BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Animals should be freed from zoos

I honestly cannot say anything in response to my opponents first proper paragraph. "The Moose" has just quoted a random part of my argument and started waffling on about elements and E=MC 2. This is irrelevant to what I was saying. You only quoted around half a sentence. Any contradictory statements that you found were most likely to be because of a slight confusion. At some points I was talking about the modern zoo and at others I was referring to to what a zoo used to be. That is why you thought that I made a grammatical mistake. It was in fact correct. According to my logic then the eagle wont be in a zoo unless it is endangered, under threat, seriously injured or has no family to go back to. Your arguments regarding the shoes is anthropomorphic. Animals cannot experience 'fun'. The reasons that I would want animals not to wear shoes is simply because human experience is very different to the experience of an animal. This is not animal segregation. I am in favor of animal rights. One of the biggest fears in modern society is the fear of the unknown (xenophobia). You say that you are fighting for the rights of animals yet you want to "force" them all to wear shoes. I have quoted the word "force" from your introductory argument. Your arguments would have made more sense if you had been more careful with your word choices. I don't see how your argument regarding people murdering each other over "FRESH OG KICKS" supports your argument. This actually supports my argument. If humans are killing each other over products then animals are bound to do strange things as a result of wearing shoes too. The difference between a shoe being too tight, too loose or just right is that the person can tell you. With an animal it cannot tell you. It is true that if it is uncomfortable then it will squeal or let out some form of distress signal but they will probably do this anyway - considering that they have no say in whether they get to wear the shoes or not. Regarding the Yahoo! source. If you actually checked what I had got from that source then you would have known that I merely used that source to get an ordinary person's opinion. If it had been to retrieve a fact, then it would have been an issue. Yahoo answers is perfectly okay to find a person's opinion because all other pages provide a professional opinion. You said Vote con at the end. If you had actually checked your position in this debate then you would have realized that I am con. VOTE CON!!! Even pro agrees with me! Sources http://pets.stackexchange.com...
Animals should be freed from zoos

-Hello my opponent. I must say that it sure is chilly in here... -As I am sure everyone here is aware of, the moose will be defending the animals rights to live their lives free of useless captivity. -My opponent states " There is still that elements". This is indeed true, as hydrogen continues to exist to this day. Though my opponent refuses to acknowledge the rights of said molecules to live free from the bondage of our bodies... As we all should know from basic calculus, E=MC^2. -My opponent continues on to say that "Understanding was limited". I'll say... When attempting to understand my opponents rambling in paragraph two, I find some contradictory statements in his defense. "The fun aspect of zoos is there". I believe you meant to say... "are". Though, I can forgive my opponent for being so confused during this extravagant topic of debate. If we are to have equal rights for all then animals must be set free. Imagine an eagle soaring through the heavens takes a stroke.. according to your logic, this animal deserves to be kept in imprisonment for the remainder of its day.. This of course, is false. If such were the case then half of the human populace should be kept in such cages as many people are incapable of supplying for themselves. -My opponent proceeds to comment on my shoe proposal... "Giving an animal shoes will present them with an unknown object".-- It will be like Christmas for any known 4 year old obtaining their first I-pad, nothing but fun for all!-- Seeing this statement made the cartilage of my tonsils reverberate with despair. Why would one wish to prevent animals from sharing the same commodities that us humans get to experience? Psychopathy comes to mind... A deep rooted hatred for all other species, almost like segregation of species. I ask you audience, is my opponent pro animal segregation? I would hope not. -Continuing with the shoe rebuttal, my opponent makes the claim that.."Giving an animal shoes isn't natural and may result in strange behavior from certain animals". --This seems to remind of of the times I witnessed humans murdering each other over a pair of "FRESH OG KICKS"down by the local expressions. According to the media it was a justified act of Darwinian survival of the "swag"-liest.-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -"If they are too tight it can cause pain and discomfort. If they are too loose they can make the animal uncomfortable and hesitant when moving. They can also slip and fall easily." --The same can be said of any human who wishes to wear shoes, adaptation of the survivors will breed animals more accepting of their -lacey- fate.-- I would like to point out that my opponent used "yahoo answers" as a source. Please refrain from using such useless pigeon feed, horse sources my feeble minded foe! Also.... Vote --CON-- The moose has spoken Sources: http://www.free-picture.net...
Things that Donald Trump and god have in common"

All the insults...dang... Well, I'll be working on a few myself. Hopefully I can come up with some good ones soon. I think my favorite was that they use weed whackers to tend to their toupees and speeches...mostly because of how accurate it was but also that it just goes along so well to perfectly describe it. Not to mention quite insulting! :D Camping was great! One of my favorite places we went to was Galena; what a great town! Hope you've been having a great summer! Unfortunately, the day after I came back, I got strep throat and my sleep cycle has been way out of whack. But it gets me out of having to sing and practice instruments, so that's somewhat a relief! Though I did want to play on my English Horn once I got back...his name is Edwin because it's TOTALLY normal to name inanimate objects...
Christianity is harmful to today's society

I am not saying it is against my religion, speaking for myself. I am mostly atheist and am fine with same-sex marriage, but not fine with abortion. That is a different argument. Anyways, after looking at your protest, it doesn't really give a huge example of why we should, or on mine and others terms, to keep it. So, to sum it up, your argument isn't that grand. But your reasons are somwhar valid.
Christianity is harmful to today's society

I'm not saying that we should abolish Christianity, because of your reason, I'm just saying its harmful to society. The main problem with Christianity is misinterpretation of the bible. For example, Homosexuality is not unnatural because it has been a thing in humans ever since we EVOLVED. If it's god's mistake, than the humans shouldn't be punished for his mistakes. Abortion is not murder because the fetus doesn't even really have any intelligence and is scientifically not considered a infant yet. Plus, it's perfectly humane and it could save a child from a terrible life if the parents are irresponsible or cannot afford to feed it. The other main problem is them forcing their beliefs upon others. By making same-sex marriage, abortion, and euthenasia illegal that's forcing their beliefs upon other people who do not agree. They can just legalize them and if it's against your beliefs than you can just simply just choose not do it.
congrats to you liars.

Based on the arguments put forward in the last round as well as the introductory round, it seems that it is impossible to discern a method for proving whether DDO users are liars. Even if that could be gleaned from analyzing the demographics, it is impossible to state definitively whether DDO users are also cowardly. Here is Con’s question: if the contributors to the site are liars, then how can we be certain that are cowardly, perhaps the cowardly part is only a part of the large lie, only a persona used to by a clever DDO to dupe another. While I concede it might be theoretically possible to analyze (although so far Pro has not provided clear methodology for how to analyze) and say that there are a bunch of liars on DDO (although again, Pro has not stated for the debate what a “BUNCH” constitutes) it appears impossible to state with certainty that DDO users are cowardly. Again, I will let Pro address these questions. However, to emphasize the most important point: if they are liars, then whatever we find out that makes us believe their also cowardly is unreliable, right? I would like to thank Pro for the debate. I will change the text and I apologize profusely for an unintended or implicit offense that was not my intention. Again, thanks for the debate. I am having fun.
congrats to you liars.

I accept. I am new to this site. This is my first debate. I have read some of the other debates and looked at the forums, so I have a general idea of now the format works. From what I can gather, I am contesting the claim that “the demographics of this site” reveal a bunch of liars, liars that are cowardly. However, I have looked at many of the debater’s profiles, especially those with the top ELO rankings and can find no definitive evidence that they are liars and definitely not “cowardly liars.” Therefore, while there may be liars and there may be cowards on debate.org, I find clear cases of “cowardly liars.” What people specifically on this website can be consider among the “bunch of cowardly liars?” How do we know for sure? I can find no evidence of cowardly liars or understand what methodology to use for this.
Resolved: If a tree falls in the forest and no animal is there to hear it, it does make a sound.

Greetings. First, I'd like to thank my opponent for extending this debate challenge to myself. I ask that you (the audience) vote on behalf of who provided the better arguments rather than what constitutes as your personal opinion. With that said, let us proceed. This opening round will be very brief. I would like you (the audience) to observe the claim being made in affirming the resolution: "If a tree falls in the forest and no animal is there to hear it, it does make a sound." Ladies and gentleman, there is quite an ENORMOUS hidden assumption being made in this claim. That assumption is this: That existence is as we perceive it to be; my opponent is advocating that reality exist as we perceive it to be. Well since that is the case, I challenge him to prove it. As the pro, it is his job to present conclusive evidence that reality is as we perceives it to be; that we aren't merely dreaming, that we aren't merely ideas of something greater, that what we know to be "true" is all a ruse (The Matrix), etc. With this being known, he cannot even authoritatively state that the concept of sound exist (which is yet again an assumption in his resolution). Due to my schedule, I have other things to attend to right now, but I now stand ready for my opponent's rebuttal.
Science Has Nothing To Say About Human Purposes and the Universe.

Other guy says I appealed to authority. Jesus is the ultimate authority. He's not just some authority! The fallacy falls when applied to Jesus. Jesus=science witch = purpose. When someone without Jesus talks about purpose, they are fooling themselves.The argument isnt proving Jesus did exist in the past its proving JESUS DOES EXIST!Ive proven it. Other guy fails. The bible says it,i believe it, THAT SETTLES IT
Science Has Nothing To Say About Human Purposes and the Universe.

Thank you to the Con for responding.(A) Response to ConI do not know if Con is even serious in his first negative case. His only argument is: Jesus says there is purpose. Science proves that Jesus exists. Therefore, science says something about purpose. Clearly, this commits and endless list of fallacies. Firstly, it is an appeal to authority. In establishing the conclusion that science does say something about human purpose, he uses "Jesus" as some kind of deciding factor in the matter. However, a number of other religious figures and philosophers have made statements regarding human purpose; what does Jesus have over these men? It is an appeal to authority. Also, premise (2) is false. Though science can invoke particular methods to validate or invalidate certain evidences for a given historical event person (carbon dating, archaeology, paleontology, etc.), it cannot "prove" (in the scientific sense of the word) that some historical person in the past exists. Even if it did, the conclusion still doesnt follow.My opponent then later goes on a red herring regarding atoms and their charges. This is not relevant to the debate by any means. Since the Con has not rebutted any of my arguments or established any of his own, I urge a vote in the affirmative.
Science Has Nothing To Say About Human Purposes and the Universe.

Science must say something about our purpose because science proves Jesus and Jesus says theres purpose What is the binding force of the atom? You would probably Gluons. Gluons are a made-up dream. No one has ever seen or measured them... they don't exist! It's a desperate theory to explain away truth! We know that the electrons of the atom whirl around the nucleus billions of times every millionth of a second... and that the nucleus of the atom consists of particles called neutrons and protons. Neutrons have no electrical charge and are therefore neutral --BUT-- Protons have positive charges. One law of electricity is: LIKE CHARGES REPEL EACH OTHER! Since all the protons in the nucleus are positively charged, they should repel each other and scatter into space. If gluons aren't the answer... what is? The answer is Jesus.
Death Battle: Ryu (Street Fighter) vs Iron Fist (Marvel)

I will be arguing for the side of Ryu. Now it is obvious that Iron fist is a great ground character and is also fast, But Ryu is a very powerful character that is really easy to use. It's also obvious that people like him more than iron fist because Ryu has a 1.8% online play rate, whilst Iron fist has a 0.9% play rate. Ryu is even higher tier than Iron fist is. Now lets talk moves and stats. X factor damage boost is better with Ryu and the duration lasts longer with Ryu. Of course Iron fist has the speed. ASSISTS Dragon's touch does 100,000 Damage while the Shoryuken does 150,000 Hadoken does 100,000 while the Crescent Heel does 80,000 Tatsumaki Senpukyaku H can go up to 143,000 while rising fang can go to 130,000 So it's obvious Ryu is better with Assists NORMAL MOVES For this I will add up all the damage for all the moves and see which is higher. Ryu: 1,014,000 Iron fist: 907,000 (Might want to check this one just in case) THROWS Ryu:320,000 Iron fist: 160,000-320,000 For the special moves just look at the assists since they do the same. So Ryu is better with Attacking, special attacking, assisting, and defending. Iron Fist is better with speed, and dodging.
Death Battle: Ryu (Street Fighter) vs Iron Fist (Marvel)

Seeing as rumors for Marvel vs Capcom 4 are floating about, and the fact that I haven't done a debate like this in a while, we're going to see which of these martial arts masters would win in a fight: Ryu, CapCom's Street Fighter himself, or the Iron Fist, Marvel's kung fu expert. I'll take the side of Iron Fist. For those of you who might not know who he is, here's the wiki page: . http://marvel.wikia.com...(Earth-616)Rules: 1) Marvel vs Capcom match ups don't count as evidence of the winner. Any videos of Ryu defeating Iron Fist in a tournament or online match will be ignored.2) We're looking at this from an objective standpoint. Arguing that a fanboy would make Ryu or Iron Fist win in a YouTube video will be ignored. Any other form of trolling is bad conduct.3) This fight is between only Ryu and Iron Fist. No other characters can join.4) Forfeiting a Round is an instant loss.5) The fight will take place in some arena. No homefield advantage can be gained from these characters, I think.6) We will be arguing on these 4 stats: Strength, Agility, Durability, and Abilities. Again, I believe Iron Fist would win.
The US Federal Government Should Not Construct a Border Fence Between the US and Mexico

I'm very much looking forward to this debate. Wylted is a very strong debater, and I'm sure this is going to be a fantastic debate.Full ResolutionThe US federal govenrment should not construct a border fence between the US and Mexico.DefinitionsUnited States Federal Government: "The United States Federal Government is established by the US Constitution. The Federal Government shares sovereignty over the United Sates with the individual governments of the States of US. The Federal government has three branches: i) the legislature, which is the US Congress, ii) Executive, comprised of the President and Vice president of the US and iii) Judiciary."[1]Border Fence: A fence or wall built between two or more countries that stretches along the entire border between the countries. Rules1. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.2. No semantics or trolling.3. All arguments must be visible inside this debate, and character limits must not be broken. Sources may be posted in an outside link.4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed in the middle of the debate. Voters, in the case of the breaking of any of these rules by either debater, all seven points in voting should be given to the other person.Debate StructureRound 1: AcceptanceRound 2: Presenting all arguments (no rebuttals by con)Round 3: Refutation of opponent's argumentsRound 4: Defending your arguments and conclusions (no new arguments)Sources[1]: http://definitions.uslegal.com...
Beauty Pageants

The money spent for the outfits, spray tans, makeup, and training sessions is unethical. The amount of money spent by the parents to create the "beauty" is not essential. I believe that it is not necessary to spend these numerous amounts of money. Sometimes, in the pageants, the women with the prettiest gowns win. Sometimes, it turns into a competition with who has the most money, which is sad. Pageants should be about a competition with natural beauty, eleligence, and intelligence.
Beauty Pageants

With all that being said, it is true. Some girls could undergo issues like that. However, studies have shown pageants make girls feel good about themselves. The majority of them go into the pageants because they love the self confidence level boost it provides them. Granted, the girls should feel confident with or without make up but if that's what it takes for them to be confident then so be it. Pageants could also be a game changer. Girls could go in their feeling awful about themselves and then get on stage and realize all of the phenomenal qualities they do have.
Beauty Pageants

The pressure on the pageant girls may sometimes lead to psychological issues within the individual. Although the person might look poise, and beautiful on the outside, that person on the inside may be suffering from diseases like anoxeria, or other severe physical or mental diseases. The pressure from parents, coaches, friends, and others may sometimes lead to an unhealthy girl. Psychologically, being under this amount of stress, the individual may become uneasy with herself and become depression and less motivated. The pressure of approval from others also contributes to the stress levels. A person who suffers from unhealthy diseases is not a well rounded role model for others.
Beauty Pageants

Beauty pageants tie into confidence. They are being judged based on their confidence. Most kids in this day in age lack confidence. Confidence is essential. If you lack it, you will never be happy or satisfied with yourself. Beauty pageants give kids a chance to be confident with who they are and with other people. They are judged by their level of confidence on stage. It is basically a pageant of confidence, that ties in with other things such as looks, fashion, etc. It provides them with a sense of accomplishment along with the confidence. Its been debated that these should serve as extra curricular activities, however, should not be interfered with academics. The winner of the pageants usually receive scholarships. The pageants also involve community service.
Beauty Pageants

It still baffles me that some pageant girls in fact starve themselves in order to feel confident and beautiful. The question of whether or not the pageant girl is a "real" person is questionable because of all the steps they do to prepare for the pageants which include, spray tans, ridiculous diets, insane daily workouts, and sometimes, botox. Just to feel confident, society puts a tremendous amount of pressure of the girl to beautiful. Sadly, some girls only think you can be beautiful by doing all those things to yourself. This sets a bad example for non-pageant girls because it leads them to think that in order to be beautiful, you need to be "all done up" or simply to work for the perfect body which may lead to risking your health. As a whole, I think that the "confidence" in beauty pageant girls consists of all unrealistic qualities rather than having natural beauty.
Beauty Pageants

It is true some could easily lie however the winner isn't just based on their answer. The judges base it on how they carry themself in general. Granted, their answer can sure be a factor because if they sound uninteligent they will clearly be punished for it. This is exactly where social skills come into play with the good parts of pageants. If one wasn't confident enough to be on stage and speak freely and openly with confidence, they would be deducted from the pageant. The judges pick the winner by how they carry themself all in one. If they have good speaking and interacting skills, it helps the judges pick a winnter. If they freeze up and can't speak, it is clear they won't be the winner. Social skills weigh more than the answer alone would.
Beauty Pageants

Beauty pageants do in fact improve social skills due to the Q&A part of the pageant, however, the question of the contestants genuineness and truth is questionable. There is a question of the consistency of answers from the contestants. During the pageant, the contestants are asked a question from a broad pool of topics consisting of society issues. During the pageant, some contestants due in fact get harder questions than others, but it is their answer that sometimes determines the outcome of the winner of the pageant. For instance, this past year at the USA pageant, a contestant from Ohio did not answer the question correctly, therefore she lost her chance at winning completely. The contest involves beauty and brains, however the question of truth in their answer is what is questionable. Whether the contestant answers truthfully or not, the judges will never know. Whether their answers are valid or truthful remains up in the air.
Beauty Pageants

Beauty Pageants give women a chance to improve their social skills. Social skills are crucial today considering most struggle interacting with people or even publically speaking in front of large crowds. Those are essential especially if you are in college, or you have a job that includes presenting something in front of an audience. Pageants also give a self confidence boost. It provides them a chance with being comfortable in front of strangers which in turn, makes them feel pretty good about themselves. By being comfortable in front of strangers and crowds, it gives them a chance to also take up new activites like dance, drama, singing, etc. Tons of communication is involved not only with the contestants but even the parents. Communication as in the parents work together to prepare the kids for the pageants.