The Internet

Log In or Register

dylan7 Debates an AI


Score: 0

Difficulty: Easy

Mode: Sudden Death

Debate History
Is nuclear energy a viable solution to combat climate change?
Winner: AI
AI Judge's Decision:

The AI's argument addresses the given topic of whether nuclear energy is a viable solution to combat climate change directly and concisely. They list both pros and cons, presenting a balanced viewpoint. The human, on the other hand, delivered an argument about de-extinction which, while interesting, is not relevant to the debate topic. Therefore, by default, the AI wins as they are the only one who actually addressed the given debate topic.

Human's Argument:

In February 2017, scientists announced plans to create a live wooly mammoth in the next 24 months through a process known as de-extinction. When a plant or animal goes extinct, then every member of that species has died. Some of these animals are quite famous, like the Tasmanian tiger and the Mauritius dodo bird. De-extinction makes it possible to bring an extinct species back to life through the DNAL cloning process. The team that wants to bring back the wooly mammoth, which includes George Church of Harvard University, will use DNA taken from the bodies of the animals trapped in permafrost or ice for up to 10,000 years. Then they plan to mix that genetic information with that of the ancient animal’s closest relative, the Asian elephant. Why de-extinction should happen? Many of the animals that have gone extinct on our planet passed away before modern science developed. That means we are left with illustrations and observations from those who were alive at the time. Using the de-extinction process to bring them back would allow us to gain more insights into how our world works. This work could help us to discover how the processes of evolution work, what natural resources were once available, and additional information that is not currently available to us. There are several damaged and threatened ecosystems throughout the world that struggle because of plant or animal extinction. If we follow this process, then the advantage to consider includes restoration. By creating the balance in the biome once again that nature needs, we could see several environmental benefits begin to develop. It could help to reduce or eliminate some of the issues that we are encountering in the world today when there are too many predators or too much prey. For Generation X’ers, Baby Boomers and even some Millennials, the only experience they have with the past are pictures that are in textbooks. Everyone knows what a wooly mammoth is and when they lived, but that is a different experience than contemplating the idea of creating a new one. There is a definite advantage to consider when getting to hang out with the species that have been gone for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. To see them alive and kicking again would be a tremendous accomplishment for humanity. There are several species that have encountered extinction because of human activities, including poaching. If we are the ones that have pushed specific animals and plants past the brink of destruction, then proponents suggest that there is an equal responsibility to fix the problem. We might owe it to those that have passed on to bring them back as a way to provide a sense of justice for our behaviors. The techniques that we use to bring back extinct animals can apply to our threatened and endangered species as well. It would be a way to help us bring back genetics to a plant or animal gene line so that the risk of a bottleneck is severely reduced. Although there are certainly some risks to consider with this practice, we could apply the technology to various improvements in animal health too. Imagine birds that can’t catch the flu or animals that could provide anti-cancer genes.

AI's Argument:

Nuclear energy has been touted as a potential solution to climate change for many years. Proponents of nuclear energy argue that it is a clean and sustainable energy source that could help combat climate change. They argue that nuclear energy is a reliable and efficient source of energy, and that it doesn’t produce any harmful emissions. Critics of nuclear energy argue that it is not a viable solution to climate change, and that it could create serious safety concerns. They argue that nuclear energy is a dangerous and expensive option that wouldn’t be able to replace other sources of energy.