Chopsticks vs Forks

No offense, but please post arguments on time next time. I don't want to sound mean, but being new has no excuse. I'll go through my opponent's points just like last time. I suggest my opponent do the same, is it was very confusing to read his speech. Ok, you contradict yourself. You claim that chopsticks are hard to use to shovel in food. Then you state later on that you are proficient with chopsticks. If you are proficient with chopsticks, then you must therefore be good enough that you can eat at a reasonable pace, or you wouldn't consider yourself proficient. Can you please elaborate as to your skill level with chopsticks, as in how you use them. Also, as a separate point, you can't blame people for the tools they use. That would be like blaming the treadmill for making people skinny since using a treadmill is efficient in getting you fit. Therefore, treadmills are worse than walking. Or something ridiculous like that. Here's a better example: It is like blaming the All in one Fitness Machine for making people skinny since it is good at getting people in shape. You cannot blame an inanimate object for a person's problems. That is silly. Also, you refute yourself in your first speech. I'll point that out now. Here's a quote: "well kids these days just don't apreciate that time they share and just shovel their food in as fast as they can." You said it yourself. KIDS DON'T APPRECIATE THE TIME THEY SHARE. And they use tools to increase their ability at not appreciating the time they share. Also, you offer no proof to this claim. So we can disregard your entire argument, so I win this point. I never said that only wooden chopsticks had to be used. I said that for the most part, most chopsticks are made out of wood, and that adversely affects the environment. You really haven't said anything about my point. ~~~ Comments on my opponents refutations of my points: 1. Thank you for conceding the point. Also, you offer no proof to your claim. We can therefore disregard it. But just in case you find evidence of this, here's my response: I would like to kindly ask my opponent not to insult my friends. Also, there are many ways to increase hand eye coordination, such as doing sports like baseball, tennis, so on. Using chopsticks isn't the only way. And I'm doubting that too. Plus, forks increase your hand eye coordination. Here's my proof: When you use a fork, you use your eyes to guide your hand to the food. You use your eyes to gather information as to what you should tell your hands to do. Doing this enough increases the ability for your eyes to communicate with your hands, therefore increasing your hand eye coordination. I have just proved that forks also increase hand eye coordination. Therefore, forks and chopsticks are equal in this aspect. 2. This is my point. Fine, I limited it to America, but my point can be extended to the rest of the world. Imagine yourself going to Japan or Korea. You consider yourself proficient with chopsticks, but while in Japan/ Korea, you meet with a whole bunch of executives. You meet over dinner, and all the other people, having used chopsticks all their lives, are completely proficient and are experts at using chopsticks. You on the other hand, use chopsticks with some confidence, but everyone else clearly sees that your technique is poor. You would just insult everyone by claiming you can use chopsticks, while in fact you cannot use them with the technique and skill of everyone else. Also, there is nothing wrong with asking for a fork. You don't have to give everyone a fork, just give it to those who ask for one. Asking for a fork shows that you respect everyone else at the table enough not to insult them with your attempts at using chopsticks. And my example does hold water because no where in my example did I say that chopsticks were the only utensil you had the ability to use. 3. Thanks for conceding the point. You just conceded that forks are easier to use than chopsticks, and therefore better. To your claim that you can use chopsticks, no offense, but I doubt that you can use them with the ease of someone who has learned how to use chopsticks since they were born. Please elaborate on your skill level with chopsticks. Rate yourself using this: 1. Not at all. 2. Sort of. 3. I hold the chopsticks in a fist. 4. I hold the first chopstick like I would hold a pencil, and the other stays still. 5. I can pick up marbles. 6. I do not drop things after I pick them up. 7. I am as good as someone who has been using them their whole life. Please state all that apply to you. 4. My fourth statement holds lots of water actually. You conceded the point yourself: "ust repeaing your previous statements while adding in 2 things that chopsticks can to spearing" SO you agree that forks can do more. And your point about indigestion; look above. You can't blame tools for human error. 5. So in this refutation, you try to limit the topic to arguing about Korean chopsticks, because they are made of stainless steel. You can't do that. You have to defend all chopsticks. Also, how often you use a wooden fork? Also, if you look at the link I provided in my first speech, you will realize that the majority of chopsticks are made out of wood. They do not have the same impact on the environment because of the demand. I agree, if you were to consider one pair of chopsticks to one fork, it is possible that the environmental impact is the same. However, more than one pair of chopsticks exist. You have to show why even though a vast majority of the chopsticks are made out of wood and are made by the billions, they harm the environment much less than forks, where the demand is much lower. ~~~ In conclusion, I have shown why again, all my opponents points are irrelevant or matter very little to the debate, and I have shown why all of my arguments have fallen through my opponents speech. Here they are again: 1. Ease of use. My opponent actually fails to refute this one, and instead concedes it. 2. Better for social gatherings. My opponent attacks me with a personal attack, and doesn't actually address the issue. 3. Ease of learning. He also concedes this point. 4. More Utility. My opponent again attacks with a personal attack, and fails to refute my point, and is shown to concede the point. 5. Less Impact. My opponent tries to limit the topic and fails to refute the point. So as of this round, I am winning. Thank you Note to opponent: Please use grammar and spelling. It took me 15 minutes to decipher your speech before I could argue against it. Don't want to sound mean, but its the truth.