I-Debate Challenge 2006 Grand Final Match (Highlights)

Highlights of the I-Debate Grand Final Match between St. Scholastica's Academy (SSA) High School and University of St. La Salle (USLS) Integrated School aired on SkyCable Sunshine Channel Bacolod on December 6, 2006.

I-Debate is a weekly cableTV debate show in Bacolod City, Philippines hosted and moderated by Atty. Ralph Sarmiento and is presented by Leo Vision and I-Productions.

However, for this match, Atty. Dennis Cortes was invited as guest moderator.

Topic: "Should the Environment Give Way to Economic Development?"

Affirmative: SSA
Negative: USLS

SSA Debaters:
1. Kia Gargantiel
2. Anne Marie Lacson

USLS Debaters:
1. Gabriel Paolo La'O
2. Yones Irene de Castro

Best Debating Team: SSA

Best Debater & Speaker: Anne Marie Lacson

I-Debate Production Team:
1. Gary Lake Liza - Director
2. Ollie Maridone Sarmiento - Producer & Floor Director
3. Ismael Algara - Creative Director
4. Nida Buenafe - Production Manager
5. Dolores Epacta - Marketing & Guest Coordinator
6. Ralph Sarmiento - Organizer & Tournament Coordinator

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• I-Debate
• debate
• championship
• argumentation
• bacolod
• tournament
• ralph
• sarmiento
• philippines

[Kythos]

For goodness sakes. Very Informal and improper. There should be around 3 minutes to hear from each side then the rebuttals. They are talking too fast that they do not realize that they commited some fallacies.

I shall transcribe their arguments and search for something weird.

[attyralph]

You are not watching the whole debate. These are just the highlights!

[hadukenzomo]

what kind of debate is this? this is not a formal debate!

[attyralph]

This is a different format called SPAR or SPontaneous ARgumentation. What are shown in this video clip are some highlights only & is mostly taken from the last part of the match which is a free-willing debate.

[denverUNO]

this is a weird debate... there's no order of speakers...

[attyralph]

This video clip features the highlights only & is mostly taken from the last part of the match which is a free-willing debate.

[quickflip65]

It is really a "no-brainer" as something has got to give. It is just the natural order of things. To give way is to sacrifice and without tapping into our planet's natural resources, global economy will soon be at a standstill opening the threshold to a catastrophically unprecedented wave of recessions. Even if one country has chosen "trade protectionism", they still have to constantly rely on their environment to survive. Survivability does not mean development. Whose idea was the topic anyway?

[quickflip65]

Furthermore, the topic "should the environment give way to economic development" was just vaguely worded to where the focus on the argument immediately vanished from what it had originally intended. I will go out on a limb on this one when I say that the debate's primary objective was to argue whether or not tapping on natural resources would be detrimental to the environment.The discussion seemed to have gone that direction.Two words: Preservation and Regulation. A "no-brainer" topic.

[quickflip65]

The problem here clearly was the topic; it was vague. The argument will be rendered useless until there is a law designating land and coastal areas to be left untouched or preserved (similar to the Antiquities Act of 1906 signed by Teddy Roosevelt). While both sides agreed that there are environmental issues that prompt the preservation of this planet, they were at the same time ineffective making their cases. They were talking both sides of their mouths. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[edpuncab]

parliamentary must be implemented.

[ralphroxasralphroxas]

Dream.....untiLL its DIM>>>>HAHAHA

[xxaznbloodflipxx]

FYI it takes a certain knowledge and guts to be a candidate in this and i'm proud of both teams... Yones is my cousin ya'll and i'm proud of her! GO CUZ !

[NewSun1000]

dito tayo magaling, sa debate......

[DarkRage51]

GO SSA-B!!

[TheMark1925]

fuck, just suck dicks moron.

[miksimyx]

this is an IMPROPER debate!! and i noticed there are some arguments which they can't understand clearly