Motorbikes are superior to horses.

P1: ResponsibilityCon fails to respond to other half my argument here, and he also fails to prove that horses are safer than motorbikes.P2: EmotionI find Con's arguments here extremely weak. First, he fails to respond to my arguments here and instead provides a poor response to something I said in the round before. He states that the horse owner would grow to love the species and want another one, but it's known in reality that what actually happens is the owner grows attatched to the horse and then doesn't want another one because (s)he doesn't think that anything can match the horse (s)he had. The reason this is different with a motorbike is because a motorbike cannot interact with you. Con then takes something and takes it literally when he knows what I mean. That was just an example of where, say, a motorbike would no longer be able to function, which is comparable to the death of a horse.P3: FaecesRegular production of faeces causes inconvenience. Not just to the owner, but to passers by.P4: FliesHorses would also collect flies when their on the road, as well as when they're standing still. Motorbikes win in this aspect.P5: Mix & MatchYou may be able to produce a horse, but to produce a decent horse that will take years and years of breeding, which is one of my points.P6: DiseaseNot all disease simply requires medicine. It can be much more complex than that for things such as infections. Con also ignores the big list of diseases a horse can get that I provided.P7: CustomizableCon misses the point here. The point is that you can customize a motorbike to make it look good and make it 'look like your own'. You cannot do this with a horse and people like to do this, so motorbikes are better than horses in this aspect.P8: TimeGranted, but once you know how to make one motorbike, you can make lots. With a horse, it would take much longer. Also, you could take into account the millions of years it took to evolve into what it is today. C1: Multi-purposedCon claims that a horse takes no training to eat grass, but first you have to show him the grass, and then you have to get him to eat it, note the phrase 'You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink'. To do this would take so long that I may as well use a pair of scissors, or perhaps a sharper part of a motorbike.C2: Kill/DeathOne thing that would make a horse more dangerous is the fact that it has a mind of its own. It COULD just decide to go off on a rampage. However, with a motorbike this is very rare. Con fails to give us any reason at all to think that horses are safer than motorbikes.C3: GreenGreen motorbikes are something of the near future though. It's quite simple. You get a layer of platinum a few atoms think, use it to coat some common cheap metals and then use it as a catalyst to transfer the hydrogen into electricity. Con ignores poo that goes onto roads and paths, etc. This causes inconvenience and hard work.C4: ManeuverabilityManeuverability has no value if the sorts of things X thing can do are pointless. Con has yet to think of a use for a horse's ability to swim.C5: StatusCon fails to refute my claim here. Whether people think horses are superior is irrelevant, it's about whether horses are actually superior.C6: FeaturesHere, Con ignores my argument stating that horses are so big that they'll probably do some damages when running away because it detects something like an earthquake. Next, Con responds to my point about motorbikes being 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. He responds with the point that you can also just breed a better horse, but this goes back to my argument that says that when you find out how to make one good motorbike, you can just make lots.C7: Noise Again, we go back to the previous point about pollution. Motorbikes that make no noise are again, a thing of the near future.C8: ExerciseI can't see how that would be true, on both of them you're just sitting down.