BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
A Joe Biden/Elizabeth Warren ticket would defeat a Hillary Clinton/_________ ticket in the primaries

No definitions mean that I can argue anything. I interpret the resolution to mean that there is a 100% chance that a Joe Biden/Elizabeth Warren ticket would defeat a Hillary Clinton / ___ ticket in the primaries. Nothing is ever 100%. It's our laws of nature that reflect every aspect of life and existence. You can't have something without nothing. Here is an extreme example: Let's say some random stranger walked up to you and gave you his car at some place you met, called point A. Think of everything it took to lead you to point A. Maybe you were on your way to school while he stopped you, School costs money/time so without previous actions your event with the person would have never happened, like if you decided you never wanted to go to school. Your encounter with the person may have never happened had you invested the time/money to go to school. Nothing is ever true. How do you know that I am not a spaghetti monster typing on my computer now hypnotizing you as you read these very words. Nothing is ever certain ... this may even be the matrix.
Debaters in this site should more vote for acetraveler in those 2 debates.

"I don't understand 'I will address both debates.'." It means I'll show why people should not vote for you in both debates, not just one. 1. Even if they understood you enough, some voters may have had a hard time understanding you, which can affect their voting. I know that I, as an example, had trouble with some of your arguments. I don't mean to insult you/your use of English, but clarity is very important in a debate. 2. "Please elaborate on 'When making your rebuttal, you questioned your opponent's pure logic'." I meant that while your opponent backed the meter up with a random system and you used that against him, he also established the point that the metric system goes in multiples of 10 (a logical and easy to use system), while you had no sufficient argument to back up the logic behind the SI system. "Like this way, no matter how he show me much evidence, I showed him the evidence have a week power to support his argument like this way, plus, I use his evidence to support my argument, so if I had not failed in this process, my logic can have power of persuasion." True, you did use his own evidence against him, but the point about using a multiple of 10 was still left uncontested. Also, by "real evidence" I meant the example of a plane crashing because of mixed-up measurements, showing why using different systems of measurement can be harmful. 3. "But, I also showed him why simultaneous interpretaters are useful like this." Your opponent refuted this in his final round. 4. "Do you really think I really failed to refute his points?" In my opinion, yes. First, he used evidence to support his position, like the plane example. Second, you agreed that the metric system is more logical ("You go on to talk about how the metric system has been adapted to be more and more accurate . . . "), winning him that point. So it comes down to safety vs. convenience. And in most people's opinions, safety is much more important than convenience. 5. Here are some examples: "This example is the out of topic in this aspect." With his bar example, he showed that English is more widely spoken than other languages, and is easy and sometimes necessary for many foreigners to pick up; but you simply dismissed it as off topic. "Therefore, English is employed in many large Taiwanese companies to avoid any such confusion." "Therefore, representatives in Parliament from outside the Han Chinese provinces must debate in a second language." With the above quotes, your opponent, in his last round, showed why simultaneous translators are not a good idea.
Debaters in this site should more vote for acetraveler in those 2 debates.

In this debate I will prove that by my opponent's own standards, nobody on this site should vote for him in these debates. Keep in mind that since the resolution includes both debates, I only have to show why he lost one of them to disprove it. However, I will address both debates. Also please keep in mind that I did not vote in either debate, so if he is losing it is not because of my own actions. Debate 1: "The whole world should witch to the metric system". 1. Manner: Your grammar was questionable, causing possible misinterpretation. 2. Matter: When making your rebuttal, you questioned your opponent's pure logic. For example, "What make you think metric system have scientific and logical reason? Because it is based on scientific phenomenon? Widely used around the world? Being chosen by scientists? Or anything else?" Do you really think that a system of random numbers is more logical than easy multiples of 10? In addition, he provided real evidence of why different measurement systems cause problems, while you had no evidence. 3. Method: Your opponent showed a better debating skill by using logic and reason, and also because you failed to refute his points. Debate 2: "In my opinion, I think WSDC participants can be allowed to speak their mother tongue." 1. Manner: See #1 for Debate 1. 2. Matter: You never fully refuted your opponent's points about using English, as you admitted that some English is necessary, agreeing with him, and didn't realize that he was saying you CAN'T use two different languages in debate. Also, he provided examples of why using English is better. You had no evidence. 3. Method: Once again, you fail to refute points correctly while defending your own.
Debaters in this site should more vote for acetraveler in those 2 debates.

(Link : DEBATE 1. http://www.debate.org... DEBATE 2. http://www.debate.org... ) *the standards of 3M(As I know) 1. Manner : style of writing, tone and other manner in conversation 2. Matter : more faithful evidence, more sharp as a razor in logic development 3. Method : more well using debate skill in each debate *The basic rule of debate(As I know) 1. Debaters must keep the subject of each debate. 2. Debaters must point out opponents words related to the subject of each debate, not to point out other things like opponents itself. Debaters in this site decide between win or lose in the each debate by vote. The standards to decide win or lose is this : "Who won this debate?" I think this question mean this definition. "Who do more well debate in the view of the standards of 3M and the basic rule of debate?' If I have more mistake in the standards of 3M and the basic rule than my opponent in these 2 debates so the votes well applicated this, I accept this is my lack of debate ability and it is the problem of my practice. But, If I see completely my lose in these debate because of other reasons like which my opinions are only different than majority or other things, I have no more means to recover my lose in those debate. In this case, only I can lean the possibility to win or lose next time. So, I must conclude the cause of my lose in these debate and find solutions so I start in this debate. If someone can point out my mistakes are more serious in the standards of 3M and the basic rule than opponents in those debate, please participate in this debate and help me. I'll wait my opponent.
HomeWork

students have school for approximately 8 hours a day. we go to school, study hard, and do our best. then they give us ASSIGNED homework. we go home and spend 1-3 hours on homework. most students don't get home from school until 4. that gets us to have to eat dinner witch brings us to 8. then as students have chores witch brings us to about 10. now, most teens go to sleep around 10 pm. so...wheres our time.we as teens need some time to ourselves.we wake up the next morning and do it all over again. we cant keep doing this. we have to contain this homework problem and get rid of homework.
HomeWork

Homework teaches students how to set priorities. Homework helps teachers determine how well the lessons and material are being understood by their students. Homework teaches students how to problem solve. Homework gives students another opportunity to review the class material. Homework gives parents a chance to see what their child is learning in school. Homework teaches students that they have to do things, even when they don"t want to. Homework teaches students how to take responsibility for their part in the educational process. Homework teaches students how to work independently. Homework teaches students the importance of planning, staying organized and taking action.
God is Black**

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيم Lol... You all are hilarious. Ok I forfeit :) قُلْ هُوَ ٱللَّهُ أَحَدٌ ٱللَّهُ ٱلصَّمَدُ لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُۥ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌۢ
God is Black**

Observation 1: In order for my opponent to believe in god he must believe in the bible Observation 2: my opponent must prove that Jesus was born in somewhere like Nigeria or anywhere where blacks originate from in order to win this debate. Observation 3: my opponent has to prove their were black people in Judea where Jesus was born Cont1. Where the bible says Jesus was born the bible says Jesus was born in a manger in Bethlehem in Judea. Now I agree the bible doesn't specify what color Jesus was but it does say where he was born. Their weren't any blacks in Judea and again in order for Jesus to be black he would have had to be born in Africa. cont 2: opponents that the Blackman and Blackwoman are God in its Supreme Condensation. And Therefore, the Fathers and Mothers of all events following Sub point A: IF blacks were god they would have been advanced people No offense or anything but we can all see today the poor state Africans are in. IF they were god they could do anything and would have gotten themselves out of their situation. Also if they were mother or father of events everything would be based off them and again this is coming from a guy who is black himself. Sub point B: IF blacks were gods wouldn't have been slaves IF us blacks were gods we wouldn't have been put into slavery. Also we would be able to do anything bring world peace even fly so I don't understand what you mean when you say blacks are gods. It's not possible our abilities are just as limited as any other races abilities. Cont 3: No proof that god was a certain race The main reason you lose in this round is because of the fact that no matter what you bring up, no matter what theory or bull crap you may bring up you cannot prove that god was black. I cannot prove that god was white. We cannot prove what color god was because it doesn't specify it in the bible or even the other holy books of religions. Since their is no proof of god being a certain color especially black for the reasons I pointed out earlier then you cannot win this debate. Even if you bring in better arguments you cannot prove that god is black so their is no way for you to win.
Living the life of an Idol, as an average citizen (Full resolution in 1st round)

Full Resolution: Is it worth living the life of a Kpop Idol? Pro, will affirm this resolution and therefore argue that it is worth living the life of a Kpop Idol Con (Me) will negate this resolution and therefore argue that it is NOT worth living the life of a Kpop Idol. The Burden of Proof for this debate is shared. This designated resolution is more a question towards any average citizen. Please note that this debate revolves around Kpop Idols ONLY (I have close to 0 knowledge about non-kpop Idols). Definitions: 1. Kpop: Korean Pop (A genre of music) 2. Idol: A famous person or thing that is greatly admired, loved, or revered. By accepting this debate, you therefore accept all rules implemented in this debate. Any need of clarification, please either do it via PMs or the comments section.
The Bible has scientific facts recorded before they were found out by science.

FINAL REBUTTALS My opponent has simply copy pasta'd a section of this website: . http://www.inplainsite.org... I didn't realise we could do that! Here are some websites which give many of the Atheist arguments: Infidels. org: . http://www.infidels.org... Iron Chariots Wiki: . http://wiki.ironchariots.org... Here are some websites which give critical views of the Bible: Evil Bible: . http://www.evilbible.com... Skeptic's Annotated Bible: . http://skepticsannotatedbible.com... Here is a very large (7.9mb) diagram showing contradictions in the Bible: . http://atheistcolby.com... CONCLUSION My approach stumped my opponent to the point where he could only copy paste a list of so-called scientific claims in the Bible. Unfortunately, none of the passages it mentioned have anything to do with Modern Science. Let me elaborate: . http://2.bp.blogspot.com... This diagram is a graphical representation of scientific advancement from 1000BC to now. It wasn't until the renaissance (. http://en.wikipedia.org...) that Middle Ages truly ended and we began to really advance forward. Were these scholars studying the Bible? No.
The Bible has scientific facts recorded before they were found out by science.

Examples of the more striking scientific accuracy in the Bible include The Universe Time and Space The Beginning An Initial Void An Expanding Universe Space is Empty That Hole In The North Air Has Weight Those Singing Stars And There are Quite a Few of Them The Earth Atoms The Earth is a Sphere The Rotation Of The Earth The Orbit of The Sun Gravitational Properties of Constellations Pangaea and Peleg First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics Talking Lightning? The Treasures of The Snow The Hydrologic Cycle Measuring The Waters Air Currents The Oceans The Paths Of The Seas Mountains Under The Seas Springs Under The Seas Misc The Dinosaur Precise Dimensions of Noah's Ark Mathematics Man Man from Dust Adam And Eve The Seed of Life All Humanity is One Blood Life is in the Blood Blood Clotting in Infants Medical Knowledge in Ancient Times .. The Egyptians Moses Sanitary Practices in the 19th Century Sanitary Practices in Moses’ Time The Minoans and The Romans Leprosy and Plague.. Hansen’s Disease or a Variety of Infectious Sicknesses Those Old Time Dietary Guidelines The End Times The Second Coming Takes Place During The Day AND Night
The Bible has scientific facts recorded before they were found out by science.

"Those were all good points, although they are open to interpretation." Excellent. REBUTTALS "The Bible mentions the life is in the blood, hundreds of years later, people were still bloodletting and killing people accidentally." So you're suggesting that the knowledge that you need blood to live originated from the Bible? Can you not imagine a man coming to that conclusion by say... seeing someone bleed to death? You haven't even given a passage, but I know the one: Levitius 17:14 For [it is] the life of all flesh; the blood of it [is] for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh [is] the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off This doesn't have anything to do with bloodletting; if the Bible said "Do not drain the man of blood for it is a ineffective means of curing him of the plagues I put upon you" or something, your example might be relative, as is it's a non-sequitur argument. "The Old Testament law prohibited Jews from eating shellfish, which, as we now no, contains germs that cause sickness if not cooked properly." Leviticus 11 deals with clean and unclean food. It doesn't just mention shellfish; It mentions pigs and rabbits, which are all eaten in huge numbers around the world. Furthermore several animals that aren't mentioned (cows and sheep) also cause sickness if not cooked properly. "Bible Prophecy has been shockingly accurate, including prophesying the formation of Israel." This is an example of a self-forfiling prophecy. First of all, the Bible is pretty vague with this prophecy. I couldn't find a single passage that could be consider a prophecy of the formation of modern Israel. This just makes my explanation more viable; how difficult is it to find prophecy in an ancient metaphorical text? CONCLUSION My opponent has yet to refute my previous conclusion that the knowledge of the Bible reflects the men who wrote it, not the God it claims to speak for.
The Bible has scientific facts recorded before they were found out by science.

Those were all good points, although they are open to interpretation. Here is more information: The Bible mentions the life is in the blood, hundreds of years later, people were still bloodletting and killing people accidentally. The Old Testament law prohibited Jews from eating shellfish, which, as we now no, contains germs that cause sickness if not cooked properly. Bible Prophecy has been shockingly accurate, including prophesying the formation of Israel.
The Bible has scientific facts recorded before they were found out by science.

I hope we can both learn something from this debate. REBUTTALS "The Bible said the earth hung from nothing. (Job 36:27)" I'm sure my opponent meant Job 26:7. .. Actually, Plato [1] had a much better idea (although still completely incorrect) about Cosmology. As you can see here [2], Ancient Greek Cosmology was far more advanced than you give it credit for. The Earth "hanging from nothing" was not a new concept introduced by the Bible. Also, this passage (Job 38:4) seems to contradict the above passage: "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. " "In Genesis 6:15, the Bible gives the perfect dimensions for a stable water vessel. (Length six times that of width. )" The Ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamian were using boats over 4500 years ago. The Phoenicians were renowned for their sea vessels. [3] Boats were not a new concept introduced by the Bible. CONCLUSION Nothing written in the Bible was outside the knowledge of the men who wrote it. SOURCES [1] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] . http://abyss.uoregon.edu... [3] . http://www.historyworld.net...
The Bible has scientific facts recorded before they were found out by science.

The Bible contains many scientific facts recorded before they were found out by modern science. While many people thought the earth rested on a huge turtle, the Bible said the earth hung from nothing.(Job 36:27) In Genesis 6:15, the Bible gives the perfect dimensions for a stable water vessel.(Length six times that of width.) I'll take a break and allow my opponent to open with his arguement. Good luck.
Scientology is here for the money.

Since my opponent failed to post anything, I will just go ahead with my argument here. (There is still one more round left. I guess in R3 con has another chance of making an argument and i'll just forfeit that round and let the voters decide on who had the best argument. I hope all is well with MistyToast.) P1- If Scientology requires a substantial amount of money to attain its most highest levels of teachings, then Scientlogy was created to make money. P2-Scientology requires a substantial amount of money to attain its most highest levels of teachings. C-Scientlogy was created to make money. P2 Scientology requires a substantial amount of money to attain its most highest levels of teachings.'Scientologists who are interested in accomplishing the major goals of Scientology – to become Clear and develop their capabilities as Operating Thetans – should expect to be investing heavily in their spirituality. A rough estimate suggests you’ll be paying $128,000 to reach Clear, another $33,000 to reach OT III, and an additional $100,000 to $130,000 to reach OT VIII, which is the highest level currently available.' Even the "cheaper" alternative is quite pricey. ''An alternative is to train with a study partner to become an auditor and participate in co-auditing. This is much more time intensive, probably taking many years to complete, but the price tag is much lower at about $50,000 to reach Clear.' (1) As we can see here to become a serious practitioner of scientology one is required to pay quite a bit of money. Even its cheaper alternative is quite expensive for the average person with an average income(2).Clearly Scientology is a religion that was made to cater to the rich, all to the benefit of its creator and its trustees. Sources:1. http://altreligion.about.com...2. http://financemymoney.com...
Vermont is better than New Hampshire

Greetings! Vermont and New Hampshire are both beautiful states, but I believe NH has more to offer. NH is one of only five states that has no sales tax. VT is not of those states. http://www.investopedia.com... Public Elementary and Secondary School Teachers in NH earn over $1000 more per year than in VT. https://www.census.gov... NH has the 4th lowest unemployment rate in the country. Vermont is rated at 10th. http://www.bls.gov... NH has the lowest poverty rate in the United States. http://www.povertyusa.org... NH has lower energy consumption than Vermont. https://www.census.gov... Mount Washington as well as the majority of New England's tallest mountains are in NH. http://www.franklinsites.com... NH has one of the longest zip lines in the continental United States. http://www.gunstock.com... NH was one of the 13 colonies. http://www.history.com... In 1833, the world's first free public library supported by taxation was established in Peterborough, NH. http://peterboroughtownlibrary.org... NH has 11 more colleges/universities than VT. http://www.univsearch.com... NH simply has it all. Mountains, lakes, biking, skiing and hiking trails, and sledding hills. The state is also perfectly situated. It has the Atlantic Ocean which makes for a great beach season. Maine lobster rolls are always nearby. Boston is just down south. To conclude round one, I leave you with New Hampshire's state motto: live free or die!
Vermont is better than New Hampshire

Vermont is a way better state than NH in many ways. VT is known for so many things, like Maple Syrup, Cheese, Skiing, Wildlife, Ice Cream, Hiking, Atv & Dirt Bike trails, Scenery, and chances are you didn't know VT is the 2nd safest state in the country and NH is 4th. 2 Presidents were born in Vt, Clavin Coolidge and Chester Arthur. None were born in NH. In New Hampshire you don't have to wear a helmet on a motorcycle and after that there deaths increased majorly, but they didn't change it for some reason. If you"re happy and you know it, you must live in Vermont. The state consistently ranks in the top states for health, happiness and intelligence. In 2013, Vermonters were crowned the fifth happiest residents in the country, as well as put in the top five states for happiest Twitter users the same year.(Motov.com) Jake Burton, founder of Burton clothing was born and lives in VT. The popular movie BeetleJuice was filmed in Vermont along with other movies. More than 3/4 of Vermont is covered in forests. Vermont does not allow Billboards! Vermont was to first state to prohibit Slavery!!! Vermont has the smallest state capital (Montpelier) With only 9,000 people and is the only state capital without a McDonalds. Vermont is the top producer of teddy bears. There is 543 organic farms in Vermont. Vermont has more covered bridges per sguare mile than any other state. IBM was founded in Vermont. Amazingly Vermont was it's own country for 14 years! The biggest corn maze is in Danville VT and it is 10 acres! Vermont owns 1/2 of the dairy farms in New England.
Black History Month is racist.

No wrong because black history month is the month that they got equal rights just as we did. Remember before they had no rights and excuse me for saying this but before February they were slaves and if it wasn't for Abraham Lincoin they would still be slaves. He stopped the slavery. Now during MLKJr's time they were still considered people but people with no rights but after he died his wife Rosa Parks finished what her husband started. The dream for all people to have equal rights.