Post Nuclear War Survival

Due to a typo on my part johngriswald will be adding Ray Wilson to his list of survivors. ====== Rebuttals ====== Michelle Patterson: Michelle is a bad choice for a few reasons, first of all she is only of fair health, of the levels of health listed, (Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor), fair is hardly the best that a 19 year old could be. Her intelligence, while not below average, is not high as other potential members that actually have known skills that are useful for survival. She is also 19 years old with no college education which suggests that she takes little initiative which is not good in a survival situation. She also is too old to be easily taught while too young and skill-less to be of much overall use to the group for anything other than reproductive purposes. Wanda Brice: Wanda's health could be better; as stated above fair is the second lowest listed health level, couple that with the fact that she is fairly old for reproduction there is a high chance that without a doctor giving birth would kill her and/or her child. Also simply because a parent is of high intelligence does not mean that the child will be and the observation that her child will mirror her aptitudes is merely speculative. She may be a psychiatrist, but that is a title that is not respected by many members of society. My opponent mentions that she has a track record of helping people with problems, I do not see proof of this as mental health case workers work with the mentally handicapped. Ray Wilson: I cannot think of a reason in favor of Ray Wilson that would outweigh his many cons. First of all he is a 69 year old man and it is highly unlikely that he could produce children, if at all healthy, as after the age of 40 men typically have fertility problems and their offspring have a significantly higher chance of being born with birth defects. As a business major in college and only known to work at a bank his skill-set is less than desirable in a survival situation. Most Able: Due to my opponent choosing himself I cannot really argue against his choice. I have no idea what his areas of expertise are or what he is good at. I will instead offer alternatives that would be better. For instance Fred Frederick knows a great deal about electronics and would be able to repair an abundance of items left after the devastation, if you couple that with his military experience and health he could potentially be of much greater use than you. Another alternative would be Bill Waters as he is at a prime age to reproduce, has a degree from a tech school, and likely knows how to build shelter based upon his 10 years of experience in the construction and welding fields. I also submit my own choice for this category as argument against his choice. Least Able: My opponent chose John Davis for this category for reasons unknown to me. The reasons that he gave were also completely absurd. Having a degree in chemistry and working as a high school chemistry teacher hardly qualify a person for the fabrication of nuclear weapons. Even if we were to assume that he had the ability to build a nuclear weapon where would he find the means to make one. Also the situation forces the survivors to assume that they are the only people left on the planet, unless some of the other people in this shelter are his enemies, his enemies are all dead and there are easier ways to kill a small group than with a nuke. As a closing statement I take issue with some of my opponent's justifications for his #1-4 choices. Nowhere does it say that these people are related and if my opponent is operating on the assumption that they are this severely limits the reproductive gene pool. I look forward to my opponent's responses and belatedly thank him for accepting the open debate challenge.