The Instigator
seraphobia
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
RiskTaker
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

polution is a worldwide issue

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 3 votes the winner is...
RiskTaker
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/31/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 911 times Debate No: 51301
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

seraphobia

Pro

I beleve that pollution is not just a problem in china, I beleve that it effects many more countrys and it is an ongoing problem. If you think otherwise come prove me wrong!
RiskTaker

Con

1) What is polution? Do you mean pollution?

2) Pollution isn't an issue, it assists with natural selection[1] as the weaker die off faster. And since our world is currently overpopulating, killing off the weak is pretty useful.

3) If pollution is an issue then it's only an issue in countries that are not overpopulated and don't need to kill the weak off.

Best of luck, opponent.

Sources:

[1] http://evolution.berkeley.edu...
[2] http://www.overpopulation.org...
Debate Round No. 1
seraphobia

Pro

Pollution is killing the weak, yes I agree. But when the weak is gone what will the stronger things eat? What will the animals that eat those things eat? And so on and so forth.
Polluted water and polluted air are causing poisinous plants, and killing animals in the area. So there is going to be nothing left for us to eat.
Pollution is also directly harming us.
Over 1 billion people worldwide lack access to safe drinking water. 5,000 people die each day due to dirty drinking water.
Approximately 46% of the lakes in America are too polluted for fishing, aquatic life, or swimming.
Over 1 million seabirds and 100,000 sea mammals are killed by pollution every year.
No it does not JUST effect the weak, it effects us too.
RiskTaker

Con

I wasn't aware that the world is full of cannibals. Anyway, to answer your question the strong eat the weak because those that were once strong will become the new weak until we become infinitely nearer to the perfect human being and kill off the weak fools such as myself for the strong geniuses to survive.

That's life. :)

You did not supply sources for any of your statistics and the only relevant stats were only for America.

Lack of drinking water isn't due to pollution, that's due to lack of irrigation. it's a financial issue of funding, not an issue of polluted water (the water was already polluted naturally).

Imagine how packed the world would be if those birds and sea mammals didn't die!

I win. Good game. Well played.
Debate Round No. 2
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by seraphobia 3 years ago
seraphobia
Then again your not 108 either so whatever.
XD
Posted by seraphobia 3 years ago
seraphobia
Oh and im also not 66 that was some sort of a glitch.
Posted by seraphobia 3 years ago
seraphobia
Sorry about the *polution* thing. My keyboard is broken.
Posted by Bobbysaypie 3 years ago
Bobbysaypie
Good luck to you,seraphobia. Pollution is indeed a worldwide issue.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
seraphobiaRiskTakerTied
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: Con had sources, and very little to refute.
Vote Placed by GodChoosesLife 3 years ago
GodChoosesLife
seraphobiaRiskTakerTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was the only who used sources.
Vote Placed by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
seraphobiaRiskTakerTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's assumptions are dangerously made; con assumes that all countries with overpopulation problems want pollution to kill the weak. Pro doesn't exploit this and makes another dangerous assumption; in which con exploits skillfully. All arguments, however, are weak in the fact that they are either baseless or irrelevant. At the end of the day, con had better S & G, so he wins.