BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Resolved - The earth is spherical

I invite my opponent, lannan13, to debate the resolution of whether the earth is spherical.I will be arguing in support of the veracity of the resolution.Definitions:Spherical: shaped like a sphere (1)If my opponent disputes this definition then he can do so in the comments section before round 2, I will then evaluate the contention.My opponent is also free to present further definitions in round 1, if I dispute them then I will do so in the comments.StructureRound 1: Acceptance & terms/definitionsRound 2: Opening argument(s)Round 3: RebuttalsRound 4: Final rebuttals and closing statementsI look forward to a great debate! (1) Google: 'Define spherical'
Legalization of Abortion

Thanks Pro. I will take this round to defend my points, as well as to respond to those of my opponent.Defense of "Aborting a child is murder"I concede that the logic of my R2 argument was flawed, as I did not mention that it relied on the point that a fetus is a human. After a quick Google search, we can see that murder is officially defined as "the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another"This of course is illegal. "Tapeworms" are not humans, but the fetus is.Debunking "A foetus is not a human being"Pro relies on the notion that a fetus is inhuman because it is dependent on another organism. This logic is erroneous, as it suggests that all dependent beings are inhuman. This includes those on life support, people using donated organs and/or pacemakers, and conjoined twins. This point has been proven false by not only me, but by the eight sources I provided in R2 that easily prove that life begins at conception. "Micro-organisms or tissues that come into our bodies," but the fetus is.Debunking Pros rebuttal to my third argument"victims of the above mentioned, very rarely come out in the open and admit their situations" unsourced"the place taken into study is America" North America has the 8th highest abortion rate in the world (http://www.cbsnews.com...), which makes it a pretty good place to study abortion trends.Rebutting Contention 1"Making abortion illegal would be like punishing them for an accidental mistake they did." We punish people for non-negligent manslaughter. "Abortion is stereotypically viewed as a decision that a crazy or dumb teenager recklessly takes. But that is not the case."This is unsourced and unprovenRebutting Contention 2Adoption is an option that you can take instead of aborting a child. Having the child does not mean that you have to keep it.Rebutting Contention 3This ties in with contention 2. Delivering the baby is not a lifelong contract to keep it. With the recent legalization of same sex marriage in the US, we can expect a surge in adoption rates. Homosexual couples tend to make better parents http://www.medicaldaily.com...Look, I've been crunched for time. Vote Pro. I've rebutted what I can right now. I hereby forfeit this debate.
Lionel Messi is better than renaldo

Talent on the ball Watching grainy images of the teenage Sporting wonderkid on his way to Manchester United back in 2003, those far off days before YouTube served as a highlight reel for any young player in the world, was illuminating. Ronaldo appeared equipped with fearsome dribbling skills which, allied to his pace, made him a prospect to watch very closely indeed. In truth, however, the striker was never a Ronaldinho or a Maradona (or indeed, a Messi) with the ball at his feet. It was only when the stepovers, lollipops and attempted dribbles followed by theatrical dives were cut out of his game that he really became one of the best in the world. In contrast, Messi's game is inextricably linked with his skills on the ball, as is common with so many young Argentines who learn their trade jinking on potholed wasteland and quiet suburban streets. The Barcelona man never uses his dribbling abilities when there is no need; a quick flick here, a lightning turn there and suddenly he is clean through on goal. This talent for dribbling, and most importantly the foresight to know when to use it best, puts him ahead of CR7. Verdict: Messi. Team play A man blessed with all the electrifying talent that the great Diego Maradona had, but without the ego or God complex that went with it; Messi is really something special in the world of football. The soft-spoken star does not court headlines, and this is what makes him such an asset for both Barcelona and Argentina. In some ways, Cristiano Ronaldo suffers from rotten luck. Strong, quick, deadly in front of goal and with the ability to do the spectacular and clean up from close in order to score, in most generations he would undoubtedly be lauded as a cut above the rest. Unfortunately for him, he shares the credits and La Liga with Messi. Both the Argentine's talents and his humble approach put him slightly above the Madrid star and leave no doubt that he is the best player on the planet. In some ways, Cristiano Ronaldo suffers from rotten luck. Strong, quick, deadly in front of goal and with the ability to do the spectacular and clean up from close in order to score, in most generations he would undoubtedly be lauded as a cut above the rest. Good Luck!
Lionel Messi is better than renaldo

The numbers barely separate them. Messi has netted 315 goals in 381 games for Barcelona, since making his debut back in the 2004/05 season. For this reason, Messi provides almost as many assists as he does goals, working brilliantly with the likes of Xavi Hernandez and Andres Iniesta to form football's most formidable trio. Those qualities, plus the impeccable example he lends to team-mates, prompted Argentina coach Alejandro Sabella to make Messi national team captain almost as soon as he took over. Good Luck
Lionel Messi is better than renaldo

When asked to compare Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi -- two other players who may at the end of their careers be in the discussion for Greatest of All Time -- Pele said that Ronaldo currently has the upper hand over Messi. He wasn't exactly putting Messi down, noting his injuries as a major factor for considering Ronaldo to be better, but that might not matter to Messi loyalists. This might also be a case of familiarity breeding something less than contempt -- when asked to choose who he'd rather play with, Pele said Ronaldo, because he considered Messi and himself to be too similar in terms of playing style.
Lionel Messi is better than renaldo

Lionel Messi Good Luck! Lionel Messi He has won more Ballon d"Or titles than anyone else and is nowhere near finished yet. He has broken practically all the records, even surpassing Gerd M"ller"s record of 85 goals in one calendar year. He didn"t just beat the record; he smashed it. The Argentinian outscored him by six goals, scoring 91 goals in total in 2012. And if anyone is ever going to break that record again, then I'd put money on it being Messi breaking his own record. He"s superhuman but with humility. He glides past people with elegance and scores goals with such simplicity, it"s unreal. He makes football seem like the simplest thing in the world. There is not a lot to choose between them but the fact that Messi stays so humble when being officially the best player in the world (as he"s the most recent winner of the Ballon d"Or) clinches it.
The welfare and progressive tax systems are less preferable than...

Yeah, no. Flat tax systems are not a benefit over progressive taxes. The people most able to pay taxes pay the most taxes. A flat rate above the specific line is not helpful. We've had the taxes like this for a long time and there's absolutely no evidence that people try to earn less money because additional money will be taxed at a higher percentage. The more money they make, the more money they make. You did the brackets wrong as well. You pay the tax within that bracket for that money. The money made in the next bracket is paid at the higher rate. If you earn 250,001 dollars and the new bracket starts at 250,000, you pay 1 dollar at the higher tax rate. At no time is it ever not in somebody's best interest to make more money. Further, the people making the most aren't that hard working, innovative, efficient, or productive and offering them more money isn't going to make them any more of those things. The idea that everybody is paid their worth is frankly wrong, a number of people are paid millions upon millions of dollars for doing considerably less work than a blue collar worker and less innovative than an average R&D person. Flat taxes don't work. They are just a massive tax cut on the massively rich. The idea that somebody really works 1000 times harder than a person making 30 thousand because they earn 30 million and that if we tax that person at 30% rather than 50% they will do 20% more is absurd. The bracket system is fairly simple and straightforward. Switching that bracketed system into a single bracket doesn't make it better, it just makes the topmost bracket pay significantly less taxes. Make no mistake, you're proposing a middle-class tax hike that will take in less money over all, during a recession. It's the worst of every world.
The United States federal government should permit the use of financial incentives to encourage orga

In regards to my opponents first contention he states negative impacts of the black market organ selling ,but fails to give me a reason the financial incentive will stop the black market. He provides and opinion an expert one maybe ,but someone who is nowhere qualified to be declaring the state of the global black market for organs, and more importantly this financial incentive sounds great but where would this monetary benefit come from? In a time of economic crisis there is no money to handout. His second contention sub point A I don't see how this is necessarily relevant. Sub point B) relies on the sole fact that more kidneys would be donated and could save up to 400million dollars well this a huge maybe what if somehow the government does scrape up enough money to offer a financial incentive and somehow someone accepts it then a liver is donated. Then what the government loses money and dosen't gain any, but again he fails to prove where would the money come from and that financial incentives would increase organ donations. His third contention relies on the fact that people are impoverish, but this isn't an issue due to their need of an organ its a non unique argument that focuses on empathy and not logic. This contention also revolves around the idea well if we somehow get the money and somehow get someone to sell their organ were going to give it away to hospitals and hope they find a cure or give it to the poor a highly theoretical solution again with no source of money or proof of donation increase,but In a very pessimistic view on it would be who pays higher taxes who will help society we need to look at this on a larger scale instead of an individual case. His fourth contention is based only on the implied fact that organ donations will increase if the government can manage to find the money.My opponents cases revolves around this framework, but he fails to up hold it whatsoever. Without any proof that the black market will fall, any proof organ donations will increase, any source the financial incentives might come from, the organs donated will save money and the fact the argument is based on empathy. For all these reasons I negate
The United States federal government should permit the use of financial incentives to encourage orga

The debate will consist of 4 rounds with the first to accept the invite to debate and definitions or provide counter definitions. Best of luck to my competitor! According to the Business Dictionary, a financial incentive is a monetary benefit offered to consumers, employees and organizations to encourage behavior or actions which otherwise would not take place. Organ Donation: The donation of an organ from a donor, either dead or alive, to a needy recipient
Federal Student Loans Should Be Abolished.

Hello, this will be a debate on whether or not federal student loans should be abolished. As pro, I will affirm that the federal student loan system is more harmful than beneficial to society, and that there are better alternatives to the current system. Con will be defending the status quo. I would like a debater who has had at least 3 debates completed. The debate will be 4 rounds, with an 8,000 character limit. First round may be for acceptance only or for con's first arguments, depending on what con wishes to do. I hope for a great debate!
Bill Cipher w/a physical body vs Discord (Gravity Falls vs My Little Pony FiM)

I believe that Bill Cipher would win this fight. Both are powerful in their own ways, but Bill Cipher pretty much outclasses Discord in almost everything. Bill Cipher is tremendously powerful and tricky, always managing to find a way to get what HE wants out of a deal. Bill Cipher's strength is almost unlimited, able to do almost anything. Though I won't say that he IS unlimited, as he isn't shown to be. While Discord 'terrorizes' others with cotton candy clouds and chocolate rain, Bill Cipher spreads terror throughout the streets with horrifying monsters and insanity. Bill Cipher is much more cruel than Discord would ever be, so he'd have no problem with killing him. Bill Cipher one shotted the Time Baby/Lord of Time easily. Though there are weaknesses he has. The embodiments of the wheel are a way to defeat him, but Discord would have no access to them, since they are outside of this battle. I won't say Discord is weak though. Discord can do almost anything with the snap of his fingers, but harmony magic is a weakness of his, and I assume other types of magic are as well, just that harmony is the most effective. Bill Cipher has destroyed the 2nd dimension, he can grow to any size he wants. Can grow extra limbs and can control time and space itself. Really the biggest factor here is that Bill Cipher would kill others without a thought while Discord would never do something like that. Bill Cipher wins.
Technology gives us information not knowledge

Information is defined as "facts provided or learned about something or someone" Knowledge is defined as "facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject" These definitions were acquired through a quick google search. Here it states that knowledge is the acquisition of information, which can be acquired through experience or education. This definition does not encompass what you would call a "complete concept". Concept and complete seem slightly oxymoronic here as concepts are usually abstract ideas and not wholly complete in themselves, hence why early designs are usually called concepts. Information, in no definition that I have found, specifically relates to data or statistics. These two things are indeed information, as well as facts that the earth is round and grass is green. Your definition of information is rather specific, whereas your definition or knowledge is too unclear. It makes me question the motives of the debate.
The Pistburg Steelers are a better well prepared team than the Kanas city Cheifs

1) You misspelled "Pittsburgh", one cannot be a "more better" person than someone else,lose only has one 'o', and his last name is Polamalu 2) Ben Roethlisberger may be a better athlete than Chiefs QB Matt Cassel, but I do not see how Ben Roethlisberger being accused of rape on two different occasions and then being suspended for 6 weeks by Roger Goodell for violating the NFL's personal conduct policy qualifies Ben as a "much more better person" then Matt Cassel 3) "With Polamalu we can never loose", the Steelers have a 5-2 record where they have already lost twice, their first loss was to the Ravens where the score was a whopping 35 - 7 where Polamalu wasnt much help and neither was Ben..... Their second loss was a 10 - 17 loss to the Texans, a team which as of right now has a 4-3 record that is worse then the Steelers. The Ravens currently have a record of 4-2 How can you claim the Steelers can never lose with Polamalu when they have already lost twice to teams that have worse records than the Steelers do? 4) "a better leader than the cheifs QB could ever be" Ben has already proved that he is not a better person then Matt Cassel right now, so how can you automatically assume that in the future Matt Cassel could not EVER be a great leader for his team? Matt Cassel could be a very good leader one day but claiming he never could be a better person then a twice-accused-of-rape-and-violator-of-NFL-official-code-of-conduct-where-he-was-suspended-for-6-weeks-QB Ben Roethlisberger seems pretty ignorant....
The Pistburg Steelers are a better well prepared team than the Kanas city Cheifs

Hey guys check it out the Pro fond an anonymous quote from a random internet source that she didnt list :D First of all the ratings themselves suggest that both QB's are A+ QB's since thy both rank in the low to mid 90's As for statistics, the Chiefs this season in rushing yards is 129.3 per game Now on the other hand the Steelers total rushing yards is 117.9 per game The Chiefs turnover ratio this season is -1 (thats a negative one) The Steelers turnover this season is -9 (thats a negative nine) Matt Cassel's passing completion rating (63.5) is greater than Ben R. (62.8) Ben R. has been sacked twice as much as Matt Cassel has been (20 compared to 10) The Chiefs defense has forced and recovered more fumbles than the Steelers have (Chiefs = 4, Steelers = 3) The Chiefs defense has had more interceptions than the Steelers defense have (Chiefs = 11, Steelers = 2) 4 players on the chiefs have the same number of interceptions this season then the entire Steelers defense has COMBINED. .. In fact one of them actually has twice as many interceptions as the entire Steelers defense COMBINED, Brandon Flowers = 4 Kendrick Lewis = 2 Brandon Carr = 2 John McGraw = 2 Troy Polamalu has not had one forced fumble recovery or one interception this season. .. .. . http://www.nfl.com... . http://www.nfl.com... . http://www.nfl.com... . http://www.nfl.com... I rest my case that Ben Roethlisberger is not an all around better person than Matt Cassel, I rest my case that Troy Polamalu does not make the Steelers unbeatable, I rest my case that Ben Roethlisberger is just as good as Matt Cassel as a QB for the reasons stated above, And I rest my case that the Steelers are just as prepared as the Chiefs for the arguments stated above! !!
The Pistburg Steelers are a better well prepared team than the Kanas city Cheifs

QB Rating: for 2010 NFL quarterbacks for QB Rating, it's a must! Qb rating is often rated as most important for 2010 NFL quarterbacks for QB Rating, in addition to 2010 NFL quarterbacks with over 65% completion percentage and 2010 NFL quarterbacks with over 67.50% completion percentage. While most people find that QB rating is a significant consideration, the difference between Matt Cassel at 92.95 rating and Ben Roethlisberger at 97 rating is 4.05 rating. This is a quote from a website i found ^ So Ben has a high percentile than Matt Cassel!
The Pistburg Steelers are a better well prepared team than the Kanas city Cheifs

Im Not saying Ben is ignorant..... Im saying that you are ignorant for automatically assuming that Matt Cassel could NEVER become a good leader for his team.... As for the multiple rape charges, 1) 2009 in Lake Tahoe Andrea McNulty worked in a hotel where Ben was staying when after being called to examine a tv Ben allegedly started to rape her and gave her wounds that required hospitalization. No charges were ever filed and no investigation was given though 2) In Milledgeville Geirgia in 2010 (less than a year later) a 20 year old student at GSCU where she later was hospitalized with many wounds to the private area after being seen with Ben by many people that night. Ben was once again not charged and no investigation was carried out Ben is a better athlete than Matt Cassel but the argument here is that the Steelers are a better well prepared team than the chiefs, that Ben is a better person and leader, and that the Steelers cannot lose with Polamalu.... As for talking football I already have talked about football im waiting for you to do the same! The steelers have already lost twice to teams that are worse then them. One was to the ravens where they lost by 4 touchdowns where Ben also threw 3 interceptions, the other was to the Texans where they only scored one touchdown. Both teams the Steelers have lost to have worse records then them which implies that the steelers are not as dominant as you think they are. As for the Chiefs they are currently 3-3, but all 3 of their losses are from teams that are actually better than them (Bills, Lions, and the Chargers, combined record of 13-6) Total the teams the chiefs have played have a record of 18-22 Steelers opponents have a combined record of 16-29 Chiefs have had a far tougher schedule than the Steelers and the chiefs have beaten every team they are better than. The Steelers on the other hand have blown games against teams that they are better than. As for well preparedness, Chiefs have won 3 games straight and are facing the Chargers at home. Chargers are 1 game better than the Chiefs, The Steelers have also won three games straight but are facing the Patriots at home. Patriots are 1 game better than the Steelers as well. Both teams have 3 game winning streaks, both are facing opponents better than them at home, so how would the Steelers be any more well-prepared than the chiefs? They both appear to be facing an uphill battle this week....
The Pistburg Steelers are a better well prepared team than the Kanas city Cheifs

Thats just your opinion at the end when you say that Ben is ignorant! In this debate I want you to show me proof that states this: 1. That hes actually raped someone because I believe that its a load of crap sir! And also if you state evidence on that then i might agree with you. 2. That he is not better than Matt as a athlete! And not based off of total bull. Then that will satify me, untill then i will agrue my heart out untill you quit basing your case off of crap that might or might not be true. this debate isnt about how good of a guy they are... Let talk football!
i determine where cause and effect begins and ends

the apple dislodges from the tree.... is the cause of it falling m8, i could also say the dislodging is the cause of the apple faliing, ai? its an eternal chain no the air beneath it is not the cause of it falling, the air makes it possible for it to fall. it is already implied there is air, space beneath it in order for it to fall, but you could say the air beneath it is the cause that the wind could make the apple fall sun is already implied in the example as fruits cant exist without sun, and we are talking about the reality we know lies are complicated by separation, and true is simple now as one cause and effect is determined by matter