The Instigator
Calvincambridge
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
Gravekeeper
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Zombies are possible.

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 1 vote the winner is...
Calvincambridge
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/29/2012 Category: Science
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 696 times Debate No: 22416
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Calvincambridge

Pro

First round is to define terms.

Zombie- A creature that was once a human being that was infected with a virus and killed and reanimated by the virus.
Gravekeeper

Con

Another definition is
A soulless corpse said to be revived by witchcraft, esp. in certain African and Caribbean religion
And witchcraft is not likely possible maybe a few things
Debate Round No. 1
Calvincambridge

Pro

I'm not talking about them that's why the zombie Jesus argument fails.

There is evidence for zombies
If there is legitimate evidence
Therefore Zombies may be real

http://www.archaeology.org...
Gravekeeper

Con

There is no actual evidence saying that there was a zombie attack. Also nowadays they take out the blood and replace it with fake blood. Also after sitting under the ground the body starts decaying because of bacteria. So there would be no way in zombies accept for the recent bodies.
Debate Round No. 2
Calvincambridge

Pro

No there is also accounts.
Gravekeeper

Con

There was once a disease like zombies where you looked kinda like a zombie
Debate Round No. 3
Gravekeeper

Con

Gravekeeper forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Calvincambridge

Pro

Zombies are going to eat you for that.
Gravekeeper

Con

Gravekeeper forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Gravekeeper 4 years ago
Gravekeeper
I did not mean to post my last sentence in round two
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Viper-King 4 years ago
Viper-King
CalvincambridgeGravekeeperTied
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:43 
Reasons for voting decision: Horrible arguments. BOP is on Pro. He epicly failed. Pro and Con trolled. However Pro used a source and Con forfeited two rounds.