BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The Scientific Method is the only way to gain Truth

Nature can not perform a test. If nature is doing anything and we record the result, it is an observation.[1] Observation is not a Test [2] To skip performing the test would not be the Scientific Method.[3] What you describe is counter to established definition and practices of the Scientific Method as taught by Universities and Science. ""As stated earlier, the scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of the scientist's bias on the outcome of an experiment. That is, when testing an hypothesis or a theory, the scientist may have a preference for one outcome or another, and it is important that this preference not bias the results or their interpretation. The most fundamental error is to mistake the hypothesis for an explanation of a phenomenon, without performing experimental tests. Sometimes "common sense" and "logic" tempt us into believing that no test is needed. There are numerous examples of this, dating from the Greek philosophers to the present day." [4] "Scientific knowledge can only advance when all scientists systematically use the same process to discover and disseminate new information." [5] To state that some of the steps in the Scientific Method are not used, would break the actual process. That process would not longer be the Scientific Method. [3] The explanations you provide are drawing conclusion from observation with out testing is known as Inductive Reasoning.[6] Inductive reasoning known as universal inference. Inference from instances (I observe people bleed when cut) to a universal generalization (all people bleed when cut). I hope the readers after reviewing the references will see what The Scientific Method is and is not. [1]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... [2]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... [3]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... [4]http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu... [5]http://www.unce.unr.edu... [6]http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com... [7]http://oregonstate.edu...
The Scientific Method is the only way to gain Truth

We do not need to verify that. We did not need to conduct a test, as the test was done naturally. We still had the question and the data recorded. We don't always have to set up a test, and not every step of the method is used. If a person receives a sharp, or very forceful attack, then they will bleed is the question. The test was not set up, but a test was done when a few people accidentally cut their thumb while preparing dinner. The fact that it happened was recorded, and a conclusion was met. You did not indeed avoid it. I would also like to point out that the scientific method is used in the situations presented in the last paragraph presented. However, it would be used before hand, and depending on what happens, it would be finished afterwards. Actually, the scientific method for the cliff or crocodile examples have been used, because of pass events. That's how a question is formulated. Something happens and sometimes it happens over and over again, so we evaluate the situation after the fact. The test, by nature, was already done. So, we ask the question, formulate a hypothesis, and because the test was done before the method started, a test is not completed, and data is at least partly recorded before hand, and a conclusion is made. And in order to relate this information, it is written down, and it is spread. It seems obvious now, but if we were never told not to approach a crocodile, we would approach it and learn the hard way. Also, with the cliff and crocodile examples, they are subjective. Some people have trained crocodiles, so they might not harm a person, and, well I don't need to say much more than Steve Irvin, or the Crocodile Hunter. Also, there is cliff jumping, and hang gliding from a cliff. They are subjective. If the conditions are right, then the negative things happen. They were good examples, but they were not well thought out. I would like the audience to not take credit away from my opponent's sources. Although he used Wikipedia, I generally consider it a reliable source, because it has had changes since our high school and college days. It is way more reliable.
The Scientific Method is the only way to gain Truth

I accept. I would first like to point out something about what my opponent said in the comments. Do not take this in to consideration when voting comes about because I am only trying to point out a comment which is not a part in this debate. The scientific method is used everyday by the average person, and it is so instinctive and his unnoticed by us all the time. Example is coming home. First thing you do is evaluate the subject. The door is locked. Then you come up with a test. Before performing the test, you make a hypothesis. If I put a key in to the keyhole of the door and turn the key, then the door will be unlocked. You then perform the test. You turn the key and unlock the door. You mentally record the data. Then you make a conclusion. My hypothesis was right, using the key did open the door. Take the next portion of this as my opening statement: Scientific method is used absolutely all the time. It is the only way to accurately determine what is true and what is not. You cannot come to an accurate conclusion without the use of the scientific method in some form. The use of the scientific method is the only reliable way to determine what is true. In my opponent's opening statement (not a rebuttal), the scientific method has to be used to come to the conclusion he is thinking of. He evaluated the subject, made a hypothesis, commenced observing, since a test can already be made up naturally without interference, recorded what was tested, and came to a conclusion. Even the voters of this debate are going to use the scientific method when voting, or at least a part of it. We have set up the problem, and we are the test subjects. The voters will make the hypothesis 'If one or the other says the right things with the right grammar and the right citations, then they will be awarded points respectfully.' And then we, the debaters, do the testing, and they observe and mentally have a record, as well as a digital one when they click on this debate, and they conclude that they are going to give the right points to the right person, or they will conclude that they decided to play favorites and vote for the one they agreed with. Also, usually after a conclusion is determined, it is written and peer reviewed by others, and is determined credible or not, represented here by the reasons for voting, and if it's not credible, it is usually taken care of, which is represented by flagging a voter for poor voting.
The Scientific Method is the only way to gain Truth

The Scientific Method is NOT the only way to gain truthful knowledge. My first example is Art. One can describe art as a process in which a subject is deconstructed and parts of the subject matter are given differing degrees of attention. Also in Art Sometimes a process in regards to one subject is then performed on another subject. This can lead a person to question a matter differently and ultimately come to a more reasonable or more truthful view of the subject. Because this is one alternative way of discovering truth. It suffices to say that those who advocate only using the Scientific Method are performing a self imposed restriction to investigating truth claims.
Democracy is better than communism

Democracy is a term given when a government is elected by the people which basically means that the representatives are the people in charge of making decisions and actions in regard to an entire nation that are elected (voted on) by the people of that society and the term communism is where everyone is classified as equal social status and that no one has private ownership. Communism and democracy are two completely different ideologies that have impacted our world both past and present. Let me ask you a question, when has communism ever worked properly? I'm guessing this answer is never. Back in history there are many people who have tried communism and have failed at the attempt. For example, the USSR in Russia, back in 1947 where the Bolsheviks tried to create a classless society but were unsuccessful. The male life expectancy is 59 years in Russia - that's what communist health care buys you. People need money as an incentive to work, and there are problems because of information overload. People have less choice because there is no competition, and as there is no competition, there is less pressure to improve. The biggest differences between communism and democracy are their economies; most if not all communist economies fail. Democracy is based on the principal of equality and freedom. In communism no one can stand above the rest and no one can express themselves because they have to conform to the society known as communism. They cannot express themselves freely as being above the norm is illegal. A quote plain and simply defines what communism and democracy are; "Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have so much." This quote was by unknown author but puts these two ideologies into perspective. For example in communism if you studied to be a surgeon for 5 years you would only be paid the same wages as a rubbish collector. Democracy is better for the 21st century because in this day and age everyone needs freedom and to be able to express themselves without the oppression of communism.
Resolved: A just society requires the recognition of animal rights.

Thanks to YYW for the topic. I'll point out that this is the first LD resolution of the year. I did LD for 3 years in high school (graduated last year), and I'm over 17, so he should be fine debating me. Though I would like to point out to my opponent that there are several intelligent high schoolers on this site, and if he's had bad exeriences with some of them then he's probably just gotten the few bad apples. I'm only saying this because I never liked the bad rep teens got and still get.
Resolved: A just society requires the recognition of animal rights.

Obviously, this is the current LD resolution. Let's try to debate it that way. Sources are important, but not overwhelmingly important. Logic, reason, etc. should be the grounds for compelling arguments. Kritiks are fine, so long as you do not willfully misinterpret the resolution or wage an assault on the dictionary. In our efforts we ought to mutually endeavor to test the strengths of our ideas, rather than quibble over phraseology and definitions. I would strongly prefer some LD experience in my opponent, but it isn't required. A couple of notes though: 1) If you are still in high school, consider the ramifications of putting your arguments online. (This is my polite way of saying that even if you are 18 and in high school, don't accept this debate. ) 2) There is a minimum age of 18 for this debate, principally because I have as of late been disgusted with some of nonsense our younger members have put on here. 3) If you assume a burden of proof higher than is required to advocate for the resolution, you can rest assured that I will exploit that to win the debate. 4) This is the last touchy one. .. I don't care about what my ranking is, primarily because of how rankings and "victory" is determined. The idea of having my argumentative prowess quantified by some miscreant youth is as novel is it is absurd. 5) I just want to reiterate that this is not an evidence war. No links (other than in-text citations), no videos, etc. Lastly: there are no "rules" per se, aside from basic cannons of decency. I would like this to go sort-of as LD does, but if my opponent is unfamiliar with that debating style I can accommodate. There is nothing I love more than a judge who (based on their personal bias of one side or another) will look for a "violation" to justify giving the debater advocating for the position they don't like the loss. If you are a judge and can't get past yourself to judge fairly then do the honorable thing and refrain from judging. Similarly, if you aren't at least an undergraduate or have an undergraduate degree (at minimum) do not judge this round. This is kind of my last hope for this site. If it goes poorly. .. well I suppose my cynicism will be justified. Now, notes about the topic itself: The resolution does not require that we explicitly define what animal rights are. We are only talking about "just" societies. While "just" is open to interpretation, "recognition" is not. Again, do not willfully misinterpret the resolution to argue some unfathomable position of insanity. After we are finished, I would like to flip sides and argue on the neg with the same opponent -if that is ok with my opponent. To that end, this is kind of like a two for one deal. Happy debating! PS. If I forgot to mention anything, no lawyering. This is not an exhaustive list of requirements and nor should it be treated as one by judges. We all should have a pretty good idea of what a debate of this variety should look like so let's not muck it up, shall we?
The earth is flat

The earth is flat. I have researched the subject for 6 months now, and there are more proof on the side of a flat earth then I can find on a spherical one. The debate format shall be as follows. Round one is acceptance. In round 2, I state my argument, and con can either use this round for rebuttal or state arguments against the flat earth. Round 3 is for rerebuttals, and further arguments, if possible. Round 4 is strictly for the bottles and round 5 should be used for conclusion and further rebuttals but no new arguments in the last round. Please respect your opponents many sources and media may be used in your argument till that source is proven unreliable or the media is shown to be faked or false. Good luck, I hope to provide insight as well as receive it. I do ask that anyone accepting this debate please have a look at least at the flat earth theory before accepting and arguing against it as it has become redundant arguing the same 10 or so proves that the earth is a sphere. It is not required but makes for a better debate for the both of us. I also ask that theoretical math equations be excluded from the arguments, as they will confuse voters, though not to be confused with basic math as in Pythagoras theorem, and the like. https://en.m.wikipedia.org...
male friends are better than female friends.

What's up with everybody forfeiting the debates. Why girls are worse than guys. a. Girls are really catty. b. Girls hold grudges for the rest of their life. c. Girls gossip. (doesn't matter if its true or not. ) d. Girls only care about only how they feel. e. Girls are very judgmental. f. Girls are to sensitive. Why guys are better than girls. a. They don't hold grudges forever. (usually get over it the next day. ) b. They are not catty. c. They are not judgmental. (every guy is a friend. ) d. Guys are a lot of fun to hang out with because they don't care about being dramatic. e. Guys tell you how it is. f. Guys care about how everybody feels. g. Guys don't judge by what someone is wearing. h. Guys are better at explaining things. i. They don't gossip about stupidity. (at least the guys I know. ) The problem is that my opponent forfeited this debate.
male friends are better than female friends.

Guy friends are better because they don't hold grudges against you for the rest of their life like girls do. They are not as dramatic as girls are. They don't gossip as much as girls do. I don't care about fashion, all I wear is sweatpants and a sweatshirt. Its fun getting dirty with guys, like getting all muddy. Unlike girls who would go crazy and say how gross it is. I like playing hard sports, meaning i don't care if i break my leg during soccer. Girly girls on the other hand would scream if a ball was thrown at them. Girls are hypochondriacs. Guys get over stuff. It's fun to hang with guys. Guys have better jokes than girls. They don't get grossed out by guts like some girls are. I feel safer with guys than with girls. I like shooting guns and 90% of girls in my town rather go shopping than shooting targets with me. I hang with guys and do guy stuff. Now don't get me wrong I do sometimes do girls stuff but mostly guy stuff. It's not much fun hanging with girls who are constantly telling you what you are doing is gross. Like getting muddy, dissecting a frog, and other stuff like that.
Music Debate: Defend your favorite band or artist!

No probs, Fruit. We all oughtta miss a round at least once, it's a mark of becoming a debater. Choosing Fun. songs is a toughie, all their songs are so good. However, I chose a song that you probably haven't heard of: All Alone. It goes like this:I fell in love with a wind-up souvenirI bought it downtown, as I was on my way to meet you.She sounds like the songs you used to sing to put me to sleep,But now that you're gone, she's all I have left to hold.And I feel so All Alone, no one's gonna fix me when I'm broke.How do you cry with inanimate eyes?You're never gonna smile with the way that you are.And I feel so All Alone, I feel so All AloneI gave her to you (I don't need a toy)I thought you might appreciate (I don't like the way that she moves)The way that she dances, the painted look upon her faceShe must've come from the sun, I wanna take her through the parkWhere she'd tell me I'm all that she wants (Speaking of which...)If she could even talk!I feel so All Alone,no one's gonna fix me when I'm broke.How do you cry with inanimate eyes?You're never gonna smile with the way that you are.And I feel so All Alone, I feel so All Alone.And she sits on my shelf,it makes me think of you.The way she carries the things that remind me of whoWe used to be before we became antiquesShe's a lot like you,But if I hold her too tight, I know she'll break.It just takes some glue to stay.And I feel so All Alone,No one's gonna fix me when I'm broke.How do you cry with inanimate eyes?You're never gonna smile with the way that you are.And I feel so All Alone, I feel so All Alone. (Side Note: I type these lyrics straight from my brain, I have most of Fun.'s songs memorized, and that includes this one).MEANING & STORYAll Alone (As my friends and I think) tells the story of a man who loses his mother and tries to make up with his sadness and greivances with an unintentionally bad girlfriend that he compares to a wind-up toy. If you wanna know about what I mean by his mother dying, read the 3rd line in the first vers-y paragraph thing. And when he says "As I was on my way to meet you", I assume this means he is going to the cemetery to visit her grave. Sadness.http://www.youtube.com...
Music Debate: Defend your favorite band or artist!

About the forfeit: school has come back and so my punctuality has been lit on fire, extinguish with urine, ate by a cat (which got its stomach pumpted), and finally sent to Russia to educate them on George Carlin's Conductor's hat. I am NOT asking for the forfeit to be forgiven (I probably could have responded on time); I felt you all deserved some sort of explanation, even though this is a terrible one. I will have to take a break from debating, but I intend to finish this one.On to the debate!______________I choose: Walk the LineI keep a close watch on this heart of mine,I keep my eyes wide open all the time,I keep the ends out for the tie that binds,Because you're mine, I walk the line.I find it very, very easy to be true,I find myself alone when each day's through,Yes, I'll admit that I'm a fool for you,Because you're mine, I walk the line.As sure as night is dark and day is light,I keep you on my mind both day and night,And happiness I've known proves that it's right,Because you're mine, I walk the line.You've got a way to keep me on your side,You give me cause for love that I can't hide,For you I know I'd even try to turn the tide,Because you're mine, I walk the line.I keep a close watch on this heart of mine,I keep my eyes wide open all the time,I keep the ends out for the tie that binds,Because you're mine, I walk the line.MeaningThis narrarator is reassuring lover that he will remain faithful and won't cheat. Some lyrics, however, suggest that he is in denial about how easy it is to resist temptation. http://www.youtube.com...
Music Debate: Defend your favorite band or artist!

Gasp! An FF! Oh well, my song for this time around will be Out On the Town. It is a bonus track for their most recent album, Some Nights. Here it is.I set all my regrets on fire'Cause I know I'll never take the timeTo unpack my missteps and call all of our friendsI figured they would take your side.I make the bed, just not that wellYour name comes up a lot, when I talk to my momOh, I think she can tellI was Out On the Town,So I came to your window last night.I tried not to throw stones, but I wanted to come inside.And now I'm causing a scene, thinking you need a reason to smile.Oh no, what have I done?There's no one to keep me warm.So maybe I should put up a fireI'll call them back and borrow a box knife.So I can learn to live with all this stupid sh*tI've been doing since '99,And I know I could be more clever.And I know I could be more strong.But I'm waiting for the day you come back and say"Hey, maybe I should change my mind".I drink a lot, I'm not sure if that's new.But these days when I wake up from a night I forgot,I just wish that it never came trueI was Out On the Town,So I came to your window last night.I tried not to throw stones, but I wanted to come inside.And now I'm causing a scene, thinking you need a reason to smile.Oh no, what have I done?There's no one to keep me warm.And I know I could be more clever.And I know I could be more strong.And I know I could be more clever.And I know I could be more clever.I knew there'd come a daywhen all was said and done,Everything I was, is everything but gone.All my big mistakes are bouncing off your wallThe bottles never break, the sorrow never comesSo come on let me in, I will be the sun.I will wake up, I am who I was.Just open up your heart, open up your heart,Open up your heart!I was Out On the Town,So I came to your window last night.I tried not to throw stones, but I wanted to come inside.And now I'm causing a scene, thinking you need a reason to smile.Oh no, what have I done?There's no one to keep me warm. MEANING AND STORYOut On the Town tells of a strong love for a his girlfriend/lover. He is constantly saying in different ways that he wants to spend more time with her. A time when we see this is when he says in the chorus, " I tried not to throw stones, but I wanted to come inside". This is implying that he wants to come in her house and be with her, but since it is nighttime, all the doors are locked. He does not want to throw stones because it might wake her up, damage their relationship, and maybe even set off an alarm. And in case you were wondering "throwing stones" is meaning a way to break the window so he can get in her house. Not to rob, obviously, but to be with her.http://www.youtube.com...