The Instigator
jingzhezhang
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
Korashk
Con (against)
Winning
34 Points

Using a time machine to go back to the past and kill halter is a bad idea

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  
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: 6/22/2010 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,543 times Debate No: 12393
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (16)
Votes (6)

 

jingzhezhang

Pro

I thank my opponent for the chance to debate. My opponent may not argue from semantics, as it is clear what the resolution states, although an exception may be made if he/she comes up with a particularly interesting objection to the resolution.

Firstly, an argument against the viability of time travel itself;

-- The Classic Paradox --

First, imagine time travel were made possible, and somebody travels back in time in order to meet their grandfather, whom they never knew. Now, say that due to an unfortunate series of circumstances, he ended up killing his grandfather before he got the chance to meet his grandmother. In this case, the time traveller would never come to exist in the first place. But this is logically contradictory, because if he didn't exist, he could not have killed his own grandfather and thus prevent his own existence. It seems that the only way to solve this contradiction is to conclude that the traveller could never have travelled in the first place.

-- It could have been a lot worse --

It is true that many, many lives could potentially be saved if Hitler were killed before he embarked on his mad, genocide conquest. However, it is also true that the war could have turned out much, much worse. For instance, Hitler made many errors in his strategies, and also made prideful decisions at the cost of the war effort. He was, by many measures, an incompetent leader. [1], [2] If he were killed, a more intelligent, war seasoned and equally evil person could rise to power instead, and either drag the war on longer, or win it, which would suck.

-- Hitler with a time machine --

Okay, so our time machine appears in a flash of light (or using an unconvincing fade in effect), and our assassin steps out...to be shot/captured by a passing German patrol. Hitler seizes control of powerful time control technology, and, well...it doesn't take much imagination to see that horrible consequences would ensue. This is, of course, only a possibility, and perhaps our traveller has safeguards against it-but there is no guarantee this is the case, and given the disastrous consequences should it happen, the safe bet is to just leave history well enough alone.

[1] http://worldwar2history.info......
[2] http://www.2worldwar2.com......
Korashk

Con

.
.
.

I thank my opponent for creating this debate.

~~~~~~~
Rebuttals
~~~~~~~

///-- The Classic Paradox --: It seems that the only way to solve this contradiction is to conclude that the traveller could never have travelled in the first place.///

This point is moot. The resolution of the debate is set up as a hypothetical that assumes that time-travel is already possible. Forcing us to decide whether or not to use it.
~

///-- It could have been a lot worse --///

I'll take a page out of Hollywood's book for this one. In the movie Terminator the Terminator is sent back in time to a point BEFORE John Connors is born in order to prevent him from existing. If I, or someone else, were to go back in time to kill Hitler we wouldn't try and kill leader of the Third Reich Hitler. We would try and kill a version of Hitler that existed before anyone knew who he was.

This contention also mentions that events could have been worse without Hitler. I contend that they could have been better. That's the beauty of speculation. It is my opponent's responsibility in this debate to provide evidence that shows that events would have been worse had Hitler never came to power. His evidence for things being worse only applies to a situation where Hitler is killed while actually in power.
~

///-- Hitler with a time machine --///

This contention also relies on the assumption that we're attempting to kill Hitler at a time when he's in power. It neglects that there is no reason for us to land in Germany with our time machine. I will now propose a set of safeguards that more than compensate for our time machine existing in the past.

1.) We land in a remote area, say near the top of a mountain or in a jungle/forest/desert. These places are typically avoided by humans and it is unlikely that our time machine will be found.
2.) The place we land does not need to be in Germany, we could land almost anywhere in the world and travel to Germany, ensuring that Germans never get their hands on the machine.
3.) After we've effectively hidden our time machine we will remove a small but important part of the time machine and hide it in a different place, therefore ensuring that even if the machine is found it will not be functional.
~

I await my opponent's response.
Debate Round No. 1
jingzhezhang

Pro

Thank you CON for accepting my debate.....

I sorry to say that I'm going to forfeit this debate....

Thank you all who will vote on this debate.....

I thank CON again and apologize for his time.....

vote CON...
Korashk

Con

Alright, I guess the debate's over. Vote for me.
Debate Round No. 2
Debate Round No. 3
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
Hmmm...strange forfeit, but OK. Do this one again. It seems fun.
Posted by debaterbayne1 7 years ago
debaterbayne1
ya
Posted by Kinesis 7 years ago
Kinesis
How do you miss-type 'Hitler' 'Halter' anyway?
Posted by jingzhezhang 7 years ago
jingzhezhang
I forfeit.... sorry.....
Posted by debaterbayne1 7 years ago
debaterbayne1
who is halter?
Posted by Strikeeagle84015 7 years ago
Strikeeagle84015
I figure the solution to the Classical Time Travel paradox is the theory of the multiverse as outlined in Micheal Chriton's book Timeline
Posted by jingzhezhang 7 years ago
jingzhezhang
sorry.....
Posted by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
I'm insulted that they copied your arguments and not mine! lol
Posted by Kinesis 7 years ago
Kinesis
Indeed.
Posted by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
What in the...
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by zGodMode 7 years ago
zGodMode
jingzhezhangKorashkTied
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 wmpeebles 7 years ago
wmpeebles
jingzhezhangKorashkTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
jingzhezhangKorashkTied
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:06 
Vote Placed by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
jingzhezhangKorashkTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Strikeeagle84015 7 years ago
Strikeeagle84015
jingzhezhangKorashkTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
jingzhezhangKorashkTied
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:07