turtles are too slow
Debate Rounds (3)
I leave the floor open to my contender.. whoever it may be
I will begin with a quote from Albert Einstein;
"A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!""
Well naturally, this old lady is right. The world, the universe and time teeters precariously on the backs of infinite turtles, and what would you have them do? Rush. Do you not realize that this would, in turn speed up time itself and destroy us all?
Let's look at this from a macro prospective. If the world was truely supported by a giant tortoise, his pace would determine our orbital speed around the sun and through the universe. If we were to suddenly change his velocity, this would in turn make the normally consistent orbiting of our solar system turn chaotic and cause the interconnect gravities of each planet to be thrown out of whack. It is quite possible that by changing the speed of said turtle that we will move the earth either closer to or further away from the sun, thereby creating inhospitable conditions on earth and destroying life as we know it. While I'm sure my opponent's anti-turtle rhetoric is founded in some personal problems, I highly doubt he wishes to destroy our planet as a result of his unfounded hatred. As long as there's the possibility for total annihilation, I would rather not gamble on it.
Furthermore, as for my opponent's insane proposition that they 'wear shoes', I would ask him; how do you intend to pay for this? As government bureaucracy is already a nightmare, I automatically reject the proposition of yet another government organization, even if it is such a worth venture as clothing turtles. Or would my opponent waste important resources from the FBI, CIA or forestry departments so that he can fulfill his wasteful agenda? I think I would rather these dollars go to pay for healthcare or education rather than to these free-loading turtles.
What's more, I think a strong position against shoes would be beneficial to our national security. In the post 9/11 world we have seen evidence for two concrete shoe-related attacks that presented grave danger to the people of the world. The first was the infamous Richard Reid, a.k.a The Shoe Bomber. The man who tried to ignite his shoes while en route to Miami. While I realize that Miami is a Godless city of filth, I sincerely doubt that they deserve a horrible death as my opponent would have. The other reprehensible attack was on George W. Bush, who was almost given a loafer-lobotomy at the hands of a shoe-wielding maniac. I think turtles everywhere are standing up to say 'enough is enough' and oppose the wearing of shoes to protect every man, woman and child of the world.
To further build on my case, there is an evolutionary argument to be had. If the world was to stop wearing shoes and mimic the slowness of turtles, I think we would receive many reptilian benefits. Turtles, for example, have very resilient feet. Sure, the first few centuries of a shoeless world may be painful, but we would see very obvious changes in that our feet would be incredibly durable. Turtles also suffer from very few heart attacks, most likely do to their relaxed lifestyle. If mankind were to adopt their slow, patient way of life I believe we would be much more health. The benefits are endless; turtles are able to live for as long as 175 years and they are also amphibious. Imagine this; underwater seniors complexes! This would save millions of lives each year that are lost to water-related deaths, create more room for our unwanted old people and allow the possibility of cheap labour by an elderly population with nothing else to do for the next 80+ years.
I believe I have logically proven that we should not intervene in the turtle industry, as it would not be beneficial to our survival, national security or evolutionary track. I sincerely doubt that m opponent can disprove any of this, though I invite him to try.
As for this slow tortoise stuff, they should be forced to rush or not be allowed in street for 17 minutes to get across the street in preposterous
I look forward to my opponents unrelenting wrath...
I accepted this debate because I like to mock people, yet any pleasure I derived from it was defeating by the fact that I'm encouraging you. So please, please stop posting like you're eight years old.
madmonkey889 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by MistahKurtz 7 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.