The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
4 Points

a Jet plane is better then a Train

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/11/2014 Category: Funny
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 781 times Debate No: 45614
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




No trolls please I do want a professional debate. I believe that trains are a better way to travel then a airplane and I will prove this.
I shall let my opponent make the first argument.


I thank my opponent, octo, for the opportunity to debate this topic, and I assure that I will keep this debate professional. By allowance of the instigator, I will make the first round of argumentation.

General purpose of a train, versus the general purpose of a jet plane

A train is a method of public transport. Its function is to transport a medium size amount of people (say 30-80, on average) to locations that are normally relatively close by. Trains rarely cross national borders, and very rarely travel to countries on separate land masses. The train serves as a generally more efficient way of travelling across small spaces.

However, a jet plane can travel across land masses that are continents apart, something that a train almost never does. For example, a jet plane travelling from Australia to America, would do so infinitely more easily than a train (seeing as trains are yet to do this, at least via rail).

Thus, jet planes serve a purpose that trains cannot. Trains are obviously far more efficient at travelling from local town to local town. When both purposes are considered simultaneously, it is impossible to conclude as to which is ‘better’.

The underlying problem with my opponent’s argument

My opponent’s conclusion: “trains are a better way to travel than an airplane”, cannot be affirmed as the purposes of each type differ.

1) Trains are better at covering shorter distances
2) Planes cover longer distances that trains cannot
3) Comparing the two, when their ultimate purposes differ so greatly, is like comparing chalk to cheese
4) Therefore, my opponent’s conclusion cannot be affirmed, as whether trains are a better way to travel than airplanes, due to the purposes of each differ so greatly
Debate Round No. 1


octo forfeited this round.


My opponent has yet to prove what he set out to do:

"I believe that trains are a better way to travel then a airplane and I will prove this."

He cannot, as I've explained, prove this. The reason being is outlined in my previous argument.

Extend my argument.
Debate Round No. 2


octo forfeited this round.


I take it that my argument was irrefutable =)

Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF all relevant points to pro.