Weaver/Science is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
- Find a debate you care about.
- Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
- Earn points and become a thought leader!
To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.
Be Yourself
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Lexiewoodwar
| Reward Points: | 3 |
| Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 95% |
| Arguments: | 2 |
| Debates: | 0 |
Joined:
I agree with callista because its true, it is harder to predict earthquakes than it volcanoes. We get more of a heads up with volcanoes and have at least a little bit of time to get out of that area.
I think that earthquakes are more dangerous that volcanoes are. When earthquakes happen they can cause many things to happen afterward resulting in destruction. They can cause by shaking tsunamis, and landslides. Earthquakes can also be the cause to some volcanic eruptions. They will shake the ground so much that it messes with the volcano causing it to erupted before anyone could be warned, meaning that more lives could be in danger. Earthquakes can also be very destructive on their own. They can happen in a very populated area with lots of people and big building. If one of those buildings are not up to standards on safety, it could fall and possibly kill many of lives. Both are very destructive but i think that earthquakes are much more dangerous.
About Me
|
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |
Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here
