The Instigator
Hazel_Snow
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
EAT_IT_SUKA
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

should we genetically modify the future

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...
EAT_IT_SUKA
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/17/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 614 times Debate No: 71056
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

Hazel_Snow

Pro

Okay, so if you think you should clone yourself you are wrong in a million ways because then this world would be to crowded. yes there is mars but its just not a good idea, trust me. if we just constantly keep going like this then we could be homeless, less jobs, less houses, less buildings. we all have a goal that we don't choose or don't wan't. that is the matter of living life and death. you all know this. well, not all of you, but you know you understand. just to end this, you should agree with me. and we should not genetically modify our future!
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

Hello PRO. My Thesis is 'We shouldn't genetically modify the future.' However, it is impossible to genetically modify the future just as it is impossible to genetically modify the past or present, so of course we shouldn't try to. You cannot genetically modify a point in time. If PRO meant for the issue to be 'Should we Genetically Modify in the Future?' he mentions cloning, although cloning and genetic modification are 2 different things.

CLONE: NOUN
Biology.
a. a cell, cell product, or organism that is genetically identical to the unit or individual from which it was derived.
b. a population of identical units, cells, or individuals that derive from the same ancestral line.
Reference: http://dictionary.reference.com...
GENETIC MODIFICATION: NOUN
any alteration of genetic material, as in agriculture, to make them capable of producing new substances or performing new functions; also called genetic engineering, genetic manipulation, gene splicing, [ gene technology ], recombinant DNA technology
Reference: http://dictionary.reference.com...

If PRO wanted the issue to be: 'Should we clone the future?' we cannot clone the future, and we cannot clone the past or present. We cannot clone, or genetically modify, a point in time.
Even if PRO wanted the issue to be: 'Should we Clone in the Future?' he agreed with my thesis, which would be: 'We shouldn't clone in the future.' So, any way you cut it, this debate is over.
Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
Hazel_Snow

Pro

That is what i am saying! we can not!
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

Let me walk this through with you...

The resolution is: 'Should we genetically modify the future?' However, it is impossible to genetically modify the future. If PRO meant for the resolution to be: 'Should we genetically modify in the future?', he/she mentions cloning, although cloning and genetic modification are 2 different things:

DEFINITION OF 'GENETIC MODIFICATION'
noun

any alteration of genetic material, as in agriculture, to make them capable of producing new substances or performing new functions; also calledgenetic engineering, genetic manipulation, gene splicing, [ genetechnology ], recombinant DNA technology

REFERENCE:
http://dictionary.reference.com...



DEFINITION OF 'CLONE'
noun
1.
Biology.
  1. a cell, cell product, or organism that is genetically identical to theunit or individual from which it was derived.
  2. a population of identical units, cells, or individuals that derive fromthe same ancestral line.
REFERENCE:
http://dictionary.reference.com...


So, as you can see, genetic modification requires you to change something, whereas, if you're cloning something, you don't. If PRO wanted the resolution to be: 'Should we clone the future?', we cannot clone, or genetically modify, the future. If PRO wanted the resolution to be: 'Should we clone in the future?' he/she argued for my side. PRO, you are'pro' because you want to genetically modify the future. I am 'con' because I don't want to genetically modify the future.

DEFINITION OF 'PRO'
1. An argument or consideration in favor of something: weighing the pros and cons.
2. One who supports a proposal or takes the affirmative side in a debate.

REFERENCE:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...


DEFINITION OF 'CON'
In opposition or disagreement; against: debated the issue pro and con.
n.
1. An argument or opinion against something.
2. One who holds an opposing opinion or view.

REFERENCE:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...


So PRO argued for my thesis, which is: 'We should not genetically modify the future.' He gave me a 'turn.' He agreed with my thesis. (s)He said:

'Okay, so if you think you should clone yourself you are wrong in a million ways because then this world would be to crowded. yes there is mars but its just not a good idea, trust me. if we just constantly keep going like this then we could be homeless, less jobs, less houses, less buildings. we all have a goal that we don't choose or don't wan't. that is the matter of living life and death. you all know this. well, not all of you, but you know you understand. just to end this, you should agree with me. and we should not genetically modify our future!'

He agreed with my thesis. After posting my last argument about all the mistakes he made, PRO said this:

'That is what i am saying! we can not!'

PRO, nobody knows what your resolution is. I would appreciate it if you told me what your resolution is next round. Not only that, but he admitted to agreeing with my thesis, as evidenced by his second post. I've pointed out flaws with all of your possible resolutions, PRO.

Therefore, vote CON.






Debate Round No. 2
Hazel_Snow

Pro

Hazel_Snow forfeited this round.
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

Extend.

Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
Hazel_Snow

Pro

Okay so then i will delete this and start a new one!
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

Extend.

PRO's statement 'Okay so then i will delete this and start a new one!' is totally irrelevant to the debate.

Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 4
Hazel_Snow

Pro

Fine con WIN'S!
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

PRO stated that CON wins. This debate, if not already, is over.

Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Poe-vahkiin 2 years ago
Poe-vahkiin
Tell me, Hazel_Snow, why should I trust you when you say we shouldn't go to Mars?
Posted by Poe-vahkiin 2 years ago
Poe-vahkiin
Tell me, Hazel_Snow, why should I trust you when you say we shouldn't go to Mars?
Posted by Poe-vahkiin 2 years ago
Poe-vahkiin
Tell me, Hazel_Snow, why should I trust you when you say we shouldn't go to Mars?
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
You may want to switch to con (as in opposed to genetic modification), and clearify the resolution (such as if you're just opposed to cloning, not against curing diseases).
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 2 years ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
Are you Pro the resolution or Con?
Posted by Hazel_Snow 2 years ago
Hazel_Snow
No one can debate with this!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Hazel_SnowEAT_IT_SUKATied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture