The Instigator
andreqgarcia
Pro (for)
Losing
13 Points
The Contender
Maya9
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

technology can avert global warming

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/18/2008 Category: Science
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,795 times Debate No: 4728
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (17)
Votes (7)

 

andreqgarcia

Pro

we are in a modernized world nowadays.. we can do anything by means of technology.. if we can create gadgets to satisfy our wants.. why cant we create something which will help our environment, a much important thing, survive?
Maya9

Con

Okay, so where exactly is your argument? A great portion of the global scientific community has devoted itself to finding a solution for global warming. What idea do you have that they don't?

I would argue that global warming is a natural occurrence. Climate changes are a normal part of nature's flow. Do you honestly believe that anything that we can invent can stop nature?
Debate Round No. 1
andreqgarcia

Pro

we cannot really stop global warming..
it's just that we may lessen its harmful effects to man...
we may improve our energy efficiency to lessen this one.
Maya9

Con

But the topic of this argument is aversion of global warming, not simply lessening its effects. You stated your position that "technology can avert global warming" then went on to say that "we cannot really stop global warming." I think you need to make up your mind.
Debate Round No. 2
andreqgarcia

Pro

andreqgarcia forfeited this round.
Maya9

Con

Okay then. I guess the winner is obvious to you all. At least, I hope that it is. Global warming does exist, but it is more than just the result of greedy, evil humans destroying the environment that tree-huggers believe.
Debate Round No. 3
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wheelhouse3 8 years ago
wheelhouse3
global warming is the biggest fabricated lie that a washed up vice president has ever created. your fear of this lie is giving him more money and power. congradulations for being his lap dogs idiots.
Posted by Katie01 8 years ago
Katie01
You people really think technology can't stop global warming???
There's lots of reasons to think technology caused it!

How about mirrors in space?
There are lots of ways: http://news.bbc.co.uk...
Posted by CiRrO 8 years ago
CiRrO
LOl, my friend from school, is a very strict Co2 environmentalist freak. On this site he is called TheRaven. He annoys me because he only thinks that it's the anti Co2 Theory people that need to disprove man-made global warming. He doesn't believe its the burden of the people like Al Gore to prove that it exists. That really confuses me. I had a another profile name on this site and I debated him about man-made Co2. I'm beating him by 1 vote. Hmm, o well. Cya all around ^^
Posted by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
You can still be an environmentalist and believe the global warming is an inclonclusive theory-- especially since most scientist who promote back theory will readily admit they are not certain of much. There are many great arguments from renound scientists against the global warming theory:

http://www.weatherquestions.com...
Posted by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
"BTW, the term "environmentalist" refers to more than just proponents of the theory of global warming."

I think we're all environmentalists in that sense. Contrary to what the left will have you believe, no one wants brown air and national forests littered with fast-food bags. It is possible to be an environmentalist without jumping on the global warming ban wagon. Wanting a clean enviroment should not block the mental faculties required to distinguish conclusive theories from inconclusive ones. that being said, don't you find it mildly coincidental that the first group to swallow the CO2 global warming theory hook line and sinker were the clean air environmentalists of the 70s and 80s? It's a shame they chose to resort to global warming scare tactics to further and otherwise legitimate clean air campaign.
Posted by Jamcke 8 years ago
Jamcke
Apology accepted. I do not advocate stringent regulation as a means to solve our environmental woes. I favor strict adherence to individual property rights as Congressman Ron Paul has advocated in the past.

BTW, the term "environmentalist" refers to more than just proponents of the theory of global warming.
Posted by CiRrO 8 years ago
CiRrO
OH LOL. Don't take that in the wrong way Jamcke. It wasn't meant as a personal attack. However, environmentalists in general are hypocrites. Oh, and i didn't come out of the blue, I was following the comments very thoroughly to see what was going on ^^
Posted by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
Just because I'm an environmentalist DOES NOT mean that I'm anti-capitalist, that I'm going to eventually wrong you in some way, or that I'm mouthy.

Here we disagree. Most environmentalist (my apologies if you are the exception) want government to impose laws forcing businesses and consumers to produce and purchase low-carbon-output products-- directly in response to activist environmentalists who have successfully turned an unproved theory into full-blown global hysteria. So yes, activist environmentalists (the mouthy ones) work to strip companies and individuals of their right to produce and consume what they choose. They also lobby governments to impose taxes and other regulation to increase the cost of fuels they do not find enviromentally friendly. So again, generally, environmentalist are anti-capitalist. And my apoligies if you are an exception to that rule.
Posted by Jamcke 8 years ago
Jamcke
CiRro: F*ck that! You're going to come out of the blue after reading the last couple of comments and call me a hypocrite? How has such an insult in any way been solicited? If you're just looking to make an enemy on this site, you got it buddy.
Posted by Jamcke 8 years ago
Jamcke
"Nothing yet, but I think most would agree that activists were the ones really pushing the global warming theory, and activists tend to be mouthy. No offense I hope. If it's any consolation, I did refer to capitalists as "profiteers" and "greedy entrepreneurs."

You say "no offense I hope" but not only was your statement regarding capitalists condescending, you're stereotyping me. Sorry, but I'm not convinced. Just because I'm an environmentalist DOES NOT mean that I'm anti-capitalist, that I'm going to eventually wrong you in some way, or that I'm mouthy. If you want to continue to insult me, I most certainly will become mouthy!
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
andreqgarciaMaya9Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
andreqgarciaMaya9Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Josh 8 years ago
Josh
andreqgarciaMaya9Tied
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 
Vote Placed by indianajones644 8 years ago
indianajones644
andreqgarciaMaya9Tied
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:03 
Vote Placed by Katie01 8 years ago
Katie01
andreqgarciaMaya9Tied
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 
Vote Placed by VenomousNinja 8 years ago
VenomousNinja
andreqgarciaMaya9Tied
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:03 
Vote Placed by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
andreqgarciaMaya9Tied
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:03