BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Weapon debate

My opponent has both failed to mention his assault rifle in his respond and anything to do with it. Therefore he has dropped it. U never mentioned your assault rifle in round 3, so I didn't have to argue about it. As I said in earlier rounds, The StG44 was the first ever assault rifle. It fires a bigger bullet then the Mk-14, and is full auto. The Barrett 50. cal is a one of a kind rifle to ever be used by the U. S military. One of our strongest rifles to ever fire a round 1 mile away nailing a target behind a concrete wall, making quite a mess in the process. The CheyTac Intervention is an American bolt action sniper rifle manufactured by CheyTac LLC for long range soft target interdiction. It is fed by a detachable single stack magazine, which holds 7 rounds. It fires .408 CheyTac or .375 CheyTac ammunition. CheyTac papers state that the entire system is capable of delivering sub-MOA accuracy at ranges of up to 2,500 yards (2,300 m), one of the longest ranges of all modern-day sniper rifles. ^From the above text, you can see the Intervention is better then the Barrett .50cal. Also, the .50 cal was originally designed to be anti-vehicle. Intervention Weight 31 lb (14 kg) without scope (M-200) Length 53 in (1.34 m) (stock extended), 46ï¿½ in (1.18 m) (stock collapsed) (M-200) Barrel length 29 (73.7 cm) in standard w/ 1:13 twist (M-200), 26 in (66 cm) optional. Cartridge .408 CheyTac or .375 CheyTac Action bolt action Effective range 2000+ m - M-200 2000+ m - M-200 Carbine 1500+ m - M-200 CIV (Civilian) 1800+ m - M-310 SS (Single Shot) ) 1800+ m - M-310 R (Repeater) Feed system 7-round detachable box magazine Sights day or night optics FN P90 Weight 2.54 kg (5.60 lb) empty 2.68 kg (5.9 lb) empty magazine 3.0 kg (6.6 lb) loaded magazine Length 500 mm (19.7 in) Barrel length 263 mm (10.4 in) Width 55 mm (2.2 in) Height 210 mm (8.3 in) Cartridge FN 5.7ï¿½28mm Action Straight blowback, closed bolt Rate of fire 900 RPM (rounds per minute) Muzzle velocity 715 m/s (2,350 ft/s) Effective range 200 m (219 yd) Maximum range 1,800 m (1,969 yd) Feed system 50-round detachable box magazine Sights Tritium-illuminated reflex sight, back-up iron sights As you can see, the P90 is the better submachine gun. StG44 Weight 4.62 kg (10.2 lb) with empty magazine, 5.22 kg (11.5 lb) with loaded magazine Length 940 mm (37 in) Barrel length 419 mm (16.5 in) Cartridge 7.92x33mm "Kurz", 8x33mm Kurz, (aka. 7.9mm Kurz or Pistolenpatrone 43) Action Gas-operated, tilting bolt Rate of fire 550-600 rounds/min Muzzle velocity 685 m/s (2,247 ft/s) Effective range 300 m (automatic) 600 m (semi-automatic) Feed system 30-round detachable box magazine Sights Adjustable sights, rear: V-notch; front: hooded post As you can also see, I have proved that I have the better guns.
Weapon debate

Dude you are quick. This is a lot of fun. "Yes the Intervention is bolt action, and yes the Barret .50 cal has a higher fire rate. But you forget, these are Sniper rifles. the Intervention forces you to pick your shot and slow down. With the Barret .50 cal you can empty a whole clip in like 5 secs and not hit anything." This is all good and true, but that does not mean that the one firing the 50.cal will empty the clip in 5 seconds. The point of being a sniper is to be undected by the enemy, not spraying your rounds. You would be seen and picked off in a second. This negates your response. "The P90 is smaller and lighter the the PP90m1." This is true, you negate my weapon, in both being compact and it's manuverability. Nice job Con. "The M249 also uses soft and box mags, but can also use M16-M4 mags as well." Your choice of weaponry in lmgs is great. Your weapon has trumped mine by proving that it can use rounds from the m16-m4 as well. Looks like i'm running out of luck. "You just admitted that your shotgun is less powerful then mine. The AA-12 is also the fastest firing shotgun out there." From my last post in round 3, yes it seems i have addmited it huh? Well i'm man enough to say you have yet beat me again at another weapon. Huh and i thought i as doing a good job there or a second too. However that does not mean i will give up. My arguments. The Barrett 50.cal is a one of a kind rifle to ever be used by the U.S military. One of our strongest rifles to ever fire a round 1 mile away nailing a target behind a concrete wall, making quite a mess in the process. The PP90M1's fire power is consestent with the standard 9mm pistol on steroids. A very unique weapon to catch the eyes of our militaty. The fire rate is most likley up there with the p90's. Stats. Weight 2.06 kg (4.5 lb) (empty) 2.86 kg (6.3 lb) (loaded) Length 410 mm (16 in) (stock folded) Width 53 mm (2.1 in) Cartridge 9x19mm Parabellum 9x19mm 7N31 Action Blowback Rate of fire 500–800 rounds/min Muzzle velocity Approx. 320 m/s (1,050 ft/s) Effective range 200 m Feed system 64-round helical magazine 32-round box magazine I have no response on my L86 lmg, since it wasd trumped by the best one evah. The Mk14 Assault rifle stats. Weight 11.24 lb (5.1 kg)[5] Length 35 in (889 mm)[5] Barrel length 18 in (457 mm)[5] Cartridge 7.62x51mm NATO Action Gas-operated, rotating bolt Rate of fire 700–750 rounds/min Muzzle velocity 853 m/s (2,800 ft/s) Effective range 500 m (547 yd) 800+ m (875 yd) (with optics) Feed system 10 or 20-round detachable box magazine Sights Modified M14 iron sights, normally used with a magnifying scope. The Model 1887 was trumped by my opponents choice of the AA-12. Yes a superior choice, but who can beat a classic?? http://en.wikipedia.org... http://en.wikipedia.org... My opponent has both failed to mention his assault rifle in his respond and anything to do with it. Therefore he has dropped it. Your turn Pro.
Abortion should be considered as murder

First, My opponent has agreed to the Oxford Dictionary definition which defines murder as the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another. I point this out, As under Roe v. Wade and other laws, Abortion is granted legal status, Meaning that according to the definitions he has agreed to, Abortion is not murder, And has provided no real reason to the contrary. Second, My opponent has provided no reason why abortion should be discouraged, Whether it be practical or moral reasons. If one chooses to criminalize abortion to discourage it, As my opponent does, One will only lessen the safety of women and cause unnecessary deaths and complications. As according to the Independent, Doing so has no impact on the number of terminations, Only moving said abortions underground with dramatically less safety precautions leading to the deaths of mother's. If laws did anything to stop abortions, May I ask why there are approximately 25 million illegal abortions occur every year. Similarly to illicit drugs, People will still commit abortions regardless of it's legality. In fact, NBC has found interestingly enough that abortion rates decline when abortion is legalized. The impacts of this are twofold. First abortions would still continue, Meaning the aforementioned problems of US economic collapse and the ridding of women rights would still occur, Perhaps to a lesser degree. Second, Maternal mortality and infection would rise, As illegal abortions without said safeguards and medical precautions would still occur. Those who suffer complications wouldn't want to seek public medical attention for complications as her body would be the equivalent of a crime scene. In short, Abortion is not, And should not be considered to be murder, Unless the consequences be damned.
Abortion should be considered as murder

I'm sorry for my unclear definition, And I agree with yours. I believe that abortion should become illegal, Become discouraged, Alternatives should be encouraged, And those who participate in abortion should be charged with murder. I agree that we shouldn't just enact a law like this without warning, But rather we should start by discouraging it, And give a fair warning before the law is implicated. After that "cut off point" than those who have abortion should be charged. Obviously we shouldn't prosecute all people who have committed abortion ever, But rather those who commit it after the law I say passed. Once abortion is considered "unlawful" than there is nothing to stop it from being considered "murder". I'm sorry that I was unclear about the definition, And my stance.
Abortion should be considered as murder

First, Refer the definition of murder from Oxford Dictionary; the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another, Because murder is not the same is killing, One must diferentiate between just and unjust killings of another human being, And consider potential malice. This is why we have distinctions such as voluntary or involuntary manslaughter, Capital punishment, Or murder, They aren't all lumped together in the same category. Abortion isn't prosecuted as murder in the vast majority of western democracies. Second, Most of the West, Whether it be the US or Europe, Allows abortion in specified circumstances, Meaning that it is lawful as according to the state. As according to the Chicago Tribune, 1/4 American women have had an abortion by the time that they are 45. If abortion was to be proscuted as murder, Give or take 41 million Americans would be incarcerated for first degree murder. The impacts of such would be twofold. First, The US economy would almost certainly crash as the US has lost an eighth of its labor force, And as America is the world's largest economy and acccounts for 25% or so of the world GDP, The global econmy would crash, Wrecking havoc and chaos throughout the world. Second, Women's rights would be devastated, As equal representation of men and women in the labor force would be a thing of the past because of the millions incarcerated or on death's row. If one wishes to think that abortion is murder, One must think that vast swaths of America's daughters, Sisters, Aunts, And wives should be sitting in a jailcell next to the serial killers and rapists. Till that is the case, No reasonable person should say that abortion is murder.
Abortion should be considered as murder

Whilst you do bring up good points I believe that abortion should be considered unlawful, And thus become murder, Because you are terminating the life of human being (albeit with maliciousness. ) I do understand that abortion could be driven underground, And clearly shouldn't be, But if people are charged for murder for committing underground abortion the public will have a much clearer view of what right and what's wrong. This will surely be benificial in the long run. We should also discourage underground abortion, Because clearly if these women are committing it they don't understand the harmful effect that it will have upon them. I also bring up an article about a man kicked that stomach of a pregnant woman causing her to lose her babies. That man was charged with murder. This shows that clearly those unborn children do classify as human beings and killing them isn't legal. The affect that this man had on those children is the same affect that abortion does. https://www. Independent. Co. Uk/news/uk/crime/muslim-pregnant-woman-kick-david-gallacher-racist-stomach-lose-baby-samsam-haji-ali-bletchley-a7753591. Html
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is failed, and should NEVER BE USED EVER AGAIN.

1. a "concept" with "no observable cause"is nothing but an abstract "idea" with No evidence or observations to support it. This is literally meaningless.2. "Don't act as if they are the only two possibilities."- please provide 1 single alternative possibility. Conclusion - my opponent dropped the first argument in this round by offering a meaningless jumble of words. - my opponent must provide at least 1 example of an alternate possibility to an infinite temporal regress of events as posted in round 2
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is failed, and should NEVER BE USED EVER AGAIN.

'Please provide 1 single example of something which has a beginning but no cause.'Virtual particals are a concept in quantom physics that have no observable cause. [1]'However, this implies an infinite temporal regress of events'Don't act as if they are the only two possibilities. [2][3]But most of all, I recommend watching this. [4][1] http://en.wikipedia.org...[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...[4] http://www.youtube.com...
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is failed, and should NEVER BE USED EVER AGAIN.

'1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence;'you said "Simply not true. [1] [2] This is a baseless assertion."- Please provide 1 single example of something which has a beginning but no cause. '2. The universe has a beginning of its existence;'you said "It's not been established that the universe did have an absolute beginning."However, this implies an infinite temporal regress of events.I have already shown in round 1 that an infinite temporal regress of events cannot exist.Argument based on the impossibility of an actual infinite. 1. An actual infinite cannot exist. 2. An infinite temporal regress of events is an actual infinite. 3. Therefore, an infinite temporal regress of events cannot exist.- This point remains unrefuted.
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is failed, and should NEVER BE USED EVER AGAIN.

'1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence;'Simply not true. [1] [2] This is a baseless assertion.'2. The universe has a beginning of its existence;'It's not been established that the universe did have an absolute beginning.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is failed, and should NEVER BE USED EVER AGAIN.

Classical argument Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence; The universe has a beginning of its existence; Therefore: The universe has a cause of its existence. Contemporary argument Argument based on the impossibility of an actual infinite. An actual infinite cannot exist. An infinite temporal regress of events is an actual infinite. Therefore, an infinite temporal regress of events cannot exist. http://en.wikipedia.org...
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is failed, and should NEVER BE USED EVER AGAIN.

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence. This is True - My opponent tried to refute this by offering the following. "Virtual particals are a concept in quantom physics that have no observable cause. [1]" However, as I stated in round 3 this is nothing but a meaningless jumble of words. An abstract "idea" with No evidence or observations to support it it is literally meaningless. 2. The universe has a beginning of its existence. This is True - My opponent tried to refute this by saying; "It's not been established that the universe did have an absolute beginning." - I established that the universe does have a beginning because otherwise you would have an infinite temporal regress of events. But as I stated "an infinite temporal regress of events cannot exist." Therefore the universe DOES have a beginning. My opponent tried to say that these were not the only two options, however he failed to provide even a single alternative option therefore my point of fact remains un-refuted. Conclusion 1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence. - I showed how the universe must have a beginning because an infinite temporal regress of events is impossible. Therefor: The kalam cosmological argument is a very sound argument. If my opponent wants to prove otherwise he must show that there is another option to the beginning of the universe other than: a) a cause or b) an infinite temporal regress of events in summery my opponent must show that something, namely (the entire universe from molecules to men) came spontaneously from absolutely nothing (which is repulsive to logic and reason). Unless and until he does that, the Kalam cosmological argument remains sound. Thank you, Fritz
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is failed, and should NEVER BE USED EVER AGAIN.

ConclusionWhat I've done here is I've pointed out two baseless assertions in the Kalam Cosmological argument. These two baseless assertions being that everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence and the other being that the universe has a beginning of its existence. Con has failed to provide any evidence to back these assertions up with. Therefore, I conclude that the Kalam Cosmological argument is flawed. I've also provided some sources including a video that points out the absurdity of the argument but judging by the speed of his reply, I heavily doubt that he paid any attention to them. If Pro hopes to win this argument, he'll be required to back up the two assertions that I've pointed out.
genetic engineering

I would like everyone reading this debate on genetic engineering to watch this video on how gene therapy can cure a rare form of hereditary blindness. http://youtube.com... One can clearly see how with gene therapy how someone's vision can drastically improve. Here is another example of how gene therapy can save people's lives http://youtube.com... 1. Remove genes from person 2. Inject virus into the genes 3. Virus alters and improves genes 4. New, genetically-altered genes is re-injected into subject making him better! With enough research, genetic engineering can grant us the ability to do anything. This NEEDS to be funded, subsidized, and LEGAL.
Resolved: No one is as epically awesome as I

To continue where I left off: 21) axM62 is probably still awing at my awesomeness. 22) I dived into the Mariana Trench and came back up without any scuba equipment. 23) I found my way out of the Bermuda triangle and published an escape plan, unfortunately the site is down. 24) I beat King Kong in a who can bring down as many planes as possible before dying and survived. 25) I taught Jack Bauer everything in order to catch terrorists. 26) I beat K.Bryant, D.Wade, S.o'neal, and C.Bosh single-handedly in basketball by 243 points, sadly we made an agreement not to tell anyone... 27) I read Of Mice and Men by Steinbeck and everyone at my school became fascinated by the book and created a fan club. 28) I hiked up Everest without any oxygen-bearing gear. 29) I beat Sonic and the Flash in a race, over 9000 times. 30) I began the Shaolin Monastery to kick some Qing butt, but meditate through the 2nd half of the Qing dynasty that led to its somewhat destruction. Then I woke up, kicked some Qing "bandits", and restored the monastery. I hope my opponent will post in R5, cause I would really like to see what he had in mind. Thank you.
Resolved: No one is as epically awesome as I

Mmm...I guess my awesomeness was simply too great. I hope axM62 will respond in the next round. I will really enjoy what he has to say. To continue where I left off: 11) I was actually the first in space, but scientists did not believe how I launched myself without rockets. 12) I touched MC-Hammer. 13) I taught Stephen Hawking the theory of black holes, then went into space changed it a bit and that's why Hawking lost his bet to Kip Thorne. 14) I made a sniper long shot of 3 miles; unfortunately, physicists did not have time to validate it. 15) I went to Sinnoh, aka Pokemon Island, and captured Mewtwo. 16) I went back in time killed robots and went into the future and crippled a futuristic supercomputer mastermind. Some dude found me decapitating something that looks like a T-800 and was inspired to create the Terminator series. 17) I ended the Cold War, single-handily. 18) I made the first successful plane before the Wright brothers capable with a speed of Mach 4. 19) I killed Abe Lincoln's assassin, James Garfield's assassin, R.F.K's assasin, and J.F.K's assassin all with one bullet. 20) I escaped the "limbo" dream state several times. More to come, otherwise my awesomeness will kill you if I threw it all at once.
Resolved: No one is as epically awesome as I

Let's begin! Roadmap: Just on Con's awesome case. Definitions: Epically awesome - extremely impressive or daunting; inspiring great admiration, apprehension, or fear; Sniperjake1994. I - my opponent: axM62 I am much more epically awesome than my opponent because: 0) He was awing my awesomeness for 2 days, lost track of time, and forfeited. 1) I've divided by zero successfully several times and the results are several black holes. 2) I had ventured into the black hole and wrote the Time Machine (I just changed the names a bit and used a pen-name, H.G Wells cause I sounds legit at the time) 3) I found the reasons why the Charter colony mysteriously disappeared. 4) I found Waldo every time without opening my eyes. 5) I am Bruce Lee's grandson, so I'll whoop your *ss. 6) I have more lives that a cat. and thus I've done so many stupid actions and lived to tell about it such as running through a mile's worth of swords, blades pointed at me. 7) I had a staring contest with Chuck Norris and won. 8) I beat the supposedly unbeatable Turk chess robots more than once. 9) I counted to infinity twice and lived. 10) I killed a stonefish with my bare hands. And more to come, stay tuned.
Resolved: No one is as epically awesome as I

I would like to thanks axM62 for this debate. Good luck! Questions: 1) Can I specifically define the phrase "epically awesome?" 2) ANY tactics is considered a fair game? 3) We can go for something absolutely absurd or OMG *head explodes*. 4) Anything we deem FIT? Meaning I can make up ridiculous arguements. 5) Resolution states: "No one"; meaning it doesn't just have to be Con that's more awesome it could be from a 3rd party? I look forward to an entertaining debate.
Resolved: No one is as epically awesome as I

I would like my opponent to post any questions they might have about today's debate. I will answer those questions in the comment section. My challenge is for my opponent to prove they are more awesome than I. My opponent and I can resort to any tactic we deem fit and sources are not needed or suggested. I suggest we tell whatever tales embody our true epicness in order to teach our esteemed audience what vessel of awesomeness we truly are in order to achieve the honorary title of "The Most Awesome Creature of All Time". I look forward to this debate.