Con Team Speaking Script
Debate Introduction + Opening Statement
1. Introduction of the Debate
(This part sets the stage for everyone in the room — say it slowly and clearly, like you're welcoming the audience
into the topic.)
Good day, everyone. Today, we gather to discuss one of the most talked-about issues of our time
— climate change. Specifically, our motion for today's debate is this: "Human activity is the
primary cause of climate change, and urgent regulation is necessary to stop it."
This is a debate held in the Oxford style. That means you will hear opening statements from both
sides, followed by rebuttals, an open floor where members of the audience may join in, and
finally, closing statements before a vote is cast.
On one side, we have the Pro, or Affirmative team, who will argue that human activity is the
driving force behind climate change and that immediate, strict action must be taken. On the other
side, we — the Con, or Negative team — will argue that natural factors also play a significant
role, that the science still carries uncertainty, and that the better path forward is adaptation and
innovation rather than restrictive regulation.
We invite you to listen closely, question boldly, and keep an open mind. Let the debate begin.
2. Self / Team Introduction
(A short, confident intro before you dive into your arguments.)
Good day. My name is [Your Name], and I am speaking on behalf of the Con, or Negative side,
in today's debate.
Our team does not stand here to deny that the climate is changing — that much is clear. What we
stand here to challenge is how much of that change is truly caused by human activity, and
whether the response being proposed is the right one.
3. Opening Statement
(Speak calmly and with conviction. Pause briefly between each point to let it land.)
First, climate change has always been part of Earth's history. Long before factories and cars
existed, our planet went through natural warming and cooling cycles — caused by solar activity,
volcanic eruptions, and shifts in Earth's orbit. So while human activity plays a role, we believe
that role may be overstated.
Second, climate models are not perfect. Scientists themselves admit these models carry
uncertainty, and they get revised over time. Basing drastic, expensive policies on predictions that
keep changing is risky — especially for developing countries that could be hurt economically
before cleaner alternatives are even affordable.
Third, and most importantly, we believe the better path forward is adaptation and innovation —
not strict regulations that limit growth and personal freedom. Instead of forcing sudden,
disruptive change, we should invest in technology, resilience, and solutions that let people and
economies adjust naturally.
In short: yes to progress, yes to cleaner solutions — but no to panic-driven policies built on
incomplete certainty. Thank you.
4. Closing Statement
(Speak slower here. This is your last impression — make it confident and memorable.)
To close, our position has never been that climate change isn't real, or that humans have zero
impact. Our position is this: nature has always shaped our climate, science still carries
uncertainty, and the best way forward is through innovation and adaptation — not fear-driven
restrictions that could hurt the very people we're trying to protect.
We ask you to vote Con — not because we deny the problem, but because we believe in solving
it wisely, fairly, and without sacrificing progress or freedom along the way. Thank you.