BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
We need to change the way we live or we will all die

I'm actually new to this website but I'm excited that a found somewhere to debate. So I think we can all agree that climate change is a big problem. It looks like the ocean levels are going to rise substantially and there are going to increased frequency of natural disasters across the globe. I also think we can all agree that it is at least partly caused by humans. Simultaneously we are on track to hit 10 billion people by the year 2050. There is no way we can support a population of this size without some major changes. I am not claiming to have the solutions but it does worry me that we do not seem to be working towards a solution. We seem to be ignoring the impending doom. This next argument is from a TED talk by Charles C. Mann. I encourage you to go an watch it. If you have ever taken biology you have seen bacteria grow in a petri dish. In the petri dish is agar or agarose. The bacteria is in an environment with all that it needs to reproduce with no predators. It reproduces until the environment can no longer support the bacteria and they starve to death. If you are a follower of Darwin you must take in to consideration that we too are a species that has the same natural instincts of all other living creatures. Reproduce and protect yourself. We continue to grow as a species but we are the first species to ever to have the opportunity to evade our own death. My argument here is that change needs to occur. We, As a species, Must decide what we are going to do.
God is real

For one the girl I saw had muscle missing from her arms and legs, we saw it grow back. Two, the thing called science is not valid when it comes to God, this is because God is all powerful, so anything that does have to do with going against miracles is deemed not valid, and now the Red Sea, you saw that it is not possible for it to be parted, I say it is, and there is evidence that it did part, like at the bottom of the Red Sea they found a wheel of a Chariot, which they think is from the Pharaohs chariot. Now for the Water into wine, as I said before, with God it is possible, but there is also some science behind that. Go to the first link for that science, again with the Red Sea in the story itself,if you read it, that the ground became solid and they people walked through it with no problem. The thing is you are not looking at it from both sides, convincing and Atheist that God is real is nearly impossible, but give solid evidence that there is a God just through Miracle's is not possible. Plus the bible was written over a period of 2000 years and there were many many writers from many different times, from farmers, to tax collectors, to even kings. So the ideology of there not being a God is almost impossible. I say go out side now I ask you if the Big Bang was an accident then how did it become this beautiful. The author Lee Strobe wrote many books trying to figure out if God was real or not, when he started he was an atheist like you and he said that there was too much evades to disprove that God is real. So now I say give me the best evidence that you can give me. http://www.wnd.com... (the Red Sea) http://askjohnmackay.com... (water into wine) https://scienceandbelief.org...
God is real

Indeed, it is as you say, I can say that your claims are false, and that is what I shall assert as there is nothing more than mere tales and paintings that depict such "miracles." It is medically and scientifically impossible for someone who has been unable to walk for some time to simply begin walking again with no prior physiotherapy, this calls into the question whether this girl even had the condition you thought she had. On another note, the Bible claims that God parted the Red Sea to allow the Israelites to escape from the Egyptians, yet not only is it impossible for the sea to be parted in such a way, as determined by scientific laws, but parts of the Red Sea are several hundred metres deep which would mean anyone crossing would fatally fall hundreds of metres down. Another example of what can be deemed impossible, where the Bible claims that Jesus Christ changed water into wine, using nothing but his will. It is impossible to change the atomic structure of anything to something completely different using your will, touch or otherwise. It has been proven that the Red Sea is several hundred, even thousands of metres deep, anyone can go confirm that with the right equipment and transport. It has also been proven that atoms exist and that they cannot be changed as the Bible claims they can. What has not been proven is that someone has or can be cured through prayer alone or that an all-powerful, all-knowing being exists that has supposedly granted these miracles. The Burden of Proof lies with the one making the claim, and the opposition claims that a higher power exists, I challenge them to show definitive proof in their response.
God is real

The existence of God is a subject that has been debated for many eons. Many well known Christians have been shut down and got disproved on the existence of God, being a 15 year old, I wont know as much as theologians, but there is one thing that I can say. I have my self experience the love of God. I wont say many books evidence and other things, you could say that I am lying about this story that I am going to say. But I would not lie about this is something that I am very passionate about. So here it goes. My "name" is Khons, two years ago I was at a summer camp and there was this girl that went there, she had muscular scoliosis, now you may say that is is not anything that can prove the existence just wait, during a prayer session she was there and you we prayed for her, in about two minutes she was healed. She could run and walk again. There are also non-Christian text that also prove but I will let my oppose tell there side.
This website is a dumpster fire

I'm going to upload this once a week until I catch the attention of the managers of this website; or quit DDO (which might be soon). Feel free to comment other bugs and I will add them to this list! Why DDO is an absolute dumpster fire:- The president hasn't logged in for over 6 months. - Every, Word, After, A, Comma, Gets, Capitalized, For, Some reason. - Most people can't confirm voting privileges because the phone identity thing is broken therefore no on votes on anything- Half the time posting a URL completely voids your post or comment. - Critical links are frequently riddled with unsolvable 404 errors. - The search function is completely useless. - This website stores your passwords in unencrypted"Plain Text" format. This means any hacker who gets access to the database will be able to read and download your password directly. - I can't even create a new poll with this topic because this website is so broken. So I'll just put this debate up instead. We might be able to change this. I urge everyone who wants a better DDO to email the owners, Juggle LLC: support(at)juggle(dot)comSend them a link to this debate. Tell them you want a better website. If a few dozen people do this they might actually invest effort into updating it. Juggle contact page: http://www. Juggle. Com/corporate/contact-us/
Dota 2 is better then league of legends

Dota 2 is free you don't have to buy league of legends to get it and the report system does work it puts players into low prio and it will mute them it is very well thought out. saying stuff like "lol" or "GG" is not poor conduct sometimes gg can be good and lol can have nothing to do with the game at all. Dota 2 is no mod from league of legends it is its own game besides players have loved dota 2 much more like weaver league of legends has a worse version of that hero techies too. not a mod.
Dota 2 is better then league of legends

Dota 2 has a report system? How does that change anything, they'll still be mean, reporting on that game doesn't do nothing. league of legends has lots of mods too you know, and including all the ones dota 2 has, why? Because dota 2 is a mod itself saying stuff like "lol" or "GG" is poor conduct, and the people can take off points for that. it maybe true that league of legend heroes can cost money, but due to the fact dota is a mod, you have to buy league of legends and dota 2 to get it.
Dota 2 is better then league of legends

Taking more time to master all the heroes in a game is not considered skill. Dota 2 has a report system so you can get rid of all the bad players and players who feed or are mean. Also, dota 2 has lots of mods so you can mess around and dota 2 has lots of game modes to play in. League of Legends abbreviates to lol so everyone who has even heard of league of legends just lol it because its lol. Half of those heroes you talking about cost MONEY and dota is completely f2p!
Dota 2 is better then league of legends

First off, dota 2 is a mod of league of legends, pure and simple, and since that league of legends was made first, it would mean dota 2's heroes have ripped them off League of legends release date is 2009 Dota 2 was released in 2013 And league of legends does need skill, it has more heroes, so it would take more time to master them all.
Blacks are equal to whites

I never understood the attraction Towards another man's anus I was always a pedosexual, Never a homosexual I don't understand this world How can you accept homosexuality And then ban pedosexuality How can you say that love towards children Is worse than love towards anus I don't understand your theses Pedosexuals spread love Homosexuals spread diseases But not even that matters I would accept homosexuality If they accepted pedosexuality But they reject pedosexuals So I reject homosexuals Why would I support them If they don't support me My love towards children Is better than their love towards men I would rather kill thousands of homosexuals Than harm even one pedosexual man
Blacks are equal to whites

Homosexual trait I was always against homosexuality If you are a homosexual, Tell me Why do you rape children Why do you cause them pain What do you have to gain The homosexual priests rape children They take away their childhood innocence Exposing them to their homosexual ways I hope that one day we can kill all gays Someone with a good childhood Cannot become a homosexual But when a child gets raped by a homosexual, The brain suffers damage and becomes more sexual The child becomes obsessed with homosexuality And ends up having sex with children and adult men Homosexuals rape little girls And turn them into lesbians who hate men Homosexuals are truly disgusting beings, The day of the rope will come And all homosexual men will hang Their crimes are one too many This has to stop, It's already too late We must eradicate a homosexual trait
Blacks are equal to whites

Everyone seems to think that us white people are better than blacks. They say they are savages. A different species. They don"t belong. Why? Because they are more tanned than we are? That"s a load of crap. They never did anything to us. They never hurt us. If they did it"s becuase we deserved it. I wanted to see if anyone has the nerve to challenge this. Anyone idiotic enough to think that blacks are the worthless, Ugly, Savage creatures all the stupid whites make them out to be. They really aren"t, But maybe someone disagrees?
The Marriage Between Prophet Muhammad & Aisha Is Good.

This debate is impossible to accept, if you’re interested please let me know in the comment section. Resolution: - Good: healthy, sound, beneficial, favourable & decent ; not harmful, not defective, not unethical & not immoral. - This debate will assume the Majority Position about the age of Aisha: 6 yo at her Marriage, & 9/10 yo when she moved in with Muhammad. Rules: - Unsupported offensive claims, insults, accusations & hate speech is not allowed, & will result in my automatic win. Once my opponent accepts the debate, he/she thereby agrees to these terms, & will be subject to them. - The BOP is shared, where it is required to establish to a sufficient degree the propriety: Good for Pro, & Not Good for Con (concerning the said Marriage that is). - Arguments are required to be taken to their full conclusions, suggestions & questions will be inadmissible. Structure: - Round 1: Acceptance. - Round 2, 3, 4: Arguments & Rebuttals, plus Closing Argument. - 4 Rounds, 10,000 characters each.
hats in schools

"I think that we should be able to wear hats in school because some kids don't have time to do their hair in the morning so when they wear a hat I helps prevent them from getting bullied so if we don't wear hats then you aren't helping stop bulling." Children don't get bullied due to their hair. If such were true, then there wouldn't be a "wacky hair day" at schools. The reason hats are banned are for protection reasons. For example, if someone were to get robbed in school, the cameras wouldn't be able to recognise the culprit because the hat is blocking their face. Also, it is used to prevent gang signs. Plenty of hats have gang signs. Furthermore, it disrespects the teacher. Usually, when wearing hats, you intercept eye contact with others. When talking to an adult, it is respectful to make eye contact. With hats, this ruins such from occurring.
NCR (Pro) vs Caesar's Legion (Con)

Of course, as anyone who knows a minuscule of knowledge of the game, the Battle of Hoover Dam is a battle, not the war. Whatever faction wins doesn't automatically win the war. This is about if they would win. SOLDIERS Unlike the NCR, which descended from the vaults and has almost existed a hundred years, Caesar's Legion is only a few decades old. Soldiers still remember the tribes they came from. Upon Caesar's eventual death, they more likely than not disband the Legion, for two reasons. First, it's more likely than not the death of the quasi Roman religion. Upon his death, the Legion would crumble after the death of the Son of God, their savior from the wreckage of humanity. WIthout Caesar, the Cult of Mars would become an empty husk of its old self. Or if the empire does survive, it will likely spilt, like Shia and Sunni did after the death of Muhamad. Funny enough, if the Followers of the Apocolypse sent the knowledge of the religion's fraud and fakery and it's charlatan leader, that may end it. Second, due to the fact that there is no plan set for his death. Not only would they be required to find a new leader (democracy isn't an option), they would need to find a new way for them to fit into the religion. The empire is a theocratic thralldom, and as Shakespeare said, Theology is a fortress; and no crack in a fortress may be considered small. Additionally, I've known many members of the US military that have a lack luster interest in their jobs. And no one really questions their effectiveness as a superpower. The NCR soldiers in New Vegas can be drunk simply due to the fact that they can be. It's protected by Mr. House. And again, I've heard countless stories of military men getting sloshed and getting a little frisky. ALLIES AND FRIENDS Of course, the NCR has enemies, every nation does. But so does the Legion. And don't let down MR. House's position, he does own the most powerful city on the west coast. And he defended himself against nukes for God's sake. He's a TECHNOLOGY The very reason that the Legion is able to supply it's soldiers easily, is because they require much less. Anyone with a half a brain knows that to make an army of skirted swordsmen takes a lot less material. Both of the factions don't know how to operate the dam, yet that doesn't mean that they're on equal footing. That would be fallacious. Also, try going without medicine in the battlefield, it doesn't turn out well.
NCR (Pro) vs Caesar's Legion (Con)

In Fallout New Vegas, there are several primary factions such as the Brotherhood of Steel, New California Republic (NCR), Caesar's Legion and Mr. House. If the two largest factions, the NCR and Legion conflicted against each other and waged war, one must ask who would win. I take the side of the NCR, primarily due to their technological advantage, and the Legion's lack luster governmental setup. Technologically speaking, the NCR is much better prepared. The Legion's soldiers will use guns if forced to, yet at the same time, their opponent is willing to use vertibirds, chems, power armor and guns. Due to their continued usage of such tech, the NCR soldiers are prepared to use them. And from their industrialization, the NCR could continue to produce guns. Much like Japan in WWII, the Legion wouldn't be able to take such an industrialized super power. Not only will they not use advanced weaponry, they couldn't get easy access to it. But one may ask what does it matter if they are years ahead of the Roman rip-off Legion? Technology itself doesn't win a battle. The Brotherhood of Steel had vastly superior prowess, yet they were bested many times by the NCR. Guerrilla warfare can be quite effective. But that forces me to digress to my next point. The Legion doesn't resemble Rome at its height as Caesar would like to believe it does. Rather it resembles its fall. Caesar has no contingency plans for his death. If he dies, he goes the way of Romulus and Remus and into the wastebasket of history. Hell, even Caesar himself believes this. If push comes to shove, the NCR could just wait it out. The man has a freaking tumor in his brain, eventually, he's going to kick the bucket. Compare this to the NCR, which because of the fact that it is a functioning democracy, President Kimball could be killed, but someone else could easily take his place. The only possible way the Legion could get out of this problem is by making Caesar's death much like a dying and rising god such as Jesus and incorporating this into the Cult of Mars. 1. First round is acceptance and opening arguments 2. Don't forfeit 3.
open voting on debate.org should be abolished or curtailed

I think you present a huge false dichotomy in the first half of your argument. Let me clarify the moderators proposal. The debate.org people would peruse the boards and determine who is a good candidate. Then they would invite these people to be judges. Then, for each debate voting would be open until a preset number of judges voted (maybe 3). They would write RFDs and this would determine the winner. No money need be involved, they don't need to be staff or anything. It's a simple and highly plausible proposal. Ultimately, I am satisfied with the conclusion that SOMETHING must change, so I think we basically agree. My concern is that if the RFD idea wouldn't stop people form just stating their position on the topic. That is, they might use their own opinions as an RFD. This wouldn't solve any of the current problems. Overall, I;m just glad we fundamentally agree
open voting on debate.org should be abolished or curtailed

I think that at a fundamental level, the people who have a right to determine how the debate is adjudicated are the debaters. They are the ones who spend the time to carefully read opponent's arguments, do research when necessary and type out arguments. They should have their debate judged however they want. I think this would be especially useful on counter-intuitive or controversial debates where asking people to release preconceptions is a much more difficult task. I also do not think that anything is lost by allowing an option for non-open voting. You gain the same education and still get to take in different sides of an argument by reading the arguments and not voting because there is nothing about clicking that little button that improves your experience in any reasonable way. At a minimum, why not include a "what the people say" box and a "what the judges say" box and just do both? So, who would become a moderator? Good question, but I don't think this is some sort of argument against my position, it's just a quandary to consider. Fact is, some people actually are better at judging debates than others. For example, on weekends I judge high school debate tournaments for extra cash and I can say that experienced judges do a much better job at staying impartial and giving reasonable RFDs than do random parents. In fact, where I judge they don't even let people without some experience either judging or debating work for them. Sure, poor judgments do not affect my life, but if we're going to allow voting, it needs to be with competent people. I think moderators should probably be chosen by the webmaster or whoever runs this site. It could be chose by simply looking at the comments and debates by people on here and deciding who is a positive contributor to the debate.org community and then asking them to judge. Ok, so what about the rationale box suggestion? While I would much prefer this to the current system, I don't think it's better than my suggestion. It's entirely likely that people could just put absurd or ridiculous RFDs in the box. Now, you have suggested some sort of waiver, but if someone's really trying to win, why waive a dumb opinion in your favor? The judge system has the advantage of accountability and responsibility. People who get to be moderators would have a name to protect and they would be more likely to do a good job because they would feel like they were chose because of their skills.
open voting on debate.org should be abolished or curtailed

I've been skimming the arguments here and I notice a common trend. People who have interesting, but controversial opinions tend to start their arguments with "PLEASE ACTUALLY READ THIS INSTEAD OF JUST VOTING AGAINST MY POSITION". It is really sad that these kind of statements are necessary. Thus, I suggest that debate.org appoint moderators who can patrol debates and vote on the winner. These people would be the cream of the debate.org crop or simply people well versed in argumentation and they could provide reasonable decisions with actual reasons for decision. Or, at a minimum, it should be optional. The debates progenitor should be able to make voting open or closed depending on preferences.
open voting on debate.org should be abolished or curtailed

I'm sorry that you do not feel the topic of moderators is not important. I do not feel the same way. I think it is incredibly important, if moderators are used, that the decision on who they are does not put some members about others, as we are all equal here. Unless the three judging positions are open to all (including those with less debating prowess) I don't think that it is fair. Everyone is equal here. I feel very strongly about letting any kind of moderator, aside from the public, be allowed to judge anyone unless they are debate.org staff with credentials. Bur yes, something must be done. I do agree with you on that front kvaughan. Whether it is something that we, the people, must change (the first priority) or if a mandatory change must be made to the structure of the site. I would hope that the people can get past their own belief system and be more open minded when it comes to debating. If we can do that then no change need be made. If people change, then open voting will no longer be an issue. I think that it has many merits, and is ultimately a good polling system. But if the abuse and misuse does not stop, then yes, I think some structural change must occur. Though, I hope it doesn't come to that. Darth_Grievous_42 out.