BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
It is probable that God exists

Con said that my proposition does not entail that nothing existed before the Big Bang. I'm not assuming that nothing existed before the big bang. I'm arguing that God existed before the big bang as he is the creator/causer of it. Agency Con argues that the cause of the universe does not have to be an agent, Or personal. This is mistaken. This cause must be personal, An impersonal cause cannot give rise to a temporal effect. As William Lane Craig rightly states, "For the effect of the universe to begin in time the cause must be a personal agent who freely chooses to create an effect in time. " [1] By personal I mean something with rationality, Self-consciousness etc, the usual qualities associated with being a person. Occam razor Occam's razor Logic fails by the very fact that if a more “complex” argument does a better job at explaining something and accords better to reason, Then it should be judged the better argument. So this is really just a bad excuse for not dealing with the actual argument and evidence at hand. ----------------- in my second round, I gave valid reasons as to why the cause of the universe is God. Con has mostly argued that there are other possibilities for the cause of the universe, However Con doesn't give any valid reasons for these other hypothetical possibilities being the cause of the universe. The resolution remains affirmed. It is probable that God exists. [1] William Lane Craig and J. P. Moreland, The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, Page 145.
It is probable that God exists

Thank you for accepting the challenge. I look forward to a fruitful debate. My case for the existence of God is simple. Whatever begins to exist has a cause. The universe began to exist. Therefore, The universe has a cause. Whatever begins to exist has a cause is a self-evident metaphysical principle: A being cannot come from non-being; something cannot come into existence uncaused from nothing. It is thus absurd to say that the universe should pop into being uncaused out of nothing. [1] There is no disputing the fact that the universe had a beginning. Scientifically, We know from cosmology that the universe had a beginning some 14 billion years ago with a cosmic event commonly known as the "Big Bang". Whatever begins to exist has a cause. Thus, Since the universe began to exist, It has a cause. However, Why should we think that this cause is God? 1. This cause must be unimaginable powerful as it bought the whole universe into existence. 2. This cause must transcend matter, Time and space because it created/caused matter, Time and space into existence. 3. This cause must itself be uncaused, Because if the cause of the universe had a cause and that cause had a cause ad infinitum, Then there wouldn’t be a universe to talk about in the first place. Thus, We have to posit an uncaused cause due to the absurdity of an infinite regress, In other words an indefinite chain of causes. Given the Kalam argument, We can rightly conclude that the cause of the universe is God and thus does exists. The resolution is affirmed. [1] William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith, Page 274.
It is probable that God exists

As Pro, I will affirm the resolution by arguing that it is probable that God exists, Meaning that it is more likely than not that God exist. I would like to note that I will not be arguing for a particular God, Like the Christian, Jewish, Or Islamic God. Rather, I will be arguing for the existence of a maximally great being with great properties. This is what I mean by God. It also means that God is the creator/causer of the universe/existence/reality. Con will argue that it is more probable that God does not exist. The BOP will be shared. Round 1: Acceptance onlyRound 2: Arguments onlyRound 3: Rebuttals to arguments givenRound 4: Defending the arguments givenAt last, I would like to recommend you to read my interesting debate with Masterful. Please read the whole debate and vote accordingly if you choose to do so. Thanks.
Resolved: The United States of America needs a Missle Defense System.

First of all, the link didn't work. Also, I continually remind you that assertions and hypothetical situations are no substitute for proof. Pro has continually failed to bring any evidence supporting his assertions into the round. In Policy debate, the debaters must prove everything instrumental to their case with evidence. This is called the burden of proof. Since Pro depends on proving a need to uphold his resolution, he has the burden of proof to provide evidence to support his arguments. Pro has continually failed to do this. I've shown how many of Pro's arguments and evidence are not relavent to the debate, and that both Ground-based and Space-based missile defense systems are unnecessary. But the biggest issue for voters is that the Pro has failed to prove a need, and thus fails to uphold his own resolution. In Policy debate, this alone merits a Con ballot, besides the fact that I've shown with evidence that the two systems mentioned in this debate are unnecessary. So with that, I would like to thank lannan13 for a fun debate and close by urging you to vote Con. Thank you.
Resolved: The United States of America needs a Missle Defense System.

We are currently putting sanctions on Iran say they don't want anymore sanctions so they fire an EMP at us. or the fact that North Korea is launching a missle over Japan. Japan and South Korea have both said they would shoot it down if it flies over their territory. If this isn't a declaration of war I don't know what is.A hypothetical situation is not evidence. The Pro needs evidence to prove there is a danger. Also, the fact that Japan and South Korea would shoot down a missile coming from North Korea would mitigate any percieved danger from North Korea, although, again, the Pro has brought no evidence that there is a danger.I said we needed a missle defense system I never specified which one.Correct. I've proved that both GBMDS are unnecessary, and that SBMDS are unnecessary. Is there a third option for Pro? Growth would double to the point were NASA would acctualy have a use.I'm not sure what you're saying here. It's not derived from evidence, and it doesn't refute my argument. Could you clarify this in your final round? As you can see, Pro has failed to satisfactorily address my arguments. In fact, he didn't even bring up my argument that SBMDS are unnecessary in the 4th round. He has consistently failed to prove a need for any type of missile defense system, and I've already shown that the two systems he mentions are unnecessary. Currently, Pro does not uphold his resolution, and loses the debate.
Resolved: The United States of America needs a Missle Defense System.

First off, the Pro didn't satisfactorily adress my arguments on round 2. I attacked his Inherency 2 argument by pointing out that there is no reason to believe that the US is in any real danger of an attack by any of these countries. Instead of proving his point with evidence, he merely asserted that there was danger, and mentioned a terrorist attack. In Policy debate, we can't trust the assertions of the debaters, we need evidence. My opponent failed to bring evidence supporting his assertion, so we can't trust it.We are currently putting sanctions on Iran say they don't want anymore sanctions so they fire an EMP at us. or the fact that North Korea is launching a missle over Japan. Japan and South Korea have both said they would shoot it down if it flies over their territory. If this isn't a declaration of war I don't know what is.Ground-based missile defense systems a high-priced failure.My opponent briefly addressed this, showing evidence that seemed to say GBMDS could only cover certain, limited areas. This supports my own argument, saying that both GBMDS are high-priced (to cover a significant area) and are not the best solution. I think it is clear from both my and my opponent's evidence that we do not need a ground-based missile defense system. So the remaining option for Pro is a Space-based missile defense system.I said we needed a missle defense system I never specified which one.Now I'd like to address the new evidence brought into the round by Pro. He brought up "Advantages" that said the Aerospace industry would grow. First of all, this growth is already happening and is not a result of the affirmative plan. This is not an advantage. The evidence is very clear that this growth is already happening now, or is projected to happen under the status quo. These are essentially useless Inherency points, not AdvantagesGrowth would double to the point were NASA would acctualy have a use.
Resolved: The United States of America needs a Missle Defense System.

This will be a Missle Defense System debate to wether the U.S. needs it or not. 1st rounds is for acceptance and defining terms. Rules: No FF No cussing No slandering Now I shall define words. United States of America - North American republic containing 50 states - 48 conterminous states in North America plus Alaska in northwest North America and the Hawaiian Islands in the Pacific Ocean; achieved independence in 1776 http://www.thefreedictionary.com... needs- Of necessity; necessarily http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
Movie Versus Debate

Hello everyone I have decided to try one of these let the opponent chose debates again. these are the rules 1 this debate has to be between which of two chosen films (chosen by !y opponent is better) 2 these movies have to be of equal or similar quality and has to be debatable 3 seeing as my opponent gets to pick the films I will pick which film I will be debating is better 4 for round 1 it will be accepting the debate and for my opponent the two films will be told. In round 2 I will say which film I will debate is better and have my starter argument while my opponent does the same in rounds 3 will be listing all are reasons as to why our film is better and in round 4 we will counter each others points. 5. As my last attempt at this was a massive flop due to me not having seen either of the films chosen by my opponent i will limit the movies that have been chosen to from the release date of 1970 to now, they must have been nominated for either best picture, or best original or adapted screenplay at the oscars or the golden globe 6. And finally the point or argument "this is an opinion and therefore shouldn't be considered an argument" is banned, as all film criticism is opinion based. Now that we have got that out of the way lets get started
Rap/Poetry Battle 2

I must apologize its true And this debate I concede to you I haven't been on but I'm not to blame But I forfeited a round which brings me shame And now I type this out in haste Because I only have 5 minutes to waste My parents nearly blocked this site And I'd never get to see it's light So I've been missing for about a week And I have obviously past my peak So I must end after telling my tale My parents are coming and I just went pale So goodbye to you and everyone here I will remember you and hold you all dear.
Rap/Poetry Battle 2

My opponent has forfeited the second round, but I will not hold back. I will now proceed with my final verse: I'm about to take this to a level beyond your capability I blow up your facility, disrupt your tranquility Don't pity me, is anybody feelin me? You're no match for my advanced ability Your futility is worthless when I step to the plate Against me you will meet your tragic fate, there's no debate While you spend your time spreading dire falacies I travel at hyperspeed and colonize entire galaxies No one in this Universe wants to battle me! I don't care if people laugh at me I will soon be elevated to the rank of Supreme Majesty I will not allow any such slanderous travesty My electrical, energetic concentrical robotic sentinel Will lacerate your ventricle, now it's time to get technical I transmutate as I cross through the photon belt Into an immortal being able to make titanium melt I pour xenobiotic substances onto your skeletal Incredible, inevitable, your rhymes aren't even legible My mathematical precision leaves incisions On your mediocre rhythmatic revisions I envisioned a much more challenging opposition My composition counters your position like nuclear fission Not to mention the tension of divine intervention It's my contention that led to your suspension You will be left behind during my ascension to the seventh dimension of perfection Final analysis, this is my profession Mass destruction of Con, he has met his defeat My final mission is now COMPLETE! .
Rap/Poetry Battle 2

I will now unleash my next verse: I'm about to destroy this battle like a thermonuclear weapon Your defense is futile when I unleash this toxic venom My unlimited power extends so far, the Universe bursts My raps so deadly, I leave your body layin in a hearse That's right folks, you heard it here first I stay in the lab crafting devastating rhymes One of my lines overpowers even the most divine I possess the ability to concentrate the energy of the Sun Absorb it into a sacred crystal, release it and watch you run You don't know what kind of catastrophe you got yourself into To say my name in vein is blasphemy, plain and simple My intent is so malicious and sinister I'll recite every religious text in reverse to your minister And tell him he's a good listener Call on the parishioner, have you had enough yet mister? This verse is enough to end all life on earth indefinitely All that will be left is the apparition of astrobiological entities My vocal intensity reaches 180 decibels, now that's loud Your physical construct is anatomized into a molecular cloud You really think you can survive another round? .
Rap/Poetry Battle 2

Here goes my first verse: You sytle is nothing compared to mine When I make my rhymes there just so divine Man I take rap to the next level It's in MY raps that people love to revel Because I'm the best and everyone knows it When I defeat you that you'll have to admit As for the odds they dont matter to me I overcome always of this you will see So I ask that you for the next verse bring his best Because against someone like me he's gonna be stressed And he knows that everybodies completely dissing it Because compared to me your nowhere legitimate And in your crazy theories we're all under control But the fact is in your heart is a whole So to fill it up you have these crazy theories There like something outta a crazy sci-fi series So as class is ending indeed I must go I'm on a level above you and you're just my hoe
Rap/Poetry Battle 2

I challenge Con to a 3 round rap battle. One verse per person, per round. Must be original and written by yourself. I will now proceed to present my first verse: My rap style reign supreme Far beyond anything you've ever seen I'm able to rap at a velocity Anti-gravity propulsion machines That can travel at light-speed will never reach Ring the alarm, my underground bunker has been breached Electromagnetic scalars activated, your mind is impaired Phaser mechanism initiated, attack me, you wouldn't dare That's what messin with GeoLaureate will getcha Your body will be floatin down the Rio, no regrets, you betcha I harness the power of the Atlantean gods No mortal man can overcome the impossible odds I'll send you through the dark abysmal portals of a black hole Genetically mutate your physical structure, can't you keep up with my flow? In this world you are an insignificant little kiddy to me I AM the Epitomy of Infinity! .
Create the most pathetic super hero you can.

I will prove why Child man is a decent superhero then Law Man. Child Man has the strength of 250 pound man "Has the strength of a 250 pound man" As we can see Child Man is obviously strong and is able to defend himself. While Law Man only defense is a restrain order in which he can lose. This means Child Man is a strong intimidating figure which is strong and can take a punch otherwise Law Man went to the hospital for 3 weeks when he got slightly cutted by a knife. Child Man has a weapon "Carries a flip knife to use against groups of children who gang up on him,while on a "hit" THis means CHild Man is able to defend himself when getting ganged up. While Law Man only has a restraing order and no weapons. Child Man gets ganged up and is able to fight which makes him bada**. Child Man is a vigilante My opponent says "Regarded as a "Freak" and vigilante. That would mean Child Man has a repuation. That would mean Child Man is a vigilante meaning he takes justice in his own hands in which is not pathetic but cool unlike Law Man where he has to follow court procedures and is just boring. Protects the weak: "Child Man is mainly called to hit children who bully other children". That means he protects Children by beating up the bully. That is not pathetic but actually heroic. Unlike Law Man who is just doing a job of a regular Lawyer. IN conclusion: Child Man is a vigilante with the strength of a 250 pound man and is beating up bullys who pick on children if he pays him. Law Man is a just a below average lawyer who is not protecting the weak and innocent. If you were stuck in a corner would you rather have Child Man who has the strength of a 250 pound man or a Law Man who just has a restrain order in which criminals can ignore.
Create the most pathetic super hero you can.

As we can see my opponent has created a pathetic super hero. However I believe Law man is actually a decent hero in some cases.. Here I'm going to explain why Child man is more pathetic than Law man. Law man has a respectable name: Anyone would associate the name "Law man" with being an authority figure and someone with power. Whereas the name "Child man" is clearly a very weak name which is not associated with power or authority. Law man sues criminals: "He sneaks around to record the criminals doing illegal acts.He slowly gathers evidence to sue the criminals and force them to go to court." This means Law man is not only a lawyer, but a detective and is very competent at gathering evidence. I would say that in some circumstances, Law man is actually a pretty decent hero. Law man has a job, and a good job at that: Lawyers normally earn about $60,000 per year. However Law man can sue anyone, even trees, meaning he's a very prestigious Lawyer. I would expect Law man to earn around $120,000 per year. While Child man doesn't even have a job. Law man can defend himself: Law man has the power to show criminals restraining orders and they will stay away from him. Whereas Child man gets beaten up by dads frequently. To conclude this: -A "super lawyer" is not pathetic as he actually puts criminals away. -Child man is just a stupid goof that beats up children for happy meals, the only reason he can be called a hero is because he beats up the occasional bully. Who would you want on your side, a super lawyer or a homless ugly man child?
Create the most pathetic super hero you can.

Law Man Lawman was once a humble student of law.After getting hit by a radioactive briefcase filled with paper about law.Given the knowledge of law he almost flunk his exam and graduated under his class and became a lawyer.He saw a man getting beat up by a thug.Law Man rushed and took a picture of the man.Three days later the man that got beat up died and Law Man sued the thug.After a couple of weeks went by the thug went to prison for 25 years with a chance of parole.Law Man understood his powers and saved people and suing the bad guys.He sneaks around to record the criminals doing illegal acts.He slowly gathers evidence to sue the criminals and force them to go to court.He cant stand ignorant people.Ignorant people caused him to lose his case multiple times.When around them he loses almost all of his intelligence and brain cells and start slurring words when around one close enough.Any person can request Law Man to defend him in Court. Law Man super powers: 1:he can sue anyone and everything he even sued a tree for tripping him. 2:He can use his videotape 3:Carries a restrain orders that can be used to make criminals stay away 4:His case can last for at least 1 week. Law Mans weakness: 1:He will always lose a case if the case drags on for 2 months. 2:He is fragile like hes not superman or anything.He got a slight cut mark from a knife and went to the hospital for 3 weeks 3:If he loses his restrain order he is useless 4:Will lose half his intelligence around ignorant people.
Create the most pathetic super hero you can.

Child man, AKA THE MAN CHILD. Child man was once just an average man working his average office job, until one fateful day he was bitten by a radioactive child. Ever since the incident he hasn't been the same. His manly 250 pound muscular body remained the same, but his face slowly turned into a face of an ugly five year old child. Child man can no longer talk and is now feared by his local community. He is called a freak by the people he once cared for. Now in solidarity, child man roams the streets. He is basically a homeless man child. He gets into the occasional fight, but only with other kids. Child man is a "mercenary" super hero, he accepts jobs where he will take out and brutally cripple other children. Normally children will holler him on the street and request "A hit" they will pay him by buying him a happy meal from mac Donald's. He is mainly called to hit children who bully other children. He will stand outside of a school until school ends, where he waits for his target. Once he has found his target he will beat them up on the playground in front of everyone. Child man normally ends up getting beat up by all the dads. Child man's super powers are as follows: 1: He can spew slightly acidic vomit out of his small mouth (acidity is no more acidic than orange juice) It's basically just a vomit on command power. 2: If he hasn't been burped in a while (patted on the back by a 3rd party) then he is capable of releasing a huge burp that will make attackers flinch. 3: Carries a flip knife to use against groups of children who gang up on him, while on a "hit". 4: has the strength of a 250 pound man. Child man's weaknesses are as follow: 1: Has to sleep every 2 hours. 2: Has the intelligence of a five year old. 3: Has a small fragile baby like face, can't take a punch. 4: Regarded as a "freak" and a vigilante. 5: Can't talk, can only gargle like a baby. What have I created..........?
Create the most pathetic super hero you can.

The idea of this debate is to create the most pathetic super hero you can. You must be creative and try not to be boring. Round 1:acceptance Round 2: Create a super hero. Give a list of their powers and argue as to why your super hero is the most pathetic. Go into as much detail about your character, make them interesting if you can. Round 3: Make a counter argument to opponents hero. You will point out faults in opponents super hero, for example, if I were to say "my super hero is so pathetic he has no powers!" Then that can be countered by saying, "without powers you've failed to create a super hero. GG" -Examples of a pathetic super hero.- THE ASHTRAY- Kills evildoers with second-hand smoke. Takes a while... MISTER meh... The one superhero who can never be truly defeated, because he actually doesn't give a rat's a** who wins. Man-Man Averagely average man who was bitten by a radioactive man and gained the power of a man. He's a taxi driver and holds deep conversations with this customers. -NOTE TO VOTERS: only "most convincing argument counts for this debate." That will be the most pathetic super hero. Should get points for being entertaining/ witty.- Be creative and try to add depth to your character.