Resolved: The average intelligence of a Fox News Anchor is = or < the average intelligence of a rock

To outline the round, I will uphold my own argument while simultaneously deconstructing my opponent’s argument. To begin, let’s chat about the intelligence of rocks. I. Rocks A. Background 1. The pre-established definition of a rock is as follows: Rock: Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter; stone. [1] 2. By contrast, let’s consider the definition and requirements for a living thing. Living thing: Any organism or a living form that possesses or shows the characteristics of life or being alive. [2] Living things are those that display the following characteristics. [2] a. An organized structure, being made up of a cell or cells. b. Requires energy to survive or sustain existence. c. Ability to reproduce. d. Ability to grow. e. Ability to metabolize. f. Ability to respond to stimuli. g. Ability to adapt to the environment. h. Ability to respire. 3. Intelligence: The capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc. [3] B. Premise: The ability to be intelligent is necessarily connected to being a living thing. 1. Because the capacity for mental activity must firstly be derived from a source, that is, what causes the ability, it follows logically that the ability to grow, respond to stimuli, adapt to the environment, etc. naturally creates the ability for intelligence, while a material formed from petrified matter, would not. 2. Because the qualifications for a rock do not contain the qualifications for intelligence, it is not possible that a rock might acquire this quality. C. Pro’s Proof 1. “The footage you are about to see comes from the movie "At World's End" when rocks coordinate and communicate to move a massive ship (across desert and into the ocean. ” Pro attempts to prove that “when rocks [as shown in the provided video] coordinate and communicate to move a massive ship,” they are demonstrating their intelligent powers. Pro gives no actual evidence of what is propelling this massive ship is a league of coordinating and communicating rocks. The only visible surface is sand. The intelligence of sand, however, is irrelevant to this debate. Pro, therefore, has yet to prove that rocks contain any intelligent powers. Furthermore, when discussing the movement of the ship with the video owner, he said the movement of the ship was due to intelligent life, "The crabs moved the ship, loads of them. " Therefore, Pro is actually carving away at his own case with this counter-evidence. But enough about rocks. Let’s move on to the videos that Pro was so anxious we address. II. Pro’s Constructive A. Pro’s initial constructive consisted of a video representation of each news or analysis program on the network in an attempt to the idiocy of fox anchormen. Pro does this by rating the programs based upon their “quality of information. ” B. Problems with video analysis: 1. Only minute segments of each show was cited, enabling the viewer to see only the most what were perhaps merely extreme scenarios as relating to the intelligence (or lack thereof) of the anchor. 2. Because the “grade” given the video clip was bestowed by Pro himself, it is fairly obvious that the potential for the grade to be biased or slanted towards Pro’s purposes exists. 3. Lastly, there was no evidence cited to prove that the information given by the anchors in the videos is misleading, fallacious, or non factual. It is necessary for Pro to provide these sources before making this claim. C. Pro’s main argument consists of the complaint that the information the Fox News network provides is “pure bullshi*t” as well as “horrendously biased and misleading. ” 1. “Sources showing that people who watch Fox News are the most misinformed. .. ” The fact that people are in fact informed regardless of whether they are given false information proves that the average intelligence of a fox news anchor is greater than the intelligence of a rock. 2. Regardless of what we are projecting onto others, be it unintelligent, misinformed, and the like, their simple ability to project anything is what proves that they have an intelligence above that of a petrified matter, and qualifies their above-rock- level intelligence. It is for all the preceding reasons I ask for a Con vote in this debate. Thank you for reading and debating :) ======References====== [1] . http://www.thefreedictionary.com... [2] . http://www.biology-online.org... [3] . http://dictionary.reference.com...