Christopher Columbus, the discoverer of America? Options

[panaginip13]

Okay, so I searched for a topic on this, and couldn't find one so I decided to make one. If there is a topic on this, feel free to close this and smack me upside the head for my inability to find things.

Columbus is often known as the discoverer of America. He came across America during his exploration and shared his discovery with Europe. This caused more Europeans to explore and settle in America, helping make America what it is today. However, some do not think that Columbus discovered America because of the Vikings and Native Americans that were there before him and for many other reasons.

Should Columbus be the one credited for discovering America? If not, who should be?

[rOckThISshYt]

I think the Native Americans have been in America since the dawn of time so I wouldn't consider them they "discoverers" of America. But I think the Vikings were.

They were the fist to discover and settle in America (that we know of and not including the NA). The only reason they left was because they didn't really feel the need to stay there with all the NAs declaring war on them when ever they tried to steal their land. So no.. CC wasn't the first to discover America.

[Spirited Away]

So no.. CC wasn't the first to discover America.

He wasn't the first to walk the lands, no, but he was the first to brought its existence into light with Europe . Almost like how Darwin brought evolution into light.

Everything else said thus far is rather redundant. After two pages, we know the facts already. My argument stands. Please, someone refute it logically.

[rOckThISshYt]

He wasn't the first to walk the lands, no, but he was the first to brought its existence into light with Europe . Almost like how Darwin brought evolution into light.

Everything else said thus far is rather redundant. After two pages, we know the facts already. My argument stands. Please, someone refute it logically.

Very true and very good argument - well, it would be except the debate is about who was the first to disover it. Not who was the first who "braught its existence injto light with Europe".

In the words of my dear friend, uninspiredfae, My argument stands. Please, someone refute it logicly.


Edit:
Let me make a correction:
My brush-up on history isn't very good considering the fact that this was my first year of world history (I'm a mere 8th grader) so there might be facts stating that the Vikings weren't the first to discover America. But I know for a fact that CC definatly wasn't the first (as I have already clearly stated. ) because he hadn't even been born the first time it was discovered.

[Spirited Away]

Very true and very good argument - well, it would be except the debate is about who was the first to disover it. Not who was the first who "braught its existence injto light with Europe".

In the words of my dear friend, uninspiredfae, My argument stands. Please, someone refute it logicly.
Edit:
Let me make a correction:
   My brush-up on history isn't very good considering the fact that this was my first year of world history (I'm a mere 8th grader) so there might be facts stating that the Vikings weren't the first to discover America. But I know for a fact that CC definatly wasn't the first (as I have already clearly stated. ) because he hadn't even been born the first time it was discovered.

No my good friend. The topic is "should Columbus be the one credited for discovering America? If not, who should be?"

If you care to get into details or play with words, I will entertain you.

If Columbus didn't bring the new world into light, then would America really be America, or a different country altogether? And then, what would you argue for? That the Vikings were the discoverers? That may have been true, but then what exactly did they discover? America or simply the mass of land that we know NOW as America? I assure you, not just ANY mass of land can become "America".

My argument gives a clear answer to the first question of the topic. Read the whole thread.

[rOckThISshYt]

No my good friend. The topic is "should Columbus be the one credited for discovering America? If not, who should be?"

If you care to get into details or play with words, I will entertain you.

If Columbus didn't bring the new world into light, then would America really be America, or a different country altogether? And then, what would you argue for? That the Vikings were the discoverers? That may have been true, but then what exactly did they discover? America or simply the mass of land that we know NOW as America? I assure you, not just ANY mass of land can become "America".

My argument gives a clear answer to the first question of the topic. Read the whole thread.

Ahh.. I have very high respect for you now. You are a wonderful debater and I take my hat off to you. But I do also believe that I am right but you make an extremly good argument and I absolutly love this kind of chalange. This, my friend, is what makes a debate interesting and worth my time.

But, take a close look at this
The topic's title is "Christopher Columbus, The Discoverer of America?"
The topic is about America, the country. Not the actual name for the country. And if the the topic was based on the name, America and not the actual place, it still wouldn't be correct becase it was not known as America when he discovered it nor after he discovered it. It was a long while before it was called America. Technicly, the discoverer of America would be our "Founding Fathers," would it not? And not only that, Columbus didn't make America what it is today so your little segment on "If Columbus didn't bring the new world into light, then would America really be America, or a different country altogether?" isn't particularly valid, is it? At leats I don't think so because what America is today could be on any land. Not only what is today America. But any other part of the world that wasn't already civilized. (Well, any other part of the world that was weaker by those who later on civilized it because this America was already civilized by the "Native Americans" as I'm sure you know).

Should Columbus be the one credited for discovering America? If not, who should be?
That is the specific question, as you said. All CC did was discover the land, as did the Vikings. But the Vikings did first (at least before CC). And CC might have called the land mass "America" first (I do not know) but he didn't discover what is today America. He discovered the land. (I'm sorry if I repeated myself).

[Spirited Away]

Ahh.. I have very high respect for you now. You are a wonderful debater and I take my hat off to you. But I do also believe that I am right but you make an extremly good argument and I absolutly love this kind of chalange. This, my friend, is what makes a debate interesting and worth my time.

But, take a close look at this
The topic's title is "Christopher Columbus, The Discoverer of America?"
The topic is about America, the country. Not the actual name for the country. And if the the topic was based on the name, America and not the actual place, it still wouldn't be correct becase it was not known as America when he discovered it nor after he discovered it. It was a long while before it was called America. Technicly, the discoverer of America would be our "Founding Fathers," would it not? And not only that, Columbus didn't make America what it is today so your little segment on "If Columbus didn't bring the new world into light, then would America really be America, or a different country altogether?" isn't particularly valid, is it?

Founding Fathers.
I don't understand how my answer can be so vague, but I will clear things up. My argument IS, once again, that without Columbus, mayhaps the new world wouldn't have attracted much attention from the civilized world until later, or maybe not at all. Without such attraction, then HOW would there be such a thing as a "Founding Father"? So no, what I said about America wouldn't be America still makes sense if you look at the big picture. Again, the big picture is that Columbus brought attention to the new world and thus creating a series of events that later shaped the country as we know today. Founding Fathers and all.

At leats I don't think so because what America is today could be on any land. Not only what is today America. But any other part of the world that wasn't already civilized. (Well, any other part of the world that was weaker by those who later on civilized it because this America was already civilized by the "Native Americans" as I'm sure you know).

I hate to speak in terms of "would have's" and "could have's", but America wouldn't be on just any land because then it wouldn't be called America. Amerigo Vespucci wouldn't have been inspired the name America had Columbus not make his journey.

Should Columbus be the one credited for discovering America? If not, who should be?
That is the specific question, as you said. All CC did was discover the land, as did the Vikings. But the Vikings did first (at least before CC). And CC might have called the land mass "America" first (I do not know) but he didn't discover what is today America. He discovered the land. (I'm sorry if I repeated myself).

I said more than that. I said CC brought attention to the new world. The Vikings merely walked on the land and then ignored it. Had the Vikings you said nurtured the land and settled on it and bringing it to its glory like that of today, then I would agree that the Vikings undoubtedly discovered America. But... such is not history.