Motorbikes are superior to horses.

P1: ResponsibilityCon says: A motorcycle requires greater responsibility than a horse. There is no age limit on a horse. You do not need a riders license to ride a horse. You can ride a horse drunk. With a horse you are responsible for the horses well-being. On a motorbike you have a responsibility to every other driver and yourself. Which means you have a responsibility to a few billion people. Also allowing a child to ride a motorcycle is irresponsible of the parent.You have all those responsibilities on a horse too. If you're riding it on the road, you need to look out for other people. Also, riding a horse drunk and the fact that there is no age limit on a horse just prove that horses are more dangerous.P2: EmotionCon says: You are stating that the fact that your motorbike does not invoke emotions in the owner makes it superior. This is only the case if you say that not loving or feeling attached to your motorcycle is far better than feeling emotions such as joy, understanding, sympathy, love etc. towards your horse. This is like saying its better to feel nothing at all than to experience the grief of losing a loved one.I can guarantee that you feel as much positive emotion as you do negative emotion, this is because you have standards. This makes it equal either way. Also, you conceded my point about the owner not wanting to get another horse, whilst the motorbike owner won't have this problem. Therefore, motorbikes are superior in this aspect.P3: FaecesCon drops this.P4: FliesCon drops this.P5: Mix & MatchCon drops this.P6: DiseaseCon says: In this case can rust not be considered as a disease? It is harmful to the condition of the bike and spreads as each layer of metal becomes exposed to oxygen.Okay, you've listed one thing on a motorbike that's like a disease. Now match this [1]. Exactly, motorbikes are superior to horses in this aspect.P7: CustomizableCon says: If I customize my bike by painting words that are offensive like "All Jews must die". Then I can guarantee that people will care. A horse is so superior that it does not require any additional modifications or accessories to increase its elite level. But if you painted the words 'All Jews must die' on a horse, the horse would care, people would care and animal rights people would care a lot. As for your last point, motorbikes don't need it either, it's just another thing that makes motorbikes better than horses. It's an add-on, you know, and it's an advantage and people like advantages. So, motorbikes are superior in this aspect.P8: TimeCon drops this.C1: Multi-purposedCon says: A horse is a very useful creature. It can act as a: Lawnmower, compost producer, tractor, war-machine, and personal transport. It can carry lots of objects on its back.You have to put lots of training in if you want it to be a successful lawnmower, it's the same case with tractor, and for personal transport, as for war-machine, one bullet and that's the end of the horse. I really don't see why you'd want to buy a horse just to be a compost producer.C2: Kill/Death RatioCon says: According to a study done by the CDC, between 2001 and 2008 there were over 34000 motorcyclists killed and over 1 million people were treated for motorbike related injuries in the US alone. Now this means that if you are riding a motorcycle you have more chance of dying than killing someone. This is not beneficial to the rider. Now horses were used in war because they gave the rider greater killing ability. This means that if you own a horse you have a greater Kill/Death ratio. This is beneficial to the rider because you have the potential to come out better than your opponent in a fight. Even if you leave your horse at home the benefit comes with you. How many horse owners die annually compared to motorcycle owners. This all boils down to in a fight between a biker and a rider, the rider will win because of superior horse ownership.Con only asserts that motorbikes are more dangerous than horses. Also, horses being killing machines isn't good as murder is wrong, murder makes people sad and sadness is inconvenient for the vast majority of people.C3: GreenCon says: Horses are greener for the environment. Low on fuel and lower than motorcycles on emissions. Go Green, Go Horse.That won't necessarily be true forever, though. Hydrogen-powered motorbikes are a possibility, and they're completely green. That's the good thing about machines, you can modify them. While motorbikes are green, horses will still be pooing everywhere.C4: ManeuverabilityCon says: A horse can be parked anywhere. It can also swim, climb over rocks, jump over objects, and eat its way through dense vegetations. It is an all-terrain, amphibious vehicle.The thing is though, there's no point in it being able to swim, climb over rocks, jump over rocks or eat its way through dense vegetations as it doesn't do anything for us. Without humans, horses are just useless beasts. Without humans, motorbikes wouldn't exist. I think it's a tie for motorbikes and horses in this aspect.C5: StatusCon says: Horses are associated with nobility, wealth and high standing. Making them superior in status.Just because they're associated with it, that doesn't make it so.C6: Features Con says: Horses have built in earthquake sensors, voice command, object detection, collision avoidance and reproductive organs allowing it to produce another of its kind.Lots of animals have those sorts of things. The difference being that it's better to have a smaller animal because small animals won't cause a lot of destruction in their path once they think there's an earthquake, for example. Motorbikes are better in the aspect of reproduction because if the motorbike is a pile of junk, you can learn from that and make a better motorbike. Sources[1] http://www.petmd.com...Conclusion- I give eight whole arguments supporting my case, Con drops half of these and gives poor responses to the others..- Con only gives six arguments supporting his case, with a lot of them showing faults.