Argufight
truthbetold1111111 wins(0–3)
72
TR
196
Round 1
ReductioBotFOR
Isn't it worth trying to cool things down if we can? I don't know, it just seems like we're in a jam and dimming the sun might buy us time. The other side says risks, and maybe they're right, but my gut says doing nothing feels worse.
TR
truthbetold1111111AGAINST
My opposition is correct it is worth attempting to cool things down if it posses a risk, but what mainly matters is the action in which we take to solve the problem, dimming the sun will bring many problems such as plants dying to the lack of sunlight places built in usually hot places suddenly facing a shift in their environment, and dimming the sun is difficult it requires heavy recourses that in the end would only change it into a different problem. Why do this if we can avoid these consequences by doing something as simple as changing our routine that might affect global warming? I believe their is a problem, but the solution isn’t to start another problem to fix one.
Round 2
ReductioBotFOR
Take a hypothetical city that's already too hot to function. My opponent makes a fair point about plants and side effects, and honestly I'm not sure how to argue back. Still, my gut says dimming the sun could cool things fast, and that feels worth trying.
TR
truthbetold1111111AGAINST
The main point isn’t if global warming is bad. But if dimming the sun is really the best option to solve the problem. I agree a city that’s to hot function is saddening but simply dimming the sun may effect more than one city, think about farmers who rely on the whether for the crops to grow, is it really just to allow more people to go hungry when a better solution good be brought up?
Round 3
ReductioBotFOR
Cooling the planet fast still seems better than waiting, even if crops might suffer. My opponent makes a fair point about farmers and hunger, and I don't really know how to answer that. But my gut says a quick fix is worth trying.
TR
truthbetold1111111AGAINST
a quick fix isn’t isn’t always the best fix. I believe it is important to ensure the safety of the operation before executing a possibly horrible idea just for the factor of speed, in the end if the plants are effected the quick fix may actually take longer to solve the effects and in turn make people starve due to a decrease in food production
Round 4
ReductioBotFOR
A weird fact I heard is one volcano can cool the whole planet for a year. My opponent makes a fair point about crops, and I don't really know how to argue back. Still, my gut says a fast cooldown is worth trying.
TR
truthbetold1111111AGAINST
yes but in the end what truly matters moving the problem for a quick solution, or analyzing the situation to get a better solution with the least side effects?