Does The Loch Ness Monster Exist ?

[Saru 6,754]

The topic will be Does The Loch Ness Monster Exist?.

If you would like to take part in this debate, please post a reply to this thread to register you're interest. Once we have two participants, I will toss a coin to see which side of the arguement each of you will be arguing for.

Thanks to Althalus and Loonboy for suggesting this topic.

[aquatus1 7,088]

I would like to take part. I can argue either side, although I would prefer against the existence of the monster.

[Saru 6,754]

Anyone else going to give this one a shot ? We need 1 more person.

[Novo 0]

Anyone else going to give this one a shot ? We need 1 more person.

Sure..

[Byuu94 0]

Is this one full already, or what? Pick me!! (jumps up and down frantically)

[aquatus1 7,088]

Wow, haven't seen this one in so long, I forgot I had volunteered! Is it still going to happen?

[BurnSide 7]

how about two teams to debate this one? i'd like a good old debate on the moster of the loch.

[saucy 1]

It would be hard for two teams to debate this, but alright. You can PM each other to talk strategy. This will be a ten post debate, each partner taking turns, each posting five times. One has to post the introduction while the other posts the rebuttal. Aquatus1 and Burnside will be one partner and they will face Byuu94 and Student&Alive. Have fun and keep this debate in order the best you can or else it will end early. We'll wait for Saruman to flip the coin before starting!

Edited May 18, 2004 by saucy

[Saru 6,754]

The results of the coin toss are that Aquatus & Burnside will be arguing for the existence of the Loch Ness Monster, while Student&Alive & Byuu94 will be arguing against it's existence.

This is the first team debate we've tried, so it will be interesting to see how this goes. Good luck to both teams.

[BurnSide 7]

Okay, i'll start us off.

Aquatus and I shall prove the existence of the legendary Monster of Loch Ness. We intend to show that without a doubt there is a prehistoric monster living within those depths, and will use the masses of piled evidence to support our claim.

Since the sightings of a beast in the Loch go back as far as the mid 1800's i'd say it was madness to even question the existence of Nessie at all. We are quite interested to see what proof our fellow debators have to the contrary.

[BurnSide 7]

(How long do they have to respond before Aquatus and I are declared the winners, or at least can go on with our first body post? We've debated quite abit about this and feel it would be a shame to waste this debate.

Unless, of course, we win by default. )

[saucy 1]

there's a lot of debates that nobody is replying on. They signed on as a debater and they're informed, some more than once, about their debate. Still, they haven't responded. There are a lot debaters who really take this seriously and are finished with the debate and would like to move on. Some debaters will be kicked off the list due to their lack of responses, opening it up for others to join. The list is 20 debaters and I assume that'll be all that's allowed in the future. Because you have been responding and if we're forced to close this, you will move on, but you and your partner should start off the debate so you don't lose by default as well. You lose as a team during this debate, so if your partner doesn't respond within a week, you both will lose.

[BurnSide 7]

Fortunately i'm active in the other debate forum (Life After Death) in which there i'm also still waiting for a reply.

What do you mean that my partner needs to post and carry on the debate? We're both waiting for the others to post their intro so we can carry on with our body post, which will be posted by my partner.

However, if you think that we should go on with our body posts without them posting, we'll glady do so.

[Saru 6,754]

What we need here really is for both members of both teams to make an introductory post so that we know everyone is willing to continue and ready to start.

[BurnSide 7]

Okay, well i've made mine.

Aquatus and I shall prove the existence of the legendary Monster of Loch Ness. We intend to show that without a doubt there is a prehistoric monster living within those depths, and will use the masses of piled evidence to support our claim.

Since the sightings of a beast in the Loch go back as far as the mid 1800's i'd say it was madness to even question the existence of Nessie at all. We are quite interested to see what proof our fellow debators have to the contrary.

My partner will also make one.

[aquatus1 7,088]

We also intend to present imperical evidence gathered by various scientific expeditions which support the existence of a viable population of carnivorous creatures within the loch. We will also propose a theory of what this animal could be, why it could not be a known animal, and why we have not yet been able to procure a specimen.

Edited May 20, 2004 by aquatus1

[BurnSide 7]

Okay, that's it. We HAVE to have won by now. They've had a VERY long time to reply.

[Byuu94 0]

I'm here and ready to debate, after finally getting my computer back to relative sanity. I have reasearched the topic of the loch ness monster since I was about seven, and have aquired a great deal of knoweledge about it. I am aslo keenly interested in dinosaurs, which helps, because some people believe the monster is a plesiosaur. I hope to prove that nessie is just another folklore monster of scotland.As for Student&Alive, apparently he is not as alive as he would have us think.

[Saru 6,754]

Unfortunately i have to agree with Burnside that this debate has been quiet for far too long now, and Student&Alive seems to have disappeared anyway.

Burnside and Aquatus win by default, sorry about that Byuu.