The Instigator
dr_doom
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Silverblood
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

should people research the area before they cut down the trees

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/11/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 276 times Debate No: 78593
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

dr_doom

Pro

people should otherwise they could cut down a old tree without knowing like the tree that could be 5,800 years old the loggers accidentally cut down without knowing they were in a illegal part of a rain forest
Silverblood

Con

Since my opponent has failed to put forward their definition of the topic, I will do so by firstly defining the term 'research':
Research: the systematic investigation into materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions.

In accordance to it's definition, this topic ultimately implies that loggers should establish facts about an area before chopping down its trees. Whilst this may be a somewhat 'wise' predicament, there are a number of floors within this argument that cannot be ignored.

Their first argument is: loggers could accidentally cut down a tree as old as 5,800 years. Despite the fact no tree known to man is this old, the possibility of such an event is extremely unlikely for a number of reasons: considering that all woodland areas are documented either with the government or local council, the chances of 'accidentally' cutting down an object of such historical significance are close to none. Let us not forget that any tree of such an age would be obviously and blind strikingly recognisable to anyone with tree experience, not only because of its aged outer-surface but also it's totally MASSIVE proportions. Such trees are indefinitely classed as part of a national park/world heritage site such as the Amazon rainforest, so there is no doubt that loggers could ever miss the fact they are in completely illegal territory.

For these reasons, Loggers SHOULD NOT have to conduct research into the area they choose to log because the very fact they can access the area (it is illegal to access land without written permission) means that the owner has deemed it a safe and appropriate area in which to operate. Thus, 99% of the time, knowledge of the area has already been obtained for them.
Debate Round No. 1
dr_doom

Pro

dr_doom forfeited this round.
Silverblood

Con

Silverblood forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
dr_doom

Pro

dr_doom forfeited this round.
Silverblood

Con

Silverblood forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
dr_doom

Pro

dr_doom forfeited this round.
Silverblood

Con

Silverblood forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
dr_doom

Pro

dr_doom forfeited this round.
Silverblood

Con

Silverblood forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by TheTitaniumThermos 1 year ago
TheTitaniumThermos
Silverblood has good points...since no such tree (or at least was never known nor recorded) has ever reached a total age of approximately 5,800+ years old although there is a specific specie of a tree which made it to 5,064 years old the Great Basin Brittlecone Pine if I am not mistaken, although, the tree has no name, Methuselah, the second oldest tree comes in second. With a record of 4,845 years of age.
No votes have been placed for this debate.