The Instigator
RhettBaron
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Zarroette
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points

Vaccines cause autism

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 4 votes the winner is...
Zarroette
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/31/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,134 times Debate No: 72641
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (4)

 

RhettBaron

Pro

there is proof that vaccines cause autism. if you do not agree post the history of how vaccine related autism appeared and why it is wrong.
Zarroette

Con

I accept. My opponent has the burden of proof to show that vaccines cause autism. This burden of proof must be met with studies, evidence and sustained logical argumentation, or else arguments will be rendered bare assertions, thus not affirming the resolution due to their logically fallacious nature.
Debate Round No. 1
RhettBaron

Pro

but jenney mccarthy said so
Zarroette

Con

Thank you, Pro.


My opponent's sole argument is a text-book appeal to authority. In form, he/she has argued [1]:

1) An authority ("jenny maccarthy") said something
C) Therefore, what was said is true

Due to my opponent's sole argument being logically fallacious, the resolution has yet to be affirmed.



Reference

[1] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com...
Debate Round No. 2
RhettBaron

Pro

im black youre saying that cause youre racist arent you?
Zarroette

Con

Thank you, Pro.

My opponent's final argument is irrelevant to the debate, for even if I did call him black and I were a racist, this in no way proves that vaccines cause autism.

I would like to thank RhettBaron for the debate and thank you for reading =)
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by YoshiBoy13 1 year ago
YoshiBoy13
"Pro pointed out con was racist which negates conduct point from con. In round to con also called pro a he she"
Because Con isn't a stalker who makes sure she knows the gender of all she debates with.
Posted by Zarroette 1 year ago
Zarroette
I'm not going to waste bluesteel's time by reporting that.
Posted by AlternativeDavid 1 year ago
AlternativeDavid
Now we wait for Bluesteel to come and take away Wylted's vote.
Posted by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
Alternate David's vote has been reported and will be removed.
Posted by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
I don't want to be racist so.....
Posted by RhettBaron 1 year ago
RhettBaron
if you dont vote for me youre a racist.
Posted by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
Pro, there are studies that support this, why did you go the silly route?
Posted by RhettBaron 1 year ago
RhettBaron
implying this is a serious deate. any retard worth their salt knows vaccines neither cause autism nor any other egregious medical issues. im simply arguing this side because i am bored.
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
I would have accepted this debate had I not 4 serious debates going on.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by YoshiBoy13 1 year ago
YoshiBoy13
RhettBaronZarroetteTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Seven point sweep - Conduct to Con: Pulling racism out of nowhere...? // Grammar to Con: I think youre lacking the apostrophe key. // Arguments to Con: BoP unfulfilled // Sources to Con: Only ones used in debate
Vote Placed by Wylted 1 year ago
Wylted
RhettBaronZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro pointed out con was racist which negates conduct point from con. In round to con also called pro a he she
Vote Placed by Varrack 1 year ago
Varrack
RhettBaronZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made no arguments that weren't bare assertions, and Con called him out on his fallacies. Con also had the only source.
Vote Placed by AlternativeDavid 1 year ago
AlternativeDavid
RhettBaronZarroetteTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's assertion about regarding Jenny McCarthy was compelling, but in the end Pro was able to prevent Pro from meeting the Burden of Proof. Also, Pro did not use any sources. Conduct goes to Con due to Pro's de facto forfeiture. Due to Pro's failure to capitalize any words, and their atrocious grammar, I am awarding S&G to Con.