Plants Are Superior Organisms To Humans

Good lord, man! i just had deja vu there while reading your side. I swear that's the indoctrination speech for children of the corn. Do try to notice that you are taking several, if not most of my side of the debate way out of context. For the first part, we both need sunlight to survive. That was the idea. If there were no sunlight, both people and plants would die. If we both benefit or suffer drawbacks from the same thing, then we are even. This part is actually pretty stupid. There are such days where there are no wind. There can be an atmosphere, but no wind if the temperature is right. In fact, do you know what causes wind? Wind is caused by different temperature zones. Hot air rises, cold air sinks. If there is hot air in one spot, and cold air in another, the air moves to balance the temperature out. When it moves, wind is created. If the temperature is even everywhere, then there is no wind. For the houses not being naturally made... Natural means it was produced by the environment. Steel and mud are not natural because they are not organic. Plants are natural because they are living. If a building is made out of steel, it is not a natural house. If a building is made out of organic matter, then it is a natural building. That was the idea. (Facepalm) Submarines. Fallout shelters. Bunkers. International Space Station. People can survive underwater or underground, given they have the proper housing. People can destroy an entire ecosystem if we willed it. Plants can"t destroy an ecosystem even though they constantly try. Having space is actually very important for plants to strive in any environment. If people are far apart, they can move closer. If plants are far apart, oh well. They're screwed. Not to mention gardens. Gardeners have to pull weeds out in order for their plants, like flowers, to live, and not get choked by weeds. Going by your logic, people are superior to plants because we can exist in outer space, while plants can"t. For marine life, we would continue to farm them like we usually do. Some people would starve, but others would still have a constant source of food they farmed themselves. For your spaz about CO2, I am still trying to comprehend your diarrhea of the mouth. It's just filler text because you have a weak argument, or because you didn't know what to put there. Either way, very poor sportsmanship. Pigs are omnivores. Do you know what that mean? Probably not, so I will explain it. Omnivores eat everything. People are Omnivores because we eat both plants and meat. Pigs can exist on meat. Really gotta use your brain sometimes. For headaches, aspirin isn't the only solution. Headaches can be cause by a lack of fresh air or from dehydration. So, to help a headache, simply drink water or go outside. Yes. Yes they were. Ecosystems were collapsing over 1.5 billion years ago. We have the great oxygenation event, for example. Caused by primitive bacteria, It gave way to oxygen breathing life. When the primitive bacterium created the great oxygenation catastrophe, it killed roughly little more then 90% of all established life on earth. The bacteria used photosynthesis to create oxygen. So plants aren"t the only ones using photosynthesis. https://en.wikipedia.org... When people lose limbs or organs, we can replace them. Have you heard of 3D printing? Scientist are developing a way to custom print working organs for people. If we lose an arm or leg, we can replace it with a mechanical prosthetic. People do actually regenerate pretty much everything EVERY DAY. People regenerate new skin every few days. People regenerate organs cells when they get worn out. People regenerate cells for literally everything in their body on a daily bases. So to say that people can"t regenerate anything is an extremely stupid statement. Not to mention that plants can"t regrow entire lost appendages. If you cut a leaf off, it won"t regrow. Plants don't regenerate period. If a part of it gets cut off, it focuses its efforts on the remaining parts. http://www.cnn.com... Just because something does not sound special to you does not mean that it isn't special. People are the only sentient organisms on planet earth. That"s out of what seems like an infinite amount of other living organisms. Going by your logic again, People are extremely complex. More complex then plants. Which means that people are superior to plants. People can make a massive dent in plant life. We have too, actually, for use in warfare. Vietnam, The V.C are hiding in the jungle and we can"t flush them out. An airstrike delivers a payload of Agent Orange. The entire forest within the blast radiance is flattened to a muddy plain. That"s one example of how destroyed thousands of plants in less then a day. Anther example is deforestation. Everyday, thousands of trees are cut down. That's just from a few small logging teams. If there were thousands more people cutting wood, we would effetely destroy ecosystem after ecosystem. https://en.wikipedia.org... http://environment.nationalgeographic.com... About the A.I... If people are supposedly inferior to plants, then why can we build something superior to plants in every sense of the word? It is not irrelevant because people build A.I's, not plants. A.I's are designed to think and act like people. The only difference between humans and A.I's is that people are living flesh, and A.I's are digital. So it's completely fallacious to think that it's irrelevant to the discussion. Now that I have that hammered out, I have to say that this is not about whether people are better then plants, but to negate your side, because people and plants are equal. If we keep on countering each others rebuttals, the end result will just be a stalemate. So lets move on to something else. And lets continue having a civil debate. Good luck and good sportsmanship.