The Instigator
frozen_eclipse
Pro (for)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
NextGenerationElephant
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

it is more probable than not that mermaids exist

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 4 votes the winner is...
frozen_eclipse
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/24/2012 Category: Science
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 8,847 times Debate No: 24852
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

frozen_eclipse

Pro

The audience most likely thinks I'm crazy for posting this. but there is substantial evidence to support this claim. Along with logical arguments. The weighing mechanism for this debate will be convincing the audience that either it is more probable or less probable based on cross examination and evidence that mermaids exist.

Structure

1-acceptance
2-positions
3-rebuttals
4-rebuttals
5-rebuttal/summary

Definitions

Probable-:
1.supported by evidence strong enough to establish presumption but not proof
2. having more evidence for than against, or evidence that inclines the mind to belief but leaves some room for doubt.

mermaids- a fabled marine creature with the head and upper body of a woman and the tail of a fish

Sources

http://www.merriam-webster.com...
http://dictionary.reference.com...
NextGenerationElephant

Con

I am looking forward to this. Good luck. :)
Debate Round No. 1
frozen_eclipse

Pro

It is more likely than not that mermaids exist.

What I am about to show is a documentary made by animal planet. In this video you will see how the navy did in fact find these mermaids and then preceded to suppress all evidence of there existence. I will point out some main things and try to summarize the video but it is essential for the audience to watch this video in full because pieces of a puzzle isn't as clear a picture as a completed puzzle. So in order to come to a complete logical conclusion please watch the video in full.(this video will blow your mind please watch with caution.)


The bloop

I forget what year it was I believe it was 2003ish The navy began doing new sonar testing. One marine biologist linked the most massive whale beaching that was happening in history to be a direct result of the sonar blasts. Scientists recovered a booie (I'm sorry I don't know how to spell it) witch had recorded the whale activity at the time of the sonar blast. When you listen to it every thing is clam then after the blast you hear the whales crying. A little bit latter the scientists hear a sound that didn't sound like any whale or any other animal ever recorded. Except in 1997ish a scientist heard the same sound . They did extensive research and concluded it was some type of new animal that had a very complex language. Marine biologists who where familiar with marine communication indicated that no animal has a language this complex and intricate. This remained unexplained until what happened next.

The beaching of the mermaid.

Along with the massive whale beaching some other creature washed up. Before the government or anyone else knew 2 kids saw the creature and decided to record it.( they show the full video at the end of the film) the creature appeared to be dead but it wasn't. It awakened and kind of tried to grab the boy. later NOAA ( the team on the film) appeared. The navy closed off the creature and hid it from everyone else. The navy told the boys what they saw as a decayed dolphin. ( That's a huge lie, dolphins don't have webbed hands nor do they have humanistic features.) The mother being smart got the boys to change their statement. around this time (2005) cell phones wasn't as main stream as they were today o the navy never thought to look at the boys phone. Thus they kept they video.

captured evidence

Fisherman for years have reported weird spearings showing up on the fish and sharks they capture. The scientist started to study this. One day a fisherman discovered something weird mangled in a sharks stomach. NOAA received the body and began studying it. It was only three pieces and some other parts. Scientists didn't know what it was even after analysis. At first they thought it was a manatee because of the huge tail but that was later ruled out. Its skull had a ridge sticking out like a shark fin on its head and they found what looked like sinus holes on the top f its human like skull peices. The scientists noticed the phalanges bones were not fins but were actually hands at some point down the mutation. DNA tests were done and amazingly the dna came back human! NOAA sent this information to a federal lab but they discredited the evidence. Later on the navy came into their university lab and confiscated all there findings including the body. They did leave the bloop recording because it was already a matter of public record. What they discovered was these mermaids evolved form early primates around the Neanderthal era these humans were first on land but some went into the ocean to hunt for food and eventually they evolved into these mermaids. They found a painting in a Neolithic cave and it depicted mermaid like creatures being hunted by humans. So maybe we drove them into hiding. They also found that dolphins help fishermen fish. How does this happen? Maybe the mermaids started it. These mermaids hunt and migrate with whales and dolphins. Witch explains why they washed up with the whales.

The actual appearance

This one fisherman actually caught one in a net and recorded it and later took a picture of the back of it. It also had a spear made from stingray spine. This creature is what has been spearing the fishermens catch. NOAA members devastated and almost with no hope went to the ocean and dropped a booie that would emit the sounds of the mermaid from the bloop. The creatures actually came and they saw them in the water, they were making the same noise as on the bloop. But then the navy came and confiscated all the new evidence they had. One guy who was actually working for the navy scientific team actually recorded the mermaid and appeared on video.The scientist learned about the boy who video taped the mermaid. They found them and the creatures depiction matched what the scientists found. After that they just gave up and made this documentary that I will now post here.

Also All of these people who were involved had practically disappeared. After this documentary aired last week or two ago. NOAA doest acknowledge that they even worked for them anymore. All the sites connected to this has a message saying confiscated by the FBI. This is true . I was aware of this before this video was out now the government is trying to cover everything.

Now that I have given evidence let me state once again that my job is to convince the audience that it is more likely than not that mermaids exist. I believe I have done such. The bloop,The beaching of the mermaid, the captured evidence, the actual appearance, and the video provides grounds to beilieve it is highly probable that mermaids exist. We have only discovered about 5% of the ocean. We have dicovered 2 new whale species in the last decade. It is very possible that these mermaids could hide in the other 95% of the unexplored ocean. This is very possible and my proposal is is more probable than not to be true.Thus a pro vote is a logical response to this debate.






NextGenerationElephant

Con

This so called "documentary" from animal planet, was actually made by animal planet, it's not a hoax, however the entire "documentary" is a work of science fiction. The producers admitted in an interview that this whole thing is science fiction. The whole show was for pure entertainment. There never has been or will be mermaids.
http://www.cbsnews.com...
http://www.latimes.com...
http://www.webpronews.com...

Sorry to burst your bubble.
Debate Round No. 2
frozen_eclipse

Pro

I have a couple responses to my opponents statements.

My first response is this. I titled this debate to encompass around the word probable for a reason. We cant really come to a conclusion of if the video is completely false or not because there are alot of factual events in the video. If I was in a position of wanting to get this information out but avoid government prosecution at the same time I would show the video and then later say it was fake to avoid penalty and avoid the government. Please don't get confused. I'm aware that those images were computer generated. If this information was true then they would have had to generate some images because they never found a complete body. What we should pay attention to here is the facts within the video and not so much the computer aspects of the video. The video is not the meat of my debate but the facts within and some other facts that would lead to probable cause that it is at least possible that mermaids may exist.

The mass whale beaching from sonar tests are real.
http://www.nrdc.org...

The bloop is real
http://www.newscientist.com...

NOAA is real
http://www.noaa.gov...

Look surprisingly the website where the stolen navy footage was on has been confiscated by the FBI. surprise surprise.
http://believeinmermaids.com...

There are many other factual occurrences in this film. Is this coincidence or not. I will let the audience make there decisions regarding the evidence of these occurrences. Is that not probable cause to atleast think if they could exist?



My second response is a more logical approach.


The NOAA reports the worlds oceans covers 71 percent of earth.5% has been explored leaving 95% of our oceans undiscovered. According to The gaurdian.co.uk....."More than 600 new species have been discovered in Madagascar's unique habitats in the past decade, among them 385 plants, 42 invertebrates, 17 fish, 69 amphibians, 61 reptiles and 41 mammals, according to a report published by WWF"............http://www.guardian.co.uk...

This was only in the last decade and only in Madagascar. At least 86 sea animals were found in one area of earth. How long have humans been around on earth? We are just now finding these creatures after 30,000+ years of our species being on earth. If only 5% of our oceans have been discovered that means there are millions of other species living out in the ocean existing without our knowledge and have been living and evolving for years. SO if mermaids existed is it possible we wouldn't have found them by now? yes

If you remember the Neolithic pictures you saw in the video those are actually real paintings made in the Neanderthal era. It depicted humans killing the sea creatures that look like mermaids. maybe humans drove them away into hiding and possibly near extinction?


IS it possible that a primitive ancestor could have mutated into a mermaid?

Absolutely. Lets look at ourselves as humans.
We have,
  • Webbing between fingers (other primates don’t have this)
  • Subcutaneous fat (insulating from cold water)
  • Control over breath (humans can hold breath up to 20 minutes, longer than any other terrestrial animal)
  • Loss of body hair (hair creates drag in water)
  • Instinctive ability to swim (human babies are able to do this)
  • A highly developed brain, which depends on nutrients provided by seafood like mercury.
Lets look at manatees. Surprisingly there not related to any other sea creature and there DNA doesn't show any proof of an exotic oceanic ancestor. Scientists believe that manatees and dugongs evolved from 4 footed land mammals 60 thousand years ago. Who was a wading plant eating mammal. Manatees closest ancestors are actually elephants,aardvarks, and the hyrax..........http://www.learner.org...

Besides this example im sure everyone else is aware of the evolution and adaptation of the Galapagos islands. With that being said if a land animal is capable of evolving into a sea animal then there is probable cause to believe that a human land animal can evolve into a sea creature. Coincidentally the manatee has the head of its previous ancestor and the body of a fish. Is this just coincidence? I think not!

My job as the pro of this debate was to meet the definition of probable with is,

probable-supported by evidence strong enough to establish presumption but not proof. etc....

So In order to win I need to establish that the conditions of this is atleast possible. I am not obligated to show proof that mermaids exist but rather to prove that evolution of mermaids could have happened. I believe I have done such. Thus again a pro vote is a logical response to this debate.









NextGenerationElephant

Con

My apologies I thought you were trying to prove the existence of mermaids. In this case, I actually agree with you, there is a possibility that they could exist because of evolution and the fact that 95% of our oceans are undiscovered and the fact that the NOAA discovered as many new species as they did in a relatively small area compared to the rest of the globe. I am sorry to have wasted this debate by misunderstanding the topic statement.
Debate Round No. 3
frozen_eclipse

Pro

O.K seeing that my opponent is actually agreeing with my case and offers no more counter arguments i believe i have fullfilled my BOP and have proven that it is more probable than not that memaid exist. my Pro case being probable outweighs the contention of cons not probable case, being that this is the situation a pro vote is a very logicall response to this debate.
NextGenerationElephant

Con

NextGenerationElephant forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
NextGenerationElephant

Con

I guess we're done here.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by frozen_eclipse 5 years ago
frozen_eclipse
hmm this is the first time i convinced someone to forfeit with psycology....hmmmm
Posted by vmpire321 5 years ago
vmpire321
lol
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Multi_Pyrocytophage 5 years ago
Multi_Pyrocytophage
frozen_eclipseNextGenerationElephantTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Obvious enough. Giving Con a point for the heck of it.
Vote Placed by KRFournier 5 years ago
KRFournier
frozen_eclipseNextGenerationElephantTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession FTW.
Vote Placed by IFLYHIGH 5 years ago
IFLYHIGH
frozen_eclipseNextGenerationElephantTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by vmpire321 5 years ago
vmpire321
frozen_eclipseNextGenerationElephantTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession