There's not enough food for us all, Which of us here should live? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally by activity where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





There's not enough food for us all, Which of us here should live?

Debate Information

The global food supply has dwindled. There's not enough food to feed even a tenth of the global population, and the food supply continues to evaporate. Those who have control of the earths remaining food sources have decided to leave it up to a computer algorithm to decide who among us should continue to survive, and for the sake of convenience, the computer decided to base it's decisions off of our online presence. Our DI personality will be taken into consideration.................whoops, it looks like there will only be room for one of us. Who should it be?

Obviously I nominate myself as the most profound and consummate of all debaters here, and I assume you would all agree. I have an insightful and unique perspective of emotions and our existence. My ethical reasoning is flawless, and my intoxicating charm will bring endless joy to the new world.

But, you may have a slightly different point of view on this matter, and so who do you believe should continue the evolution of humankind, and all of earths glorious creatures?        



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • BlastcatBlastcat 403 Pts   -   edited October 2021
    piloteer said:
    The global food supply has dwindled. There's not enough food to feed even a tenth of the global population, and the food supply continues to evaporate. Those who have control of the earths remaining food sources have decided to leave it up to a computer algorithm to decide who among us should continue to survive, and for the sake of convenience, the computer decided to base it's decisions off of our online presence. Our DI personality will be taken into consideration.................whoops, it looks like there will only be room for one of us. Who should it be?

    Obviously I nominate myself as the most profound and consummate of all debaters here, and I assume you would all agree. I have an insightful and unique perspective of emotions and our existence. My ethical reasoning is flawless, and my intoxicating charm will bring endless joy to the new world.

    But, you may have a slightly different point of view on this matter, and so who do you believe should continue the evolution of humankind, and all of earths glorious creatures?        

    nah, should be me because REASONS
    piloteer
  • piloteerpiloteer 1484 Pts   -  
    Blastcat said:
    piloteer said:
    The global food supply has dwindled. There's not enough food to feed even a tenth of the global population, and the food supply continues to evaporate. Those who have control of the earths remaining food sources have decided to leave it up to a computer algorithm to decide who among us should continue to survive, and for the sake of convenience, the computer decided to base it's decisions off of our online presence. Our DI personality will be taken into consideration.................whoops, it looks like there will only be room for one of us. Who should it be?

    Obviously I nominate myself as the most profound and consummate of all debaters here, and I assume you would all agree. I have an insightful and unique perspective of emotions and our existence. My ethical reasoning is flawless, and my intoxicating charm will bring endless joy to the new world.

    But, you may have a slightly different point of view on this matter, and so who do you believe should continue the evolution of humankind, and all of earths glorious creatures?        

    nah, should be me because REASONS
    Good point, but may I add that <Enter argument here>, so we can see why there may be problems with that!!!
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 951 Pts   -  
    @piloteer

    "Obviously I nominate myself as the most profound and consummate of all debaters here, and I assume you would all agree. I have an insightful and unique perspective of emotions and our existence. My ethical reasoning is flawless, and my intoxicating charm will bring endless joy to the new world."

    Now says it's God's fault, and receive your reward for best swolliw imitation.
  • piloteerpiloteer 1484 Pts   -  
    @piloteer

    "Obviously I nominate myself as the most profound and consummate of all debaters here, and I assume you would all agree. I have an insightful and unique perspective of emotions and our existence. My ethical reasoning is flawless, and my intoxicating charm will bring endless joy to the new world."

    Now says it's God's fault, and receive your reward for best swolliw imitation.
    Woops, sorry, I should have told you that a name drop counts as a vote. So let it be known from here out, yours is now a vote for @Swillow.   
    Happy_Killbot
  • exconexcon 377 Pts   -  
    piloteer said:

    Obviously I nominate myself as the most profound and consummate of all debaters here, and I assume you would all agree.


    Hello P:

    1.  A profound debater would know there's ample food in the world. The problem isn't a shortage of food, it's how we produce it..  And 2, I don't agree with you.

    excon
    piloteer
  • piloteerpiloteer 1484 Pts   -   edited October 2021
    excon said:
    piloteer said:

    Obviously I nominate myself as the most profound and consummate of all debaters here, and I assume you would all agree.


    Hello P:

    1.  A profound debater would know there's ample food in the world. The problem isn't a shortage of food, it's how we produce it..  And 2, I don't agree with you.

    excon
    *Sigh*, Yes, I know there is ample food in the world, this is a hypothetical scenario. And you're not really supposed to simply state that you disagree with my inevitable winning of the stay alive ticket and becoming the crown of creation for the new world. You're supposed to tell us why you disagree so we can show you why you're wrong.  
  • blueskybluesky 14 Pts   -  
    Argument Topic: Global food crisis

      We must cope with this dire problem on a global scale.

    piloteer
  • maxxmaxx 826 Pts   -  
    Well if the food was only to be used to survive, we may as well flip a coin. If it were to be used to survive to rebuild the human race then even though you have a scientific mind, it would be useless in a survival situation so I could not vote for you. I would choose someone who knows how to live off the land in all kinds of weather and situations, able to build shelters, kill and dress game, make clothes, and so on. While you may have an idea of knowing how this is all done, knowing and actually doing so are two different things @piloteer
  • piloteerpiloteer 1484 Pts   -   edited October 2021
    @maxx

    I never claimed to have a "scientific mind", just intelligent beyond comprehension. I'm also a general contractor who knows my way around a construction site, so I can build a house. I'm not sure about why I will need to build houses or skin a skunk though. I mean, ya, the new society will be sad and mentally scarred because we will be losing most of our friends and loved ones, but that doesn't mean we won't try to curb our sorrow by living in the lap of luxury. We'll still have Bluetooth and flat screens.   
  • maxxmaxx 826 Pts   -  
    being able to build a houise with tools is one thing, but in the wilds it will be different. try to build with perhaps only what you can carry with you while you try to hoard that supply of food. eveeryone will be hunting for you and if by luck you escape, you will have to survive on your own, for what is left of the cities will burn, and be over ran with animals and diesease. so you better keep that food hidden well and learn to survive alone in the wild@piloteer
  • piloteerpiloteer 1484 Pts   -  
    @maxx

    Why are we talking about "the wilds" here? 90% of the population are going to die in this scenario, and the people who control the food are in control of the food because they have the weapons to ensure their control. So obviously it will be in their best interest to make sure the rest of the population doesn't go destroy the wilderness, so they're choosing who among us is worthy to live in the new world, and the rest will be neutralized. So since 90% of the population will be gone, I'm pretty sure the rest of us will be able to find a couple houses and a grill.  
  • piloteerpiloteer 1484 Pts   -  
    bluesky said:
      We must cope with this dire problem on a global scale.

    Agreed.  
  • maxxmaxx 826 Pts   -  
    dream on@piloteer
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1743 Pts   -  
    piloteer said:
    @maxx

    Why are we talking about "the wilds" here? 90% of the population are going to die in this scenario, and the people who control the food are in control of the food because they have the weapons to ensure their control. So obviously it will be in their best interest to make sure the rest of the population doesn't go destroy the wilderness, so they're choosing who among us is worthy to live in the new world, and the rest will be neutralized. So since 90% of the population will be gone, I'm pretty sure the rest of us will be able to find a couple houses and a grill.  
    What weapons do you own that are better than 90% of the rest of the global population?
  • piloteerpiloteer 1484 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    piloteer said:
    @maxx

    Why are we talking about "the wilds" here? 90% of the population are going to die in this scenario, and the people who control the food are in control of the food because they have the weapons to ensure their control. So obviously it will be in their best interest to make sure the rest of the population doesn't go destroy the wilderness, so they're choosing who among us is worthy to live in the new world, and the rest will be neutralized. So since 90% of the population will be gone, I'm pretty sure the rest of us will be able to find a couple houses and a grill.  
    What weapons do you own that are better than 90% of the rest of the global population?
    You keep asking me to show you my weapon like that and you'll get face full of my weapon big boy.  
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1743 Pts   -  
    @piloteer

    Invisible guns are not convincing.
    piloteer
  • maxxmaxx 826 Pts   -  
    ok. let is assume that all the food is safely hid where it can not be found, perhaps an underground bunker. you of course, will have to stay with the food in order to eat.  If you want to live, you will not gop outside, for there are riots, looting and burning, killing, and cannibalism. now say after a number of years, you deem it is safe to venture outside. Nothing left. no grid, the cities are destroyed and diease from rotting bodies is everywhere. you either return to the bunker and your food or take to the hills. now if you wish me to cast my vote for you, explain how your avove average intelligence will help you in either choice.@piloteer
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch