The Instigator
SuperSmartSassySweetie
Pro (for)
The Contender
RMTheSupreme
Con (against)

P.E. is a waste of time and energy

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
SuperSmartSassySweetie has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/24/2018 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 597 times Debate No: 114238
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

SuperSmartSassySweetie

Pro

P.E. is a waste of time and energy. Science even dictates this. P on the periodic table is phosphorous. this is found in plant and animal waste. therefore, p stands for waste. In the equation E=mc^2, e stands for energy. therefore, P.E. stands for waste of energy. It is also a waste of valuable time that could be used for preparing for exams or state tests.
RMTheSupreme

Con

First of all, one must ask themselves why it's a waste and not a spending. aside from the blatant interpretation that Physical Education has provable health benefits let's stick to the definitios of P and E outlined by the proposition and work from there.

Attack 1, Grammar/Semantics

Just to be clear, I spell it Phosphorus to please American readers but both 'us' and 'ous' are correct endings depending which English you use.

The phrase 'Phosphorus Energy' is gramatically impossible to be anything (including a waste) since 'Phosphorus' is not an adjective and having two nouns together makes no sense in itself.

If the resolution is read as 'Phosphorus and Energy is...' then it is gramatically impossible to uphold as that would have to be 'are' since it follows plurals and it's mandatory in English to switch 'is' to 'are' in such scenarios.[1]

If it's 'Phosphorus of Energy' that makes no sense.

If it's 'Phosphorus or Energy' then perhaps a debate can begin but that would mean that Pro has to prove that they are mutually exclusive in being a waste of time and energy (meaning that one can't be it while the other is).


Attack 2, Phosphorus is not a wa
Phosphorus is found in many places on Earth is one of the single most reactive of the elements.[2]

Now, interestingly enough when Phosphorus is part of the greater compound(s) that form dung and waste of animals it is not itself a waste at all. Just because we dub the excrement as 'waste' in no shape or form means that the Phosphorus within the compound goes to waste. Dung is a potent fertilizer and since I can't word it better myself I'm going to quote source, ad verbatim:[3]

'White phosphorus is used in flares and incendiary devices. Red phosphorus is in the material stuck on the side of matchboxes, used to strike safety matches against to light them.
By far the largest use of phosphorus compounds is for fertilisers. Ammonium phosphate is made from phosphate ores. The ores are first converted into phosphoric acids before being made into ammonium phosphate.

Phosphorus is also important in the production of steel. Phosphates are ingredients in some detergents, but are beginning to be phased out in some countries. This is because they can lead to high phosphate levels in natural water supplies causing unwanted algae to grow. Phosphates are also used in the production of special glasses and fine chinaware.'


Attack 3, Energy Cannot Be a Waste of Itself
How can Energy be a waste of energy? It cannot. In fact energy is neither created nor destroyed so only forms of it can be wasted but not energy itself.[4]

Attack 4, P in P.E. is wrongly stated to stand for 'Waste (of)'
Since I have proven in Attack 2 that Phosphorus is not a waste even when it's in a compound known as dung/excrement then it follows that Pro was wrong to conclude that the 'P' in 'P.E' stands for 'Waste (of)'.

Attack 5, How is P.E. a waste of time?
Since P.E. is defined by Pro to be a stationary entity time-wise then how is time spent, let alone wasted via it?

Sources:
[1] https://www.grammarly.com...
[2] https://www.ducksters.com...
[3] http://www.rsc.org...
[4] https://courses.lumenlearning.com...
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by RMTheSupreme 3 years ago
RMTheSupreme
Attack 2 is Phosphorus is not a waste
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.