CreateDebate


Debate Info

2
3
Yes No
Debate Score:5
Arguments:9
Total Votes:5
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (2)
 
 No (3)

Debate Creator

ZingoFet(47) pic



Do we need a new plague to weed down the population?

Yes

Side Score: 2
VS.

No

Side Score: 3
1 point

We often ignore how the natural world works, or we think humans should be exempted. That is unrealistic.

The wildebeest and zebra on the Serengeti depend on the lions, cheetahs, and hyenas to trim their herds so they do not overgraze their habitat.

There are no large predators left that prey on humans; all we have left are micro-predators.

The greatest and most devastating environmental disaster of the 20th century was the extinction of small pox in the wild. As a result of this, in part, human population has exploded, mowed down rain forests, blighted landscapes to build ever-expanding cities, increasing energy needs that have increased the folly of nuclear power plants (many of which go the way of Chernobyl and Fukashima.)

Fortunately, microbes reproduce and mutate faster than medical science can keep up. The spread of new strains are aided by enormous and dense populations, worldwide rapid travel.

Sooner or later, there will be a plague that will kill millions, and possibly billions. This may even be aided by the well-meaning idiots who engineer genes for fun and profit.

Side: Yes
Amarel(4790) Disputed
1 point

This is a side of you I don’t typically see. Let’s look at your position on environmental disasters. What exactly do you think makes an environmental event disastrous?

Side: No
marcusmoon(578) Clarified
1 point

What exactly do you think makes an environmental event disastrous?

Something that damages the "health" of the non-human parts of the natural world in a way that significantly and demonstrably jeopardizes the ability of humans to live healthily, productively, and peacefully in the world.

The explosion of human population in the 20th century is at the core of the scope of the environmental damage our species is doing. Deforestation, non-point source water and air pollution, chemical spills, etc. are results of going from 2 billion to 7 billion people in a century.

We get much less advantage out of our technological and economic advances than we could because there are just too many people. Population pressures exacerbate international conflicts, reduce our abilities (on both the societal and personal levels) to have clean air and water, and make it impossible to enjoy how beautiful the world is, especially if we want to experience pristine (unaffected by technology, etc.) places.

Side: Yes
1 point

Do we need a new plague to weed down the population?

Hello Z:

Nahh… We need a new weed called the plague..

excon

Side: No
DeathWolf666(379) Clarified
1 point

Nahh… We need a new weed called the plague..

Good idea sexcon.

Side: Yes
Xenithbionic(4) Disputed
1 point

We need a weed called brownie plant or bong grass.

Side: Yes
1 point

The Zionist world rulers have already got this situation under control. Bayer the producer of Chlorine and Mustard gas and Monsanto the creators of Agent Orange have merged and control about 2/3 of the worlds food supply. Obama has given them immunity legally. They will be sure to keep the worlds population at a normal level.

Side: No