If a tree falls in a forest, and there is no one to hear it, it does not make a sound

Thank you for your response. I'll start with my refutation first.RebuttalsDefinitionsI'd like to go on with all the definitions stated above including my opponent's. As for as the source provided by Pro, it includes many definitions for the word "Sound" which I accept. However, I deny accepting the sole definition of "Sound" provided by Pro. A definition is one which is widely accepted and also it is a statement of the exact meaning of the word.....[1] [2]I accepted the debate and provided the widely accepted definitions of "Sound" and prevented the debate structure being "bias" which my opponent knowingly or unknowingly constructed this debate.TreesIt appears as though Pro is being over smart and add a high level of confusion among the readers. However coming to the point, I accept the first three statements of Pro with no objection but not the fourth. My opponent states,In any circumstance, in understanding what a "tree" is, you have not actually understood what a tree is at all.Pro did not specify for "whom" he is addressing this statement, this may be true for a minimal percentage of people who is not normal. For example:A lunatic or people whose brain functioning is not normal. However, people with minimal knowledge and who is normal including children aged 2 may be below perfectly understands what a tree is. [3] Yes, I agree I have subjective experience of what a tree is. That being said, in reality, "trees" do not have any color (2), do not feel hard, do not taste woody, do not have any way they "look" like. These are all inherentlyinternal mental constructs which exist only in our minds.Thus, a tree, as it exists in reality, has absolutely no qualities of which we perceive with our senses. There is no "look" to a tree, no "smell" to a tree, no "feeling" or "size" of a tree. It just exists, out there in the dark world, utterly imperceptible to us. Now you may be wondering: "Ok, sure, but that's pointless. We're talking about a tree in reality, it's still out there." To which I answer: "How do you know?"As for the source of Pro,numbered 2 is broken. I think Pro is again adding confusion among the readers, As for as best of my knowledge only one world exists and that is real. Earth exists and it is real. On Earth, Trees grow and it is widely accepted. Thus in reality,Trees have color, feels hard, have taste, by experience of billions of living beings on this planet they look alike i.e.. They look like trees. Internal mental constructs may carry many meaning and purpose, Other than imagination the vision,senses etc are very much essential for human beings to exist and it is real. The human brain has its purpose and helps human beings exist in this world. Thus tree exists and even its properties. Many people including me with common knowledge know that "Tree" exists because we have seen and experience "Tree" and its qualities. You cannot just say this world is imperceptible and "Tree" is imperceptible just because you are living in a different world which common people including me do not know.Next, My opponent presents the other possibilities which I'm going to answer1. No I'm not dreaming as I'm presently typing in this debate and never heard of an evil genius stimulating the world around me and I wish to talk about reality not some unfounded, unheard, illogical assumptions.2. Pretty much same as above.3. I've answered already above that "Tree" is not imperceptible.Next,Pro states "Problems and conclusion" regarding his own definition of "Sound" which I already disagreed regarding his sole definition of "Sound". I'm using widely accepted definitions for refuting.P1: When a tree falls,it hits the groundP2: It creates vibrationC: From P1 and P2, there is soundAs simple as that, If no human is present in the forest at the time to hear the "tree fall" doesn't mean we cannot assume there are no animals nor birds nor insects nor any bacteria which do not have the impact of the tree fall. Monkey's may run away, Birds may fly away, Insects may die because of the tree fall. Even if there is no one around to hear it or measure the frequency of "Sound" of the tree fall. Sound still occur and definitely exist due to the vibrations caused at least for that minimum period of time of "impact".Moving on, Next my Pro states about definitions provided by me which I think Pro has some disputes regarding the word Vibration. Vibration can be defined as "the act of vibrating", "the condition of being vibrated", In Physics it is stated as, "A rapid linear motion of a particle or of an elastic solid about an equilibrium position".It just cannot be considered as mental phenomena because it exists in reality and as stated earlier for tree most human being experienced it. Therefore it is Syllogistic. It is important in this case because Vibration is produce when the event of tree fall occurs.Next Pro states his horned argument for which I'll state my ownP1:"Sound" is a part of senses and it does require proper functioning of human or animal brain and ears.P2:In forest apart from the tree fall there are many other types of sound produced. For example: Forest fire, chirping of birds, sounds produced by insects.C: Just because no human is present in the forest, We cannot just discard that all the above examples as not sound. Therefore "Sound" exists even if no human is present.Regarding Pros final argument against realismEarth is real and so is the World as people live in this world, may be few exceptional cases may have interaction problem but most don't as they communicate with their fellow human beings and with the help of technology to any part of the World. Minds may be immaterial things but not the human brain and brain is known to detect senses. "Sound" and "Vibration" is real as we feel its existence and in this case, In the event of tree fall in the forest, Sound is produced and did exist even if there is no human present during the event. [4]ContentionsIf a tree falls in a forest, and there is no one to hear it, it does make a sound.[5] [6]1. Impact on other living creaturesI've explained earlier in my rebuttals but once again, Just because no human is present it doesn't mean we cannot assume there are no animals nor birds nor insects nor any bacteria present in the event of tree fall in the forest which carries zero impact among these creatures. Thus there is "Sound".2. Vibrations are producedIn the event of tree fall in the forest, "Vibrations" are produced as we can know this as any falling item produces vibration and thus "Sound" exists.3. Many other types of "Sound" exists in forest.As stated earlier, it is common knowledge that in forest there are other types of "sound" such as chirping of birds, sounds produced by various animals, sounds of forest fire etc just because no human is present to experience that kinds of sound doesn't mean we cannot count that as "sound".Therefore sound exists.4."Sound" is realMy opponent seems to have lot of confusion between "Real" world and "Dream" world (non existing world), I'm arguing for the real world thus as "sound" is experienced and felt by most human beings we can in no doubt say,"Sound" is realConclusionSound is a physical phenomena and it is felt and experienced. Just because in a forest there are no human to experience various kinds of "sound" doesn't mean there is no "sound" at all. Thus, If a tree falls in a forest, and there is no one to hear it, it does make a sound.Sources[1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com... [2] https://www.google.co.in...[3] https://www.google.co.in...[4] http://earth.com...[5] http://youtu.be...[6] http://youtu.be...