely false voting, account.

This guy has made 3 debates since joining, and all have been 1 round (and quite easily torn to shreds).

Please don't allow him to get 3 completed debates (until we know more), because then he will be able to vote.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
Benshapirodragon_slayer489Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: the resolution was that trees should be planted under 5 feet beneath the Earth, and then pro disagreed with his own resolution when he was supposed to try to defend it. Pro basically conceded the argument in round 1, so arguments go to the con. Spelling was an issue though
Vote Placed by lannan13 4 years ago
lannan13
Benshapirodragon_slayer489Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Con continues to give bad spelling and grammer so the point goes to Pro. Conduct to Pro because Con's arguement didn't make much sense.
Vote Placed by Jegory 4 years ago
Jegory
Benshapirodragon_slayer489Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: S&G: CON made some awful spelling mistakes. Arguments: PRO lacked any real depth in his points.
Vote Placed by Inductivelogic 4 years ago
Inductivelogic
Benshapirodragon_slayer489Tied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: this is illogical but i think by default con had 1 more point than pro
Vote Placed by MisterDeku 4 years ago
MisterDeku
Benshapirodragon_slayer489Tied
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:41 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither warrants their arguments, but at least I can understand what Pro's argument is. I give conduct to con for posting more elaboration, grammar to Pro as I can't understand what con is arguing and arguments to Pro for the same reason.