BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Creationism and Evolution are BOTH right.

The hard pill about a "God made the universe" theory is that you basically have to willing suspend your logic for it to make sense. We as a species do not like having our logic suspend for belief. I think that this lacking of willing suspension of logic stems from the fact that humans like to think ourselves as Gods. With the power of high IQ, fire, and bipedal movement; we conquered the planet and became the dominate life form. So the idea of a higher-power much greater then us, which would surely be beyond human comprehension, is insane for many of us. I also find it a bit silly...but I also find it to make a surprising amount of sense. I wont argue against the fact that the Big Bang sent the universe in motion. But even if the Big Bang was created by energy, that only leaves the question of where that energy came from. And that question leads to the other question of what made whatever made the energy that made the Big Bang. The only conclusion I can come up with is the higher-power. The reason it seems so ludicrous is because we have never seen said higher-power ourselves. But hey; when the first reports of the Platypus rolled around, did anybody believe it existed? Now, just because I cant be proven wrong does not mean I am right. I am not 100% sure I am right. In fact, I cant be proven right...depending. You see, the whole idea of both Evolution and Creationism both being right relies entirely in on the fact of whether or not a person believes in a higher-power of any sorts with any amount of power. People who believe in a higher-power would find this theory more sound then someone who does not believe in a higher-power.
Creationism and Evolution are BOTH right.

I would like to point out that you ignored the entire last paragraph of my previous argument. You also ignored part of what I said in my third paragraph. I'm not saying you are automatically wrong, just that you didn't address those points. Alright, so lets look at the big bang theory. The big bang is defined as: "A theory that deduces a cataclysmic birth of the universe (big bang) from the observed expansion of the universe, cosmic background radiation, abundance of the elements, and the laws of physics." (Courtesy of Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com... ) So it would make sense that something caused that large "cataclysmic birth" of the universe. Again, I ask you. What would be more likely to be the first thing to come into existence to cause the big bang: A fully formed sentient being, capable of creating and ruling a universe as complex as the one we see now, or something like a small packet of unstable energy existing in a single point? Both of those things could have created the universe. But one is far more complex than the other, and is less likely to have been the first thing ever to exist. I made points for this that you didn't respond to in my last argument, so I won't go over them again. But let me ask you: Do you believe in dragons? Really? Why? Can you prove that they never existed? Of course you can't, but you cannot prove that they did exist either, which is why it makes no sense to believe in them.
Creationism and Evolution are BOTH right.

I am not saying people should believe both because the truth is "too difficult." I am saying to believe both because, for the longest of time, its been a "black-or-white" mentality. A mentality of one being right and the other being wrong. I am suggesting that neither are wrong. And when I mention "God" I am referring to the typical image of God. A Single Higher-Power with magical powers. Anyway, yes, I will say that I agree and support the idea that the Big Bang Theory makes much more sense as to what created THE UNIVERSE. However...that leave the question of what created the big bang? All the elements, all the stars, all the chemicals that made that loud boom billions of years ago had to have been made by something. I find very little other explanation other then a higher-power making said big bang happen. When I say that "Creationism and Evolution are both right" I do not mean they are both 100% right. That is flat-out impossible. What I am saying is that both philosophies have grains of truth in them. Evolution more so then Creationism, but still. Let me go into detail: God (or whatever higher-power you want it to be) makes The Big Bang happen. After that, God/Higher-Power lets science (Evolution) do the rest.
Creationism and Evolution are BOTH right.

I agree with part of what you said, for 150+ years, creationists and evolutionists have argued this point greatly. For several thousand years before that point, most people just believed that God existed without questioning it. So what you are saying is that now, people should just believe both, because finding out the truth is just too difficult? For now, I'm going to ignore the Bible and specific religions, since you only lightly mentioned one, and just focus on the idea of God. Assuming that you mean a monotheist God, here is the definition of what God is: "The one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe." (Courtesy of Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com... ) We know the universe had to come from somewhere, and a lot of people obviously attribute this to God. But what seems like the more likely thing to be the first thing to ever exist: A sentient being, capable of creating and ruling a universe as complex as the one we see now, or something like a small packet of energy that caused the big bang? We have a hard time figuring out how we got here, because of how complex we are and how complex the universe around us is. So we are supposed to just accept that a fully formed intelligent omnipotent being just exists and created the universe and all of us? That doesn't seem to be very scientific. I also hear a lot of people say "If it was a small packet of energy, then that means everything was random chance! Do you know how small those chances are?!" I do, but think about this. If you have a 1 in 10 chance that something will happen, if you give it one opportunity, there is a 10% chance of it happening. But what if you give that chance a lot of opportunities to occur, say you repeat it 5 times? The chances are a lot higher, around a 40.95% chance that it will occur. So even if the odds are astronomically small, you also have to account for the number of times that it has a chance to occur. And given the size of the universe, it has had a LOT of chances to occur. You specifically state that you "like to think that God made the universe". If you like to think that, go right ahead. I like to think that dragons exist, because dragons are awesome. Does that make dragons real? Not really. If there is any rational evidence for dragons, well, I'll start believing that dragons exist. But just saying that you can make a false idea and a true idea work together doesn't prove anything. I can say "Well, dragons were once around, but you don't see them anymore because they all left Earth at some point." You can't prove that wrong. But that doesn't make it any more right.
Creationism and Evolution are BOTH right.

Now here me out; For over 150+ years, Creationist and Evolutionist have bitterly argued with each other over which philosophy is right. Creationist believe in an all-mighty god who made everything. Evolutionist believe that we as a human race and as life itself evolved from lower life forms. Each side has their strengths and flaws. I myself used to be a heavy believer in the Evolution side. However, I have began to rethink my philosophy. Its always been a matter of black or white in this long going debate. Its always either Creationist or Evolutionist who are right and the other side is either a bunch of bible-reading jackoffs or ape-worshippers. But what if neither side was wrong? What if both sides were RIGHT? I like to think that God made the universe. After all, SOMETHING had to have made the universe (although who or what made God is another mystery we may never solve). After God made the universe, he let Evolution do the rest of the work for him. It makes sense on both sides. Its unarguable that species evolve. But what can be argued for is the existence of a God and what hand he played in the creation of life. The theory I have present makes sense on both sides.
Creationism and Evolution are BOTH right.

I guess since you forfeited, I should just make a few things clear about my previous arguments. You haven't proved that there is no God, or that there is. So if you happen to get any evidence for or against it, show it please! But showing that their are ways to find explanations for the existence of God and evolution does nothing, I believe that's what conspiracy theorists do as well. You can't disprove the Illuminati, there will always be an explanation. They can do anything, so the possibilities for how they could hide their existence are endless. I heard someone say they wanted to become a joke because that way no one would seriously think that they were real. The problem with these explanations arises when they don't have evidence for that explanation. I also don't really believe for sure that a packet of energy caused the creation of the universe, I don't know what did. The entire point of that was to tell you that there are other options, God isn't the only possible explanation. And so, until I find evidence supporting one claim or another, or perhaps even supporting no claims currently out there, I will keep my mind open. I could be wrong. God might exist. But if he does, it would be nice if he provided some evidence for it.
It is probable Obama is a Muslim

Closing arguments " In the same way I can be an American Muslim, Obama can be a Jewish Muslim"Point to a map and show me a country that is named "Jew"....."Being a Jew is simply a race"No its not, its all about religious orientation: 1. One of a scattered group of people that traces its descent from the Biblical Hebrews or from postexilic adherents of Judaism; Israelite.2. A person whose religion is Judaism.3. A subject of the ancient kingdom of Judah.http://dictionary.reference.com..."If we print more money, then inflation will be soring through the roof; it will be worse than spending us to death!"And spending America to death sounds more like a Jewish tactic to kill America then A Muslim tactic..... So just from how he is messing up America shows how Obama is indeed Jewish. As for the emails, you never provided the link, so I call bullsh*t ;DUnaddressed arguments1) Obama wore a Yamaca2) Obama loves Israel3) Muslims hate Obama4) Obama is manipulating and controlling, like a Jew would be5) Obama was picking up a penny in Japan and Saudi Arabia6) Obama visited the Holy Jewish Western Wall of the Temple of Solomon7) "In other words, you are right--OBAMA IS A JEW" I thank the Pro for a fun debate and I thank the voters for reading. I would like to take some time though to say that If I did offend any Jews out there, I sincerely apologize, but this was admitted to be a troll debate from the start so I had the green light to go ahead with all of this stuff. I will now take my leave but before I do I would like to remind the Pro that he will always remember this day as the day that he ALMOST defeated......Captain.... Jack.... Sparrow.... ;D
It is probable Obama is a Muslim

Thank you. This round is for closing statements only. I argue that Obama is a Muslim; but even if I concede that Obama is a Jew, that doesn't mean he isn't a muslim. Remember: Jews can also be a race, not necessarily a religion. In the same way I can be an American Muslim, Obama can be a Jewish Muslim. I argued that in the previous round and it has gone unanswered. 1) You can clearly tell the Muslim from the Jew because the Jews have that hideous side burn hair, unlike the Muslim.2) Actually, Obama is a woman as clearly seen in this photography with her in her Islamic scarf: 3) Red herring. Even if it doesn't work, it still makes no sense for a non-Muslim to threaten to convert us to Islam; of course unless HE (or she) is a Muslim!4) If we print more money, then inflation will be soring through the roof; it will be worse than spending us to death!5) Emails unrefuted. ==>PARTNER'S CASE<==I pointed out in the last round the following:"Being a Jew is simply a race. One can be a Muslim and be a Jew. My partner hasn't refuted my case. "In other words, you are right--OBAMA IS A JEW, but HE IS ALSO A MUSLIM!
It is probable Obama is a Muslim

Thanks for your rebuttals. As I was reading my partner's arguments, he completely dropped the fact that Obama admitted to being a Muslim in the video I have provided. DEFENESE OF MY ARGUMENTS 1) OBAMA wears Islamic clothing. My partner claims Jews and Arabics look alike. However, he hasn't proved that. His photography did not work--in fact, none of them work. It is a bare assertion fallacy. In fact, Jews and Muslims do NOT look alike at all. Generally, this is what an orthodox Jew would wear: versus a Muslim: Notice the stark contrast.C2) Obama bowed to the King of Saudi ArabiaMy partner claims he was simply picking up a penny; yet he hasn't provided a shred of evidence for such a silly assertion. I mean, come on, a penny in a Muslim country? They'd kill you for doing such a thing over there.C3) We're all converting to IslamMy partner doesn't get the contention. He threatened to convert us all to Islam. What will happen is that Obama is going to spend us to death and when we go bankrupt, become dictator of the nation and destroy freedom of religion and turn us in The United States of Obamism. C4) EmailsWhat emails has he provided? None! REBUTTALS TO MY PARTNER'S CLAIMS 1) MoneyActually he is raising money simply for campaigns and is going to waste it all on a hopeless election. It is a fact that Obama loves to waste money. 1) Jews like money2) Obama wastes it3) Therefore, Obama can't be a Jew!2) The blame Musims are also blamed for stuff they didn't cause. Didn't you know 911 was just a conspiracy theory perpetrated by the government from the inside to make Muslims look bad? 3) Loyalty to US and IsraelObjection: Obama wants people to think he isn't a Muslim so he boasts love for Israel. In all reality, he wants to help Ahmadinejad destroy Israel and wipe it OFF THE MAP! http://www.israeltoday.co.il...4) Demographics of KenyaSure Islam isn't as popular in Kenya compared to Christianity. However, he also has a greater change of being a Muslim than a Jew. According to your same article, the demographics are follows:Christianity   83%Islam   11.2%No religion   2.4%Indigenous   1.7%Other   1.8% We see Jews don't even appear on here; hence Muslims are more common than Jews.6) Famous black JewsSure, but there are famous black Muslims like OBAMA! 7) RacismMy partner's case is circular. Obama can be as much of a Musim than a Jew. People hate Musims and blacks as much as people hate Jews.8) Arabs hate Obama They don't hate Obama. In fact, it is a conspiracy to hide their love and support of the Muslim man in office.ONE FINAL POINTBeing a Jew is simply a race. One can be a Muslim and be a Jew. My partner hasn't refuted my case.IT IS A CONSPIRACY. THE NEW WORLD ORDER IS HERE. EVERYONE PREPARE FOR DOOMSDAY!!!!!!
It is probable Obama is a Muslim

Contention 1: Obama wears Islamic ClothingPro is simply being racist here since all Jews and Arabs look alike, he just decides to claim that its Arabic clothing when in reality he could be either. Here is the Jew himself in Israel. Contention 2: Obama bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia. He wasnt bowing to the king he was picking up a penny on the ground in front of him because his Jew side told him to do so. He did the same thing when he was in Japan! Contention 3: We are all converting to IslamWe are not converting to Islam because last I checked people are still protesting the mosque being built near Ground Zero. We are instead all being converted to Bada**es. Contention 4: EmailsPro may have emails but I have other means proving that Obama is a Jew.1) Jews like money, Obama aised $1 Billion in fundraising, which is the classic sign that he is good with money, and therefore is a Jew. http://www.humanevents.com...http://www.npr.org...2) Jews are often blamed for stuff they did not cause. Glenn Beck blames Obama for everything and it is a well known fact that Glenn Beck is a crazy braindead Nazi. Therefore since the Nazi is blaming the Jew for stuff he did not cause, that makes Obama more Jewish3) Jews are known to divide their loyalties between the United States and Israel. Obama has devoted much time to Israel and ever since Iran went out of their minds Obama has proven how deeply connected he is to Israel. http://theconversation.edu.au...4) Obama's father was born in Kenya, Which is 83% Christian, and 11% Muslim, meaning that his father has only an 11% chance of actually being Muslim (unlikely)http://en.wikipedia.org...5) Jews are stereotyped to be overprotective, manipulative, and controlling. Obama passed the Stimulus package and also proceeded on bailing out major companies during the latest recession, which is a sign that he is controlling, manipulative, overprotective, and thus a dirty Jew6) There other famous Black Jews in America, one of them is Lenny Kravitz. Lenny Kravitz and Obama have a lot in common where many white people dont like him and where a lot of blacks do like them. Therefore Obama shares qualities with black jewish men which can show that Obama is in fact a Jew7) People are racist towards Jews. People are racist towards Obama, thus one can be racist towards Obama for the same reason why they are racist towards Jews, meaning that one can be racist towards Obama and Jews for the same reasons. Obama therefore can be a Jew8) Arabs hate Obama so how could Obama be Muslim? Muslims hate Obama and Muslims also hate Jews, so it is more probable that Muslims hate Obama because he is a Jew and not because US drone strikes have killed hundreds of innocent civilians. http://opntalk.blogspot.com...http://current.com...Obama is not a Muslim, he is a Jew :)
Death Battle: TheLegend27 vs. Sans

Here's how this will play out: Sans starts out with an attempt to spear him with bones coming up from the ground, but TheLegend27 blocks it with his Supersonic Sword Ground Pound. TheLegend27 then clones himself over and over again and Sans has no escape no matter where he teleports to. One of them eventually hits him with a long range sword slash. Sans dies. THE END.
Breadwinner

Parvana a 11 year old girl is trying to grow up in a war zone in Afghanistan. The Taliban, a religious extremist group ruled the country while the nation is struggling in every way and her family is trying to survive. Women are under strict commandments to obey and not be at all sexual in society and they can't even show their arms or legs. They must be covered at all times. Parvana dresses up as a boy so that she can work and make some money and support her family. Her parents and all her family members to for her sister's wedding and at that time the Taliban takes over the city and start putting up their own rules of life for people to follow. The Taliban ban people from traveling to and away from cities unless you work. Parvana becomes very alone with her family in that society. She being the only one to work goes to find a job and support her family and find shelter. She meets other friendly kids and other people and they become her family. Should this book be allowed in public schools?
Resolved: 'Bieber Fever' should be classified as a mental illness like Schizophrenia

Concluding Remarks:Physical Vs Mental Illness:If a physical illness is observable does this mean something not observable by the naked eye -- such as cancer shall we say -- automatically default into a "mental" illness? That notion is absurd, not all physcial illnesses are actually observable or evident. Same thing with a mental conditon; we can never actually tell if someone is suffering from a mental issue or not, we can only go by what they describe to us as their symptoms and conclude what they may have at that time. Thus my opponents argument is null-and-void. Even if we actually do show for a fact someone has a mental issue, how do we even know it is not caused by a physical one? For instance, someone who has too much morophine (a physical drug) may cause a hallucination (mental) does this equate to a mental issue? The answer is clearly no. Someone who has a taste in a particular artist or music -- no matter how aweful it may be -- does not equate to a mental deficency of any kind. With that being said, my opponent never actually defines a physical disease from a mental one, or for that matter as previously noted a mental disease from a disease of any kind. If that is the case, and we cannot tell if someone hasd a physical issue or mental issue, and the question here is more about what type of illness is "Beiber Fever" to establish if it should be a mental or physical deficency. If someone suffers from Beiber Fever, whats to say their ears are working properly? And with that argument, I conclude my statement. VOTE FOR ME!
Resolved: 'Bieber Fever' should be classified as a mental illness like Schizophrenia

Alright, we both agree that Bieber fever is indeed a disease and that those who have Bieber fever should be put into camps so they can concentrate on living normal lives. (We can call them 'concentration camps')"My opponent cannot tell the difference between a medical condition and that of a physical one. Some physical conditions may affect the persons cognition."Excuse me I know very well what the difference is between a mental condition and a physical one! A mental condition is something that affects a persons brain and behavior while a physical condition is something you can quickly point out and observe, like a lost limb. Bieber Fever is clearly a mental condition because you cannot tell who is or isnt a fan of Justin Bieber just by looking at them. The ills of Bieber Fever mentioned in the last round all relate to ones mental capabilities, not their physical ones. Nervous breakdowns, stalking, obsession, mental retardation, etc are all mental conditions which therefore makes Bieber fever a mental illness..... Like Schizophrenia!
Resolved: 'Bieber Fever' should be classified as a mental illness like Schizophrenia

I concede to the definition of "Beiber Fever"however, at the same token, we can define a physical illness as:A disease [or] an abnormal condition that affects the body of an organism. It is often construed as a medical condition associated with specificsymptoms and signs From: http://en.wikipedia.org...My opponent cannot tell the difference between a medical condition and that of a physical one. Some physical conditions may affect the persons cognition. With that, I have fulfilled my BOP, we cannot tell if Beiber Fever actually is a mental issue, or a physical one!
Resolved: 'Bieber Fever' should be classified as a mental illness like Schizophrenia

First off, lets define a mental illness: "A mental illness is a medical condition that disrupts a person's thinking, feeling, mood, ability to relate to others and daily functioning." http://www.nami.org... Bieber Fever as defined by UrbanDictionary is: "The act, or disease of being litterally obsessed with justin bieber. Most commonly found in girls, but occasionally a guy or two" http://www.urbandictionary.com... Symptoms of Bieber Fever that imply it is a mental illness: - Bieber fever causes people to be a lot dumber and more obsessive, aka disrupting a persons thinking - Bieber fever causes people to feel super crazy when 'Bieber' or anything about him is mentioned, causing mood swings and such - Bieber fever causes people to be alienated from the rest of society and their own friends, meaning it affects how people function on a daily basis. - Bieber fever causes people to have a nervous breakdown when his name is mentioned on TV - Bieber fever causes people to stalk his every move on facebook, twitter, other social network sites These are the most well known symptoms of having Bieber Fever, all of which disrupts and damages a person's ability to act normal and behave normally. Therefore, Bieber Fever should be classified as a mental illness like Schizophrenia :D