Human Superiority. Man is the most intelligent species on the planet etc...

Thank you for posing good arguments Pro. This has been a very thought provoking experience, more so than expected.I wrote this on word and don't know how I will remove the 1,917 extra characters i have.I responded to most topics in a linear fashion. I hope it's clear. Pro's comments in Italics "This is entirely false. From 1930 - 2010, the average life expectancy has increased over 30%" The increase in life expectancy is based on averages. The lower class has been exposed to worse living conditions historically resulting in longer lives for the wealthy typically. Living conditions have improved since the 1930’s and that’s how the life expectancy gives way to a presumed increase. If you compare today’s third world countries to the period prior to the aforementioned 1930’s, human life expectancy has not nominally increased. Actually - if comparison is made including the multiple new diseases that have developed since the 1930’s, expectancy has reduced. For every sickness cured a new stronger strain of virus develops. In no way will I attempt to discredit man’s ability to observe and have it be noted that with proper medical care our risks can be dissuaded, but even then our life expectancy has not increased any further, it has only been re-lengthened to the natural human maximum. I urge Pro to think outside of the box, humans are not a number to be averaged out. For example; Ancient Egypt’s average life expectancy is said to have been “54 years for men and 58 for women”. However, “one hundred-and-ten years seem to be the ideal Egyptian life-span. There are 27 places in documents where this figure crops up, and it had its widest acceptance during the 19th and 20th Dynasties. King Pepi II of the 6th Dynasty certainly came close, since we know of events that took place in the 94th year of his reign. Ptahhotep, who was vizier to King Djedkare Isesi of the 5th Dynasty, and two others individuals, are reputed to have lived to that age as well.” Ten oldest people -http://listverse.com... Article Regarding Age in Ancient Egypt - http://www.touregypt.net... “My opponent has correctly stated that animals have lived in some of these areas, however, they cannot point to a single animal that has lived in multiple locations” This statement is a little too easy to refute. Ever saw the Lion King? Lol… We have obstructed animal migration with our intelligence (err) I mean highly advanced shelters. Migration is the natural way of the earth. I was under the assumption that Pro knew there are many animals that live in multiple locations. To affirm my burden of proof I will show – 3 – after this it should be clear that what Pro stated is quite contrary to reality. Nearly every animal has the ability to live anywhere it wants, and naturally. Tiger – The Bengal Tiger; Hot climate and the Siberian Tiger; Cold climate Polar Bears – “Evolutionary young species that split off from the brown bear 150,000 years ago.” http://earthsky.org... Turtles – Are Cold blooded, and through Hibernation can survive winter. Turtles can be found anywhere and their navigation during migration cannot be explained by humans (Sounds intelligent to me). http://www.animalbehavioronline.com... - http://suite101.com... My opponent speaks some undeniable truth. I am definitely downplaying the moon, admittedly. I will provide a link to an informative article that I will quote and paraphrase from. http://www.slate.com... “Rocket engines emit reactive gases that cause ozone molecules to break apart.” This is the first issue with space travel that I have and only one of many quarrels that I will attempt to express here. Can we survive on any other planet? Not the one’s in our Solar System, if any at all. How intelligent is it to destroy the atmosphere that protects you, just to do something no other life form on earth has done? That’s rhetorical. It isn’t Intelligent at all and if you disagree, I hope the voters will not be as bullheaded… The reactive gases are not the end of it… “They also discharge microscopic particles of soot and aluminum oxide, which may increase the rate at which those gases wreak havoc”. If I provide the other facts mentioned in this article I will run out of room. Please, Read the Article if you are unaware of the effects of space travel. If it doesn’t completely change your perspective on space travel, it will at least open your mind to questioning it more actively. It should also add strength to what I am going to say next. My opponent’s opinion is in strong contrast to my own. Space Travel for Pro; is an amazing feat displaying intelligence at its highest level. To me; it is destructive and a disgusting example of the human species stupidity and inability to reason. This small amount of Information I provided should speak volumes. I am willing to have an entire debate based on this topic, the materials against this being positive are large and I urge pro to abandon this point all together. My opponent opines; “Most animals work off of physical ability that they've obtained from evolution, not from intelligence”. I agree with this for the most part. Most of their life does not involve a human intelligence. Animal do not complicate simple things. The animal doesn’t feel trapped, like somehow he knows that there are things that are not meant to be. By the same logic, if all animal ingenuity is passed off on physicality - then the human thumb being a product of evolution should be disregarded right with the turtles “instinctual” migration. This may seem like I’m just disputing everything, because I am… But all things productive should be considered Intelligences and destructive actions as stupidity. If we go extinct then we can’t have this debate and we have less chance of survival during extreme conditions than animal and plant life so we should stop engaging in stupidity and calling it intelligence! Simple My opponent asserts; “most of our technology has caused a net benefit”. Rather than get upset that Pro said my claim was dishonest without a formal refutation, I will ask that pro provides proof of this alleged “net benefit”. I resolve that most of our technology has no purpose at all other than entertainment and leisure and I am willing to double whatever proof he provides that affirms the prior. “No evidence is presented that any animal "understands the planet itself,". I stated this in round 1 – “For example animals never sacrifice (on altars) as an attempt to change the weather (or at least to my knowledge they haven’t). Instead, they sense it and use their reasoning to avoid it.” Furthermore, Salmon and Turtles find their way over 100,000 km. Without the alleged luxury of technology. Man cannot explain this. Animals predict weather changes and avoid them. In comparison to animals you will find that their ability is better applied than our so-called intelligence, during and preceding natural disaster. The only significant numbers of animals that die in weather events are domesticated. Cows, Dog’s, Cat’s etc… Caged and trapped animals die in storms this is another travesty of Human intelligence. Animal instinct proves they understand the planet more than human observation can feasibly explain. “Animals do not typically engage in "humane" killings [3].” Duh animals aren’t human… lol and apparently neither do U.S. private contractors in Iraq. http://www.guardian.co.uk... Moving along...Pro has pointed out that I had not selected individual animals that were smarter than man.My Resolution stands at equality, not superiority of animal over man or vice versa.Although the Most Intelligent way to live is; dont destroy the planet, life continues... simple logic I am out of space and will have to address the other points next round.