The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Julian-Harker
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

without everything there can be no source, so the source is everything

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 2 votes the winner is...
Julian-Harker
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/13/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 247 times Debate No: 92667
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

Julian-Harker

Con

This so called 'source' is a fuel to everything that relies on it. You can't say it IS everything just because it fuels everything. It's like saying a Bee is a Plant because it fuels plants by transferring it's pollen.
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

if plants cant exist without bees they are 1, like chicken and egg
Julian-Harker

Con

Not all Plants won't exist if a Bee didn't, but only the insect reliant Plants. A single source is not a fuel to everything, you see.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

nature equals nature even if a flower dies
Julian-Harker

Con

You're going off topic, a fatal flaw you've casted. Sorry to burst your bubble but a snake is not a rodent if it feeds on them. You are not explaining yourself at all and not even making the slightest touch of sense. Do enlighten me and stay on track, please.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by whiteflame 8 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: HomelySherlock// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: Con used obscure analogies whereas pro used logical arguments.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn't explain Conduct, S&G or Sources. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to assess specific points made by both sides, and generalizing about the logic of each side's points is never sufficient.
************************************************************************
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Omniscient_Debater 8 months ago
Omniscient_Debater
vi_spexJulian-HarkerTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con refuted an argument from Pro and Pro's attempt to knock it down failed as Pro refuted his attempt at refutation. Pro also went off topic for a bit, so the last round barely counts as an argument, that is vital anyway.
Vote Placed by ThinkBig 8 months ago
ThinkBig
vi_spexJulian-HarkerTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Now that the vote bomb has been removed, I will remove my counter bomb