BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
American History Is Fiction, False & Propaganda To The Highest Degree

Hi, I don't agree with you at all. What foreigners have you met that consider American history as a joke? Or more specifically, What foreign historians have you met that consider American history a joke? Because I know many historians and none of them consider any country's history a joke. I also don't see foreign historians laughing at our education system/society (maybe because we are the most powerful country in the world? But that's irrelevant). Could you present some examples of fiction, Lies, Or propaganda in American history? Because I don't notice how the US is proud of its wounds or hides its scars. How is our dishonesty blatant, And how is literally EVERY ASPECT of our history a pyramid scheme? I'm not arguing with you yet, I just want to see your points and arguments.
American History Is Fiction, False & Propaganda To The Highest Degree

The American (mis)education system needs a complete overhaul because it's full of lies, Half-truths and fiction. From discovery to holidays, Every aspect of our history is a huge pyramid scheme. I've been fortunate to travel abroad for many years and I've noticed that the foreigners of Academia view American history as a joke. "Why does a country, So proud of its wounds, Hides its scars? " From what I've learned throughout my studies is that we are the laughing stock of society because our dishonesty is so blatant. If anyone can deliver a solid case that proves otherwise, Then don't accept this debate. Illogical and ignorant comments will get you embarrassed.
American History Is Fiction, False & Propaganda To The Highest Degree

How ignorant are you? The 13th amendment ABOLISHED slavery in the entire United States. It didn't decide that slaves were 3/5 human, That was a Supreme Court case. For someone who claims that all aspects of American history are a huge pyramid scene, You have a very poor knowledge of history. There is a huge difference between not being taught a fact and being taught a lie. In schools, Not all the facts are taught. For example, I never learned that Hitler was a drug addict and a vegetarian in school, But does that make German history false? Leaving out facts to only teach kids basic history isn't lying and propaganda. We aren't taught that Columbus was a bloody pedophile (which, I will not deny, He was) not because American history is propaganda but because schools only teach kids basic history. If you would go on Wikipedia or do any of your own research, You would see that such information isnt hidden. NOBODY DENIES THAT COLUMBUS WAS A MURDERER AND DIDN'T ACTUALLY DISCOVER AMERICA. All you do is build up strawmen and then accuse the US schoolsystem of propaganda because it doesn't teach all the facts. I'm not going to get into the BLM narrative, As this discussion is about history. There is not a single law in the US anywhere which discriminates against African Americans. Every human IS created equal. Period. There is also no need to group me into "you guys" and say that I'm brainwashed by the US education system. That is classic ad hominem fallacy.
American History Is Fiction, False & Propaganda To The Highest Degree

Ok. . . You say that "nobody hides the facts. " Let's take a closure look at Columbus. We were taught in school that he emphatically discovered America and that he was a great man. Our curriculum seems to leave out that he tortured and murdered slaves/natives. On top of that, He molested underage girls. How do I know this? . . . Columbus' fellow voyagers reported his atrocities when they made it back to Europe and he was jailed for it. Yes, It's documented in Spain's slave records. We surely didn't hear about these crimes in history class did we? Thanks for admitting that Black people were slaves during the drafting of the Declaration so why would the Declaration/Constitution state that (All Men Are Created Equal)? Is that not a bold-face lie? Either way you try to spin it, That facts prove that it was not a misconception. You can't be mad at me for pointing it out. Now. . . You just said that Blacks were never 3/5 human in the US. . . Sir, The 13th Amendment of the Constitution stated that provisions allowed southern states to count (Slaves) as three-fifth human. My question to use is "who were the (slaves) during this time in the south? Yet again, You put your foot in your mouth. . . You also said that it was never written, And I just proved that it was. How are you going to talk your way out of that nonsense at this point in time? . . . Nope, I did not say that the Constitution stated that natives were merciless savages. . . I said that the "Declaration" stated that the natives were merciless savages. Are you following me? Sir, The Constitution and Declaration are separate documents. Who said anything about BLM? You said that policemen who murder citizens go to jail. OK. . . The police murder of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, Walter Scott, Eric Harris, Tamir Rice etc all walked free. Just two days ago, The cops who killed Stephon Clark walked as well. Yes, These murders were caught on tape, But I guess "all men are created equal. " I'm pretty sure that if the shoe was on the other foot, You'd speak different, But that's just how you guys operate. . . My advice to you is to leave Wikipedia alone & study from legitimate sources. I don't blame you for your ignorance, I blame the American (mis)education system that lacked to actually teach you.
The Moral behind humpty dumpty aren't relevant to life.

My opponent's morals are irrelevant. 1. Don't sit on a wall if you're an egg. The poem is about a cannon. "There One-Eyed Thompson stood on the wall A gunner of deadliest aim of all From St. Mary's Tower his cannon he fired Humpty-Dumpty was its name" Therefore, the poem is indeed about a cannon, and not an egg. My opponent figures that it implies that Humpty Dumpty is an egg; however, it is not and cannot be, as it can only be a cannon. One can easily conclude that my opponent's moral is irrelevant. 2. Medieval cavalry shouldn't be used as doctors. Doctors don't fix cannons; they treat the sick or wounded. Therefore, medieval cavalry could not be considered to be a doctor and so this moral is also irrelevant. Further, multiple versions of the Poem do not even mention these horses; therefore, they are obviously not important to the true theme of the poem. However, my morals are actually found in the poem and do apply to real life. 1. Be careful. What happened historically and what the poem was written about may contrast, but the poem clearly states, "From St. Mary's Tower his cannon he fired Humpty-Dumpty was its name Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall. Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. " . http://en.wikipedia.org... The poem does not mention anything about being shot; therefore, the fall being an accident is not part of the poem. The everyday reader (the toddler) assumes that Humpty Dumpty fell due to a lack of care. Therefore, the concusion in the toddler's head would be to be more careful, which is obviously the moral that counts. My opponent has conceded that being careful is relevant to life. 2. Some things can't be rebuilt. As I have stated earlier, in the poem, the cannon was not shot, it fell. It was broken. It could not be rebuilt. That was the story. From this, the children know that somethings can't be rebuilt. Further, my opponent has conceded that this moral is relevant to life. My opponent has also conceded that 'This teaches kids that s*** happens'. This is applicable to life, and my opponent has agreed to it. Children may learn at a ripe young age that accidents happen. There are morals behing Humpty Dumpty that are relevant to life. In conclusion, the voter should vote CON. My opponent had burden of proof, but failed to prove that there are no morals in Humpty Dumpty that are relevant to life. Thank you for reading this debate. Vote and leave a reason for decision.
The Moral behind humpty dumpty aren't relevant to life.

I would like to note that my opponent has broken the rules of conduct I presented in R1 as he used R2 to rebut my morals AND defend his. Therefore, he should not be awarded conduct. Now for the defence of my morals: 1.Don't sit on a wall if you're an egg. My opponent says 'does not mention any egg and is about a cannon.'. Where, in the poem that I presented, does it mention a cannon? As far as I see it, Humpty Dumpty is presented a a fragile object that is unrepairable after falling from something. An egg is a prime example if this. 2. Medieval cavalry shouldn't be used as doctors. As I have mentioned the poem I presented has 'all the kings horses and all the kings men'. My opponent has forgotten we are using the poem I presented in R1, therefore there were horses and men. As I mentioned, horses are not adept to fixing things, nor are armour clad men, be it cannon or egg. Rebutting his morals: 1. Be careful. My opponent says that it fell, and the cannon wasn't blasted. However, I quote wikipedia in saying 'The church tower was hit by enemy cannon fire and the top of the tower was blown off, sending "Humpty" tumbling to the ground.' http://en.wikipedia.org.... Now, if we take your guess that it fell, then this is a deep metaphor, that even some educated adults wouldn't interpret straight off. You see, the reader is told something fell from a tower, and like most things, something that falls from a tower breaks. Therefore, it is not relevant to life as most people won't experience heights as far up as a tower. 2. Some things can't be rebuilt. My opponent says that children will learn they can't just break their toys and expect new ones. However, the cannon was blasted and because they could put it no where else, it doesn't teach a child not to break their toys. A more relevant interpretation is when you leave a painting out to dry, and someone takes it and rips it up. You had to put the painting there for it to dry, but someone messed it up. This teaches kids that 's*** happens', not be careful. My opponents morals are barely applicable to life, and neither are the ones I have presented, so therefore I urge you to vote con. Thank you.
The Moral behind humpty dumpty aren't relevant to life.

I will rebut my opponent's attacks and then prove his morals aren't the morals behind Humpty Dumpty. First, though, it is important to note that a story made Humpty Dumpty into an egg ("Through the Looking Glass") http://www.gutenberg.org... However, the morals behind the nursery rhyme were created when the poem was written. In its original form, Humpty Dumpty was a cannon and should be judged as such, even though later, a riddle made it an egg. http://www.straightdope.com... To the morals: 1. Be careful. The cannon wasn't blasted. It fell. Read the poem. So, next time, the person placing the cannon would not put it so that it would fall. Beyond the narrow meaning, "Don't put cannons all walls in a way that they would fall.", is the broader meaning, or moral: "Be careful." People being careful is a moral that is relevant to life. 2. Some things can't be rebuilt. Again, we must look beyond the narrow moral of, "Cannon's can't be rebuilt." to a more broader moral, which does effect life: "Some things can't be rebuilt." While a this is impractical to some objects, it is quite practical to others. The kid learns that he/she can't just smash his toys because they might never be the same again. The kid finally understanding that somethings not being able to be rebuilt without learning the hard way is good. In addition, this is obviously relevent to life. Only one of my morals has to stand for me to win this debate. My opponent's morals: 1. Don't sit on a wall if you're an egg. This is not a moral of the poem because the poem does not mention any egg and is about a cannon. Therefore, it is not the moral of humpty Dumpty. 2. Medieval cavalry shouldn't be used as doctors. They weren't doctors. The "threescore men and threescore more" were people, not horses, who tried to fix the once-great-but-now-fallen cannon. Therefore, this moral doesn't apply to the poem. I remind my audience that my opponent has the burden of proof. My opponent has not came up with the real morals from the poem. I have, and they do apply to life quite obviously. I again thank my opponent for this interesting debate. One more round!
The Moral behind humpty dumpty aren't relevant to life.

This round will be used to rebut my opponents points: My opponent has presented 2 alternative poems to the one I have presented but we agreed that we will use the one I posted in R1. The imagery often used for this poem is an egg. I quote Wikipedia 'Humpty Dumpty is a character in a Nursery rhyme typically portrayed as an egg.' Now to rebut his points: 1. Be careful. My opponent says 'his is beneficial to life because someone who is careful not to lose things is less likely to lose them and someone who makes smarter decisions regarding safety will live a longer life and also be happier'. However, using his own theory against him. The cannon didn't fall, but it was blasted by another cannon. This does not tell the reader to be careful, as the tower was tactically the best place for the cannon, and when it was hit was just unfortunate. If, however, we interpret it as Humpty Dumpty being an egg, it is obvious then has no meaning to life as it just says an egg fell off a wall and broke, like an egg does. If you did drop an egg, it's not tragic, you just grab another. Therefore, it has no relevance to life. 2. Some things can't be rebuilt. As I said in my previous rebuttal, Humpty Dumpty was hit by another cannon, but Humpty had to be put there tactically. Yes, it would tell us some things can't be rebuilt. But if we interpret it as Humpty being a cannon, cannon's aren't used in war anymore. Furthermore, most children can't afford a cannon and most won't put it in a tower during a raging civil war to fend off against waves of royalists. If we interpret it as Humpty being an egg, most children know a bit of glue or duct tape won't fix an egg. To most children, an egg is of little value. If they break one, as mentioned before, they simply get another one. An egg isn't an example of an expensive or precious thong, so therefore it has no relevance to life. Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org...
The Moral behind humpty dumpty aren't relevant to life.

Further clarification: egg- the hard-shelled reproductive body produced by a bird and especially by the common domestic chicken . http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2] cannon- A large mounted weapon that fires heavy projectiles. Cannon include guns, howitzers, and mortars. . http://www.answers.com... Humpty Dumpty was a cannon, not an egg. "It was used during the English Civil War ( 1642 - 1649) in the Siege of Colchester (13 Jun 1648 - 27 Aug 1648). " . http://www.rhymes.org.uk... Eggs cannot be used in war, and were not common items of war in this time. Therefore, it is obvious that Humpty Dumpty was a cannon, not an egg, and their definitions are too far apart for the poem to be referring to both. Other versions of the poem are: Humpty dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty dumpty had a great fall; Threescore men and threescore more, Could not place Humpty as he was before. . http://www.rhymes.org.uk... The extended version: In Sixteen Hundred and Forty-Eight When England suffered the pains of state The Roundheads lay siege to Colchester town Where the King's men still fought for the crown There One-Eyed Thompson stood on the wall A gunner of deadliest aim of all From St. Mary's Tower his cannon he fired Humpty-Dumpty was its name Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall. Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the king's horses and all the king's men Couldn't put Humpty together again. . http://en.wikipedia.org... As it is R1, and as my opponent has already suggested, I will only be able to post the morals from this poem this round. I will rebut my opponent's morals and defend mine next round. 1. Be careful. Obviously, it was a great loss to lose this cannon. Therefore, the reader knows to be careful. This is beneficial to life because someone who is careful not to lose things is less likely to lose them and someone who makes smarter decisions regarding safety will live a longer life and also be happier. This is relevent to life. 2. Some things can't be rebuilt. The poem makes it clear that the cannon cannot be rebuilt. Knowing that somethings cannot be rebuilt teaches a child not to break things and that some changes are permanent. This is also relevent to life. I will elaborate in later rounds.
The Moral behind humpty dumpty aren't relevant to life.

The rhyme of Humpty Dumpty that we will be using is: Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall. Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the king's horses and all the king's men Couldn't put Humpty together again. Each side must present 2 morals they interpret from the said poem in R1 and rebut the other morals in r2, r3 is more-less free reign Pro Moral 1: Don't sit on a wall if you're an egg: The said poem tells us the perils of sitting on a wall if you are an egg. You could fall, break and never be put together again. Even by the king's men. However, humans aren't eggs. We don't get cracked into bowls to make delicious omelets or go hand in hand with bacon to make someone's day. Pro Moral 2: Medieval cavalry shouldn't be used as Doctors: The poem tells us at the end that all the kings horses and men couldn't put him back together again. Well, the kings men in hand are armed with swords and shields and dressed up in armour, as they are knights after all. Any attempts made by them would be futile. So it's up to the horses. Horses don't have opposable thumbs last time I heard. And if I were to make an egg crushing device, a hoof would do a very good job. But we no longer use medieval cavalry, so this has no relevance to modern times.
Atheism is more probable then Theism

Problem of Evil1. If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect. (As defined by Christian theologians and philosophers.)2. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.3. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.4. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.5. Evil exists.6. If evil exists and God exists, then either God does not have the power to eliminate all evil, or does not know when evil exists, or does not have the desire to eliminate all evil.Conclusion: Therefore, God doesn't exist.There are a few out-comes for the PE (Problem of Evil) 1: God is not Omnipotent 2: God is not Omniscient3: God is not morally perfect.4:Evil doesn't exist 5:God is not really a Tri-Omni god.Not the best argument but time to move on the the Kalam.Kalam Cosmological Argument1) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.2) The universe began to exist.3) Therefore, the universe had a cause.The issue with this is because we only can witness ex materia creation, not ex nihilo. We can't take the rules for "ex materia" and then sic them to "ex nihilo".One other thing. God is a problem for the KCA. WHERE did God come from? HOW (like how the big bang was created the universe?) did God come to be? No doubt by "argument from design" logic it had to be quite the anomaly. Thus by this logic the KCA and God are self refuting.
Atheism is more probable then Theism

Resolved: Atheism is more probable than Theism. For purposes of this debate, the term "God" will be defined as to include the general attributes of the Judeo-Christian God (i.e.: omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence etc.) That is to say, we are not referring to anyspecific deity. "More probable" is to be defined as more likely than not (in other words, atheism is more likely than Theism). Rules: (1) Debater must have typing experience and internet access. (2) Place your arguments and sources inside the debate (3) Structure the debate in a readable, coherent fashion. (4) No semantics, trolling, or lawyering. (5) Forfeiting any round will result in a 7 point loss. Rounds: (1) Acceptance (2) Opening Statement (3) Rebuttal (4) Rebuttal Other notes: (1) 72 hours to argue; (2) If special circumstances arise, one side may ask the other to wait out his or her remaining time. (3) If one side explicitly concedes or violates any terms, then all seven points will be awarded to the other; (4) By accepting this challenge, you agree to these terms.
Atheism is more probable then Theism

I feel like I can rebut all of the theist in this rant. You have avoided the Higgs Boson. This alone rebuts the KCA. You now have no clear agrument for God therefore you lose. The Problem of evil is sound. You gave me confusing riddles with no value. I could sto here but my opponent thinks I cheated. I did not. Conduct to me and arguments to me abuse he had none. I am busy with life and I think by my opponent giving sloppy rounds lead to confusion os both sides. I will allow a better rematch in the future if you want to. Peace.
Ireland should have one official language

Many scientists have proven research that learning a second language whether it be at home or through the school system finds it beneficial to a students learning ability. Learning more the one language will provide your brain with better functionality and problem solving skills. Now Irish being a compulsory subject in schools is vital to keep the language alive. It's no secret that without schools teaching the subject no one would bother learning it. Without the schools help future generations would not bother learning the language and forget all about it, destroying Ireland's culture and diversity from the UK. One of the reasons why Irish isn't so widely spoken as English is (in Ireland itself) is not because it's "useless" but because of how it is taught in school. According to Independence.ie,"There are also too many aspects to cover on the course in too short a time, so teachers are forced to prepare students for an exam, instead of having time to teach the basics. Students thus do not develop the skills needed to learn a language properly". In Northern Ireland Irish is known as a second language and more than 1/3 of the population have no problem using the language because it is taught more effectively and efficiently than Ireland. If Ireland could learn how to introduce Irish to the education system better than there wouldn't be so much controversy over the subject as there is today. Irish is a great language to learn especially about Celtic culture, it provides Poetry, Songs, Culture, Stories and more to the people that know it. Every one in Ireland should learn the language to connect with their heritage and it also provides us with a more "Irish" way of thinking. I would like to thank my opponent for a good debate and I hope to see you vote my side of the argument. Sources: http://www.telegraph.co.uk... http://www.broadsheet.ie... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://answers.yahoo.com... http://www.bitesizeirishgaelic.com...