The Instigator
eyeleapy
Pro (for)
Losing
22 Points
The Contender
Logical-Master
Con (against)
Winning
45 Points

Who would win in a fight? Crab People or Lobster people? I say Crab people!

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: 2/12/2008 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,355 times Debate No: 2574
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (26)
Votes (16)

 

eyeleapy

Pro

I say the Crab people would win, simply because the have bigger pincers! And they do have a boxing crab, that must mean they can throw down.
Logical-Master

Con

My opponent advocates that the crab people would win in a battle against the Lobster people, but I advocate otherwise.

First, we know nothing of crab or lobster people due to the fact that neither exist, so the exact physical characteristics are completely left up to assumption. Without a way of observing them, we must compare normal lobsters and crabs. Thus, it would be best if I compared a Lobster of my choice to the Crab of my opponent's choice.

Description from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Fighting:

American lobsters are solitary animals. The only time they peacefully share a burrow or other enclosed area is for mating. At other times, when two lobsters meet, they will size each other up. If one is clearly bigger or stronger, the weaker one will retreat. A well matched pair will move through a ritualized series of aggressive displays until one gives up. These start with whipping antennae at each other, then shoving each other around with their claws, then a claw crushing show of strength called claw lock, and lastly flipping the opponent and trying to kill it. However, at any point before the end a lobster can back-off, admitting defeat, and the victor will usually not progress further. After this the loser lobster will be able to recognize the victor for up to about a week and will immediately back out of a fight."

American Lobsters are usually 20-60 cm and .5 - 4 kg in weight.

Not to mention that they hunt codfish, haddock, flounder, and other Lobsters if necessary.

Lets compare this to what my opponent cites as the best of the Crabs (Boxing Crab).

http://www.saltwaterfish.com...

The boxing crab is merely one inch in size and doesn't even come close to eating the kind of meals an American Lobster may eat.

I now stand ready for my opponent's first rebuttal.

Clearly, the crab which my opponent implies as being the Crab people's best defense would be vanquished in one blow if it attempted to take on an American Lobster (even an average sized one at that).
Debate Round No. 1
eyeleapy

Pro

My opponent has the very good arguement, in fact i agree with what he has posted, in fact most crab species are smaller than Lobster pecies, but i also did research on Crabs at wikipedia.org and i found this amazing info.

The Japanese spider crab, Macrocheira kaempferi, is the largest living arthropod; fully grown it can reach a leg span of almost 4 m (13 ft), a body size of up to 37 cm (15 inches) and a weight of up to 20 kg (44 lb). The crab's natural habitat is on the bottom of the Pacific Ocean (some 300 to 400 m deep) around Japan, where it feeds on dead animals and shellfish. It is believed to have a life expectancy of up to 100 years.[1]

Because it is a particularly old species of crab, it is often referred to as a living fossil. Currently, this is the only species of the genus Macrocheira, but there have been two reports of other fossil specimens.

That's a huge Crab, i think it'll win in any fight against the Lobster people.

In the Red corner, weighing in at 44 lbs, standing at 13 ft with an arm reach of 6.5 ft, it's claws are sharp and can pack-a-punch, "The Japanese Spider Crab" and in the Blue corner, weighing in at 44.4 lbs, standing at about 3 ft and doesn't have as long a reach, but can pack a huge punch. "the Lobster"

It usually matters on how the experience goes in people world, but in natures world, size is everything!
Logical-Master

Con

Alright, first, my opponent drops/concedes my round one arguments, so you can extend them.

Second, my opponent cites the Japanese Spider Crab, but this is where his argument falls apart. What he has overlooked is the fact that these crabs are limited to being on the bottom of the specific ocean and that their weight and body proportion give them inferior mobility when it comes to a comparison with a Lobster. Not to mention that Lobsters have been recorded at being able to move at an incredible speed of 5 meters per second. The Japanese Spider Crab won't be much help to the crab people since it needs to remain in deep waters for survival. On the other hand, Lobsters can thrive on the seal floor and shallow waters, so Team Lobster clearly has the advantage. And since there are far more American Lobsters than there are Japanese Spider Crabs, the Lobsters could gang up on the Spider crabs if necessary. It's just like the film "A Bugs Life" where all the ants overpowered the grasshoppers in the end.

One more thing from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org... (which was cited): They can thus reach impressive sizes. According to the Guinness World Records, the largest lobster was caught in Nova Scotia, Canada, and weighed 20.14 kg (44.4 lb).tage.

Now matter how you look at it, the Crab's would be defeated by the superior might of the Lobsters.
Debate Round No. 2
eyeleapy

Pro

I never conceded, i gave you credit.

Yes that was the largest lobster to be recorded ever, EVER! But thats an average size for the Massive Japanese spider Crab. Plus it being part human, doesn't stop it for going to the surface of the earth. also you stated the lobsters over powered the crabs with thier supperior numbers, actually the crabs have much more species than the lobsters. One of the species has a carry on gun. It slams it's claws so fast, causing a super loud noise, louder than 4 Jets combined, stunning it's pray, it is in the Animal Planets Most Extreme for loudest animals and placed number one. All the Crabs different species and different abilities causes them to have the best advantage. First the King Crabs will go into hand to hand combat, then the Noise Crabs will come in and fire thier super loud claws, stunning them and putting them into a confusion, that's when all the other crabs come in and fight to the death, Plus the crabs have a much more narrow claw, enabling them into impailing thier shell easier than any wide claw can. and who says the Japanese Spider Crabs are low in numbers, They also have a mighty army, march in to the destruction of the labster people. The Lobster fast swimming, isn't going to help them, because this battle takes place on dry land, right on the beach.

Booya!
Logical-Master

Con

First, my opponent claims that he never conceded, but he had dropped the arguments I had supplied and even refused to make an objection to make claim that we would be comparing normal sea creatures rather than contributing speculation over the features of crab people. Not only that, but here is what my opponent stated:

"My opponent has the very good arguement, in fact i agree with what he has posted, in fact most crab species are smaller than Lobster pecies . . . "

So yes, my opponent did concede.

Next, my opponent points out that my Lobster citation concerned the larged Lobster ever and that Japanese spider crab's were that size on average, however, through viewing his source, we clearly see that the maximum size is what my opponent had listed.

Observe: http://en.wikipedia.org...

"The Japanese spider crab, Macrocheira kaempferi, is the largest living arthropod; fully grown it can reach a leg span of almost 4 m (13 ft), [a body size of up to 37 cm (15 inches) and a weight of up to 20 kg (44 lb)."]

Read the line within the brackets as the maximum size is implied within it. And for those who may be confused, my previous citation applied to Lobsters in general rather than American Lobsters alone.

My opponent then attempts to use my point against me by pointing out that crabs had the advantage in numbers. Although this is true, this doesn't reflect upon my point as I didn't make the claim that "working together" would be beneficial until I pointed out some more lobster attributes. For instance, I suggested (and cited) that Lobsters could move at a speed of 5 meters per second. With this unique speed and the fact that they could adjust to all areas of the sea rather than merely one portion, this is how working in groups becomes effective for Team Lobster. Also, to further add injury to my opponent's argument, I merely compared one species of Lobster to one species of crab (you can check my wording if you don't believe me).

My opponent commits the fallacy of false dichotomy by claiming that animal planet list a crab for loudest animal. This is false as shown here on animal planet's website: http://animal.discovery.com...

"The blue whale is also the loudest creature on our planet. Its low-frequency whistles can be heard for hundreds of miles underwater and are often 40 to 50 decibels louder than a jumbo jet. These powerful, highly structured sounds may help them find food or mates."

Another reason my opponent is incorrect is the description itself. He states that there is a crab which STUNS it's pray by smashing it's claw against a surface loud enough to produce sound waves equivalent to the sound waves produced by 4 jets combined. Considering the size and fragility of the prey crabs hunt after, such a blast would not merely stun its pray but would kill it instead.

As for the King Crabs, they lose for mostly the same reasons the Spider Crabs do.

My opponent states that Crabs (in general) have a much narrower claw when compared to Lobsters, but this is irrelevant. Lobsters still have a thick shell and super strength to rely on. This is not something many opponents of a Crab have to offer in battle.

Who says Japanese Crabs are low on numbers?

Lets check out my opponent's source:

"It is considered a specialty around Suruga Bay, but numbers of the crab have diminished over recent years, and there are efforts to protect them. In Wakayama Prefecture, the crabs are caught when they move to shallower waters in the spring."

Besides, there is a reason it is referred to as a "living fossil."

My opponent states that this battle takes place on dry land on the beach, but he did not define this to be the terms of the battle in the resolution or during round one. He is basically shifting his argument. Therefore, I am justified to ignore this conditions that he created on the last round.

As for this stuff about being part human advantages, this is baseless conjecture from my opponent. In round one, I had already explained that we have no way of observing the results of a Crab-Human / Lobster-Human transmutations, so the attributes which my opponent provides (and on his last round no doubt) are dismissible. Although to pacify my opponent, the world is 75% water and Lobsters are incredible swimmers, so they have control over most of the battlefield.

Closing Statements: My opponent has dropped my arguments, has provided false info, and has attempted to change his argument on the final round. On the other hand, I have provided information that suggest Lobsters to have the advantage over crabs in general. Thus, in a theoretical battle between Lobster people and Crab people, most of the evidence points towards the lobster people as being victorious. With that said, I thank my opponent for taking the time to debate with me and I thank the audience for reading. Good night! =D
Debate Round No. 3
26 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by eyeleapy 9 years ago
eyeleapy
I'm an original baby gansta, like the dresta, no not the docta fasition over MD, drestas an OG, Doctas a foney, only the real real steal can chill w/ me, and the rest can't ____ with E.

My opponent previously stated,

"Honestly now, you're going to correct me for speaking figuratively?

As for the personal attack bit, I even made my point clearer in my previous comment. I don't feel like getting into a definition debate, so insist that you show me where I have actually bashed you.

Until you make the effort, you can consider this being my final comment here as the horse has apparently been killed."

Sounds to me like he needs a girl friend, if he is human that is.
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
Honestly now, you're going to correct me for speaking figuratively?

As for the personal attack bit, I even made my point clearer in my previous comment. I don't feel like getting into a definition debate, so insist that you show me where I have actually bashed you.

Until you make the effort, you can consider this being my final comment here as the horse has apparently been killed.
Posted by eyeleapy 9 years ago
eyeleapy
Ill type it again not "say it" you can;t say something in a comment poster. and I said,

"I never said "personal attack" here let me copy and past it once more...

"As well as your point. i didnt need to ask for clarification, because if you sound kinda like a robot then i'll let people vote on that behalf. Just chill bro, no need to get all riled up and all "technical" on your wording, fine, your smart, you know words, but dont think by spewing out big words can assure a victory, it needs to make sense, instead of bashing, make you own comments ans views, use bashing for 1 round only, it is likely to improve your results on the outcome instead of trying to make others look like a fool,because then you make yourself look foolish."

in other words, being on the offense of a debate just isn't nearly enough, besides i have voted for you on a few of your "great Debates" and im not taking them back, you made good points on those. Instead of Bashing and saying, "My opponent previously stated that_________" Lets hear what you have to put for a change. I mean for reals yo, Try not to put that type of shiznatics for one debate and we'll see how great you can be.

Sign, Shrimpman and eyeleapy"

Read it correctly and see for yourself. You didn't personaly offend me. Do you even know what being on the offense is? I bet you never took dabate either. Ok lets play this slowly, Offense- A team in possession of the ball or puck, or those players whose primary duty is to attempt to score.

that's what you do, also you always type "My opponent previously stated that_________"

well, lets see what you state.
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
I'll say it again: Show me where I have made a personal attack; show me where I have bashed you.
Posted by eyeleapy 9 years ago
eyeleapy
I never said "personal attack" here let me copy and past it once more...

"As well as your point. i didnt need to ask for clarification, because if you sound kinda like a robot then i'll let people vote on that behalf. Just chill bro, no need to get all riled up and all "technical" on your wording, fine, your smart, you know words, but dont think by spewing out big words can assure a victory, it needs to make sense, instead of bashing, make you own comments ans views, use bashing for 1 round only, it is likely to improve your results on the outcome instead of trying to make others look like a fool,because then you make yourself look foolish."

in other words, being on the offense of a debate just isn't nearly enough, besides i have voted for you on a few of your "great Debates" and im not taking them back, you made good points on those. Instead of Bashing and saying, "My opponent previously stated that_________" Lets hear what you have to put for a change. I mean for reals yo, Try not to put that type of shiznatics for one debate and we'll see how great you can be.

Sign, Shrimpman and eyeleapy
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
1) Substance is far more significant than style. Voting on behalf that one thinks I sound like a robot is silly. To tell you the truth, you're the first person to have ever had a problem with the way I debate.

2) You're telling me to chill out? I've kept my composure the entire time, leapy. Anyone with eyes can see that. ;) If anything, you lost yours the moment you started fishing through my account and voting against me for no real reason whatsoever.

3) Show me where I made a personal attack during the round. This stuff about me making you sound stupid can be attributed to you possibly having an inferiority complex.

4) No, I can't stop people from voting on comments; you're correct about doing what they choose to do. However, the point I was trying to make was that voting on comments rather than the debate could not be justified.
Posted by eyeleapy 9 years ago
eyeleapy
ps, you cant stop people from voting only on the debate instead of the cooments. they do what they choose
Posted by eyeleapy 9 years ago
eyeleapy
As well as your point. i didnt need to ask for clarification, because if you sound kinda like a robot then i'll let people vote on that behalf. Just chill bro, no need to get all riled up and all "technical" on your wording, fine, your smart, you know words, but dont think by spewing out big words can assure a victory, it needs to make sense, instead of bashing, make you own comments ans views, use bashing for 1 round only, it is likely to improve your results on the outcome instead of trying to make others look like a fool,because then you make yourself look foolish.
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
*sigh*

1) People should only vote by the debate. Comments are insignificant.

2) If you were confused by what I said, you could have asked for clarification or you could have argued that what I said was nonsensical. During the round, you did neither.

3) I'm going to assume you were kidding about the shrimp man part. :D

4) I said I stood corrected on an issue that had virtually nothing to do with the debate (as in, shrimps actually producing a loud sounds rather than crabs). Anything else I've stated on an insignificant matter has no bearing on what was stated during the actual round. ;)

5) There's nothing wrong with using outside sources. In fact, debate.org even encourages the practice.

6) Whether or not the Blue Whale is in first or second, the candidate for 1st is not a crab, so your point remains negated even if we do take the material within the comment section for granted.
Posted by eyeleapy 9 years ago
eyeleapy
But the lobsters still fight each other, and maybe if you wouldn't contradict yourself then maybe people wouldn't vote by comments. In all 3 rounds, at least 38% of what you said made sense to the debate. I know your probably on a high school debate team, but so was i, and i can tell you on what you messed up on. Firstly (if that was a word) Being on the constant attack isn't going to win you voters, 2nd, jumbo jets aren't that loud And 3rd, i know shrimps weren't involved, but shrimp man said they would back them up. He's like, part shrimp part man, so that's up to him. Also you previously stated that you were provin wrong and so was i, then you turn around and state that blue whales are also the loudest, you need to hope the fence, it's 1 or the other. and i rememberd it was a shrimp. i knew i seen it, i usually don't use outside sources because i like a clean debate. And by going to Wiki 1st you started outside research. But i remembered the blue whale was in 2nd, not 1st.
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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:06 
Vote Placed by Robert_Santurri 8 years ago
Robert_Santurri
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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 jiffy 9 years ago
jiffy
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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 Jamcke 9 years ago
Jamcke
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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 
Vote Placed by SportsGuru 9 years ago
SportsGuru
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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 
Vote Placed by YummyYummCupcake 9 years ago
YummyYummCupcake
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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 beem0r 9 years ago
beem0r
eyeleapyLogical-MasterTied
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