BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
should inteligent be thought as a science

Thank you for responding, and for your clarification. However, it comes time where I must disagree with you on certain points, so here it goes: Argument 1: "The definition of religion is 'an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group' according to webster's dictionary. So I would like to ask you what makes evolution only a science and not a religion." If this is your definition of religion, then I don't think that evolution is not a religion. However, I do not see the relevance of this. The defining factor of what is referred to as "religion" by the public is a lack of scientific evidence instead of faith, and in that way evolution is far different than intelligent design, and should be taught in school. Argument 2: "The definition of science is 'knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through' so why isn't the theory of intelligent design regarded as a science." First, I disagree that intelligent design is a theory. A theory has scientific evidence and has been tested, and intelligent design has not been. I would refer to it as an unproven hypothesis. Again, because intelligent design has not been tested thoroughly to be proven, it is not regarded as science, according to your own definition. Just to overview, you defined evolution as being a religion and intelligent design as a science, but the most important difference between the two (belief based on faith for religion vs evidence from repeated testing and questioning for science) is why intelligent design cannot be considered a science, and should not be taught in a science classroom. Your move.
should inteligent be thought as a science

yes, sorry I forgot for some reason forgot to add the design part. I am speaking of the God of the bible. The position Im taking is that I believe it should be taught as a science in school along side evolution but objectively. Im new at this so I don't really have any rules about forfeiting. I just want it to stay respectful and healthy. So here is my argument: The definition of religion is "an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group" according to webster's dictionary. So I would like to ask you what makes evolution only a science and not a religion. Second: The definition of science is "knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through" so why isn't the theory of intelligent design regarded as a science. Also I think that we can teach this in the school system without a religious agenda. Don't get me wrong though I also believe the theory of evolution should be taught so the students get a chance to be overall well educated in these theories.
should inteligent be thought as a science

I accept your proposal, and look forward to your arguments. However, if in the beginning of your opening argument, you could specify a few things, that would be great: 1. I assume when you refer to intelligent, you mean intelligent design, the term for creation of species by god? 2. What is the exact position you are taking and I am going against? Give a very precise definition, such as "Intelligent design, or creationism, should be taught in public schools in America in a science classroom" 3. What are the rules for the debate? What are you rules regarding forfeiting rounds? How about length preferences? Thank you, and I look forward to a healthy debate.
Same Sex Marrige

Rebutting my opponent's arguments "well people do choose to be gay"Bare assertion fallacy. You have provided no sources to back up your claims. Many scientific experiments have been conducted indicating that homosexuality is something you are born with but may not realize till their older [1]. "i think it is wrong"I do not think it is wrong. "god made us to be with a man and a woman not a woman or a woman or a man or a man"Well if God exists, doesn't the fact that gay people exist prove your statement wrong? If God wanted relationships to be strictly women and man, then he never would have encoded thoe certain genetics or hardwire certain people to be gay without choice."and my arguments dont have to be long"Nobody ever said they did."i just think people should stay "normal"""Normal" is usually subjective.Argument for same sex marriage P1: Marriage is not immoralP2: If you take your average marriage and switch the gender of one of the people, there is no added moral implicationP3: Same sex marriage is not immoralConclusionSame sex marriage is not immoral, and should not be illegal.Source(s)[1] http://www.truthwinsout.org...
Same Sex Marrige

Rebutting my opponent's arguments "I think SSM or same sex marrige is gross. "I personally think acts of homosexuality are "gross" as well, however that doesn't mean that our opinions should manipulate the will of others who are doing nothing to hurt others. You have provided no reason to assume that this would be logical, therefore your argument does not stand. "First I don't think guys should be "butt buddies""The problem is it's not their fault that they were born that way, gay people don't chose to be gay. Basically, homosexuality is not a choice but extreme homophobia is so if anyone is guilty of committing immoral acts I'm afraid it would be people like you (excuse the ad hominem)"and second it is agenst my religion"This ties in with your first statement, there is no reason why any of your personal feelings you have should interfere with anybody else's who aren't hurting anyone else. "I do not agree with SSM at all"SSM advocates don't agree with you, however that is not an argument. Arguments for Same Sex MarriageP1: Homosexuality is not a choiceP2: Something that is not a choice, should not be held against someone harming nobody elseP3: Homosexuality is not a choice, and harms nobodyP4: There is no negative moral implications regarding homosexualityP1: The only difference between same sex marriage and classic marriage, is the sex of one of the people involvedP2: P1 holds no significant moral baggageP3: There is no good reason to believe same sex marriage should be illegalClosing There is nothing wrong with same sex marriageSource(s) [1] . http://en.wikipedia.org...;
From minister to atheist and continuing the journey

To start I fully understand and agree about all of the confusion in the world. I have seen the same as you and suffered much agony. I've been where you've ended and we must start from the same point to accurately debate. All of your points I agree you've won the debate thus far. It is what we see in the world. If you can agree to clear your mind and approach this from a "sandbox" perspective as though you were teaching your newborn I can help. Its very simple. Start here - Athiest (religiously confused) Wipe mind clear - meditate and only think about this conversation. Keep mind clear and don't let any other thoughts in. Start with Holy Trinity defined strictly as "Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" Keep mind clear. Start from left to right. What is the father? Well okay maybe its my dad. Who is the son, well probably me if father is my dad. We say this all the time. What the heck is the holy spirit then? I've meditated plenty on this- if the Holy trinity is the father, the son, and the holy spirit binding the two, then the holy spirit is just a english phrase for something else. A synonym. So I substituted different things in for holy spirit. At first i had an image of god and it got complicated. I lost hope. Then I realized well what do i have for my dad? Well mixed feelings, but in a perfect world it should be love. So holy spirit is now = love as my first premise. It fixes my world view, my catholic church accepted me because of it even though i started off an atheist. And now my world is super easy and positive. If i ever change the holy spirit from love to anything lesser I feel bad so I don't since I want to love my own father so much. My second step was to just look at biology and then go upward in my bloodline and grant the idea that maybe god is the father of my dad's dad's dad's dad 10000x up somewhere. I can't disprove it or prove it but time might if technology keeps improving. Maybe this helps?
Science Is Dead

Resolution- Science is Is DeadAllow me to lay out some definitions:Science- "A systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. ". https://en.wikipedia.org...Dead- "no longer having life". http://www.merriam-webster.com...My interpretation of the resolution is that pro is arguing that the entire discourse of science is stagnant in acquiring knowledge. BoP:As con, it is merely my job to negate pro's arguments for why science is dead; I am not required to argue for why it is not dead, however I am permitted to. Along these, lines I can negate the resolution by showing that science has made substantial gains in knowledge in many fields, and fostered technological innovation that is beneficial to human well being i. e medical advances and engineering developments, as well discoveries in the social sciences. I look forward to pro's arguments.
Resolved: The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument is Sound - 4

Resolved: The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument is Sound.Rounds:1. Acceptance only2. Opening arguments3. Clash4. Closing arguments/clashThe Leibnizian Cosmological Argument (LCA) Every existing thing has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external cause. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God. The universe is an existing thing. Therefore the explanation of the universe is God. I cite the The Nature of God by A.W. Pink [1] to describe the complexity of the Lord:[F]rom a review of the perfections of God, it appears that He is an all-sufficient Being. He is all-sufficient in Himself and to Himself. As the First of beings, He could receive nothing from another, nor be limited by the power of another. Being infinite, He is possessed of all possible perfection. When the Triune God existed all alone, He was all to Himself. His understanding, His love, His energies, found an adequate object in Himself. Had He stood in need of anything external, He had not been independent, and therefore would not have been God.He created all things, and that for himself (Colossians 1:16), yet it was not in order to supply a lack, but that He might communicate life and happiness to angels and men and admit them to the vision of His glory. True, He demands the allegiance and services of His intelligent creatures, yet He derives no benefit from their offices, all the advantage redounds to themselves (Job 22:2-3). He makes use of means and instruments to accomplish His ends, yet not from a deficiency of power, but oftentimes to more strikingly display His power through the feebleness of the instruments.I ask readers to take note that we should rationally accept an argument as sound if the affirmation of its premises is more plausible than the negation.Sources1. http://www.pbministries.org......
It is unjust to prove or disprove someone's religion.

This is now the round of concluding statements and we can no longer rebut. I'd prefer to have the conclusion statements to be 2-3 sentences. My conclusion: Although, my statements were probably weak, but I can conclude that it is not your right to attack someone's rightfully acclaimed religious beliefs unless if those beliefs do harm to others. This debate was good, and you were a tough opponent (coming from a guy who sucks at organizing thoughts). I'll give you credit, but my ideal is to differ right from wrong and to separate the innocent from the wickedness (Yeah, I got that from Noah).
There is another 'dimension' alongside of the dimension we can see/hear in.

Pro's case falls on the lack of evidence to prove it; which is no case at all.Referencing the R2 video; if you believe the moonwalking bear was not seen the first play-through because it only appeared from another dimension later, vote pro; if you believe it was there the whole time, but humans are fallible vote con.To be sporting, here's some pointless rebuttals (I believe the above is all that is needed for voting)..."You have to rely on witnesses, who experienced the occurrence, or the aftermath of a disaster."Word of mouth does not prove other dimensions are to blame. Saying something is unexplained is believable, saying it's unexplained therefore it must be another dimension; is about like claiming there's a rainbow, so there must be a leprechaun at one end."Air Pockets."Turbulence on aircraft is well documented; it has to do with varying ground temperature (say a cool lake vs a hot parking lot). Warmer air (heated by the ground) rises, causing cooler air to fall. This affects aircrafts. It's well known, and generally not a big deal [5].It however has no impact on cars or boats; a boat traveling into one (doubtful as it is due to the water distributing the heat so rapidly) would not even notice it. The interior of a parked car on one would heat faster or slower, but that's the extent of it."When you believe in God, and follow His Word, you have God and His holy angels watching over you. Without this 'armour' you become a 'fatality statistic'."Again your case counters itself, since you reference (without evidence) plane disasters; was there not a single Christian fatality on any plane that crashed? Plenty of them [6]."compasses' needles, 'spinning' on their own"Yeah underground near a lot of metal, they tend to get confused by the various nearby magnetic fields. Hold one to your belt buckle, and ask yourself if the result is another dimension, or merely the normal working order of a pointed magnet spinning freely on water.If you'd like you can start a forum topic, where I answer your questions on "unexplained" basic science.Sources:[5] http://www.foxnews.com... [6] http://www.usatoday.com...
There is another 'dimension' alongside of the dimension we can see/hear in.

There are a lot of unexplained occurrences on this earth, that if several occur at the same time, in the same place, for only perhaps a matter of 'seconds' at a time, and then disappear again thus leaving no 'proof' behind. How do you therefore, prove that they 'exist, with hard evidence? You have to rely on witnesses, who experienced the occurrence, or the aftermath of a disaster. A well-known phenomenon, is the occurrence of 'air pockets'. We know they exist, but are unaware in advance, where they are, at any specific time. A plane can drop 100 feet while flying through the air, when they fly through the air pocket. Since there is no resistance, the drag force, lift and thrust is affected. One plane hit an air pocket while on approach to landing, turned upside down and crashed into the ground, killing all on board. What is the effect on 'SOUND' in an air pocket? What is the effect on 'LIGHT' (reflection versus refraction)? What is the effect on road vehicles travelling through an air pocket? What is the effect on human life, if a person enters an air pocket while travelling in a boat on open water? There are many hidden dangers that we face here on earth. Why do some survive, while others don't? Why are not ALL drivers protected from these dangers? To me, it is very simple. When you believe in God, and follow His Word, you have God and His holy angels watching over you. Without this 'armour' you become a 'fatality statistic'. We are taught, that 'perpetual motion' is impossible. This is a fallacy. The surveyors employed during the construction of the railway west of Sudbury, Ontario, experienced their compasses' needles, 'spinning' on their own. I also experienced this while staking mining claims north-west of Geraldton, Ontario. The compasses west of Sudbury were affected by the Sudbury Basin metal deposits. In my case, my compass was affected by the magnetite bands running through the mining claim that I was staking. Evidently, the compasses were affected by both north-south magnetic fields and north-north/south-south magnetic fields (folding of the magnetite bands?). If this knowledge could be used to 'create' a man-made occurrence similar to the natural occurrence, then we would be able to create perpetual motion motors. What I experienced (as I wrote in my original post, above), is the truth. I was not in a 'trance', nor was I not paying attention to my driving. I was perfectly aware of my surroundings. As I mentioned, I tried to enter the intersection, but was unable to do so. The experience has been with me throughout my life. I can still see (from memory), the road, as it was, before the truck appeared and I then heard it. This is the impact that this experience has left on me. There was nothing to warn me in advance, of the impending danger.
There is another 'dimension' alongside of the dimension we can see/hear in.

Human Error:Please watch the YouTube video provided.The phenomenon shown tells a lot about road accidents. Highly visible things, go unnoticed to us [2].Cross Examination:Since you claim this occurrence is so common... please provide a link to the relevant page on the Department Of Transportation website [1]. Police or other government agencies would also be fine.Even the navy has a page on the Bermuda Triangle, which they don't believe in [3].The Bermuda/Devil Triangle:Easily explained. From the National Ocean Services [4]: "The majority of Atlantic tropical storms and hurricanes pass through the Bermuda Triangle, and in the days prior to improved weather forecasting, these dangerous storms claimed many ships. Also, the Gulf Stream can cause rapid, sometimes violent, changes in weather. Additionally, the large number of islands in the Caribbean Sea creates many areas of shallow water that can be treacherous to ship navigation." "There is no 'PROOF' of the existence of 'ANOTHER DIMENSION...'"Human error is a more likely explanation, which has plenty of proof to support it."It was 'like' there was a hand ... holding my foot on the brake."Ok, so again... If your hypothesis is true, there's a magical invisible hand preventing accidents caused by this other dimension. Thus the accidents referenced become even more likely human error instead of another dimension."There was a right-hand merge constructed in order to head west, and no further accidents have happened at this corner since. You explain it...I can't."A merge lane was added... I guess I need to spell out that merge lanes give people a better chance to merge onto a road safely? The main reason for this is they pull into the merge lane, rather trying to slip between potentially fast moving vehicles; plus while on the merge lane they are visible for a longer period of time. Conclusion:Either A: The moonwalking bear hails from another dimension, and that's why it could go unnoticed. OR B: Human error. Even with training, we make sometimes fatal mistakes. Sources:[2] YouTube video http://www.youtube.com...[3] http://www.history.navy.mil...[4] http://oceanservice.noaa.gov...
There is another 'dimension' alongside of the dimension we can see/hear in.

I am certain you are not as 'stupid' as your comment seems to portray. There is a difference between 'TRUE' north and 'MAGNETIC' north. There is no 'PROOF' of the existence of 'ANOTHER DIMENSION' alongside the one we commonly 'live within'. The results [accidents] by properly trained drivers/pilots, fully alert at the time of the 'accident' without any reason for the accident, are all that we have. The same is true of the Bermuda Triangle. We do not know how certain things happened, but we have many documented cases of these events, where there are survivors. I did not say that there was a physical hand stopping me from proceeding into the intersection. It was 'like' there was a hand holding me back from making the body movements required to drive my vehicle forward. I was 'locked into' holding my foot on the brake. I could not proceed with the vehicle, until the transport came into view and I could see it. It simply WAS NOT VISIBLE AND I COULD NOT HEAR IT, until this occurred. I doubt that this type of phenomenon would EVER be recognized by the transportation departments. Anyone could use this as an excuse for an accident, and no one would insure anyone. It is, however, very real. A strange thing happened at this same intersection. There was a right-hand merge constructed in order to head west, and no further accidents have happened at this corner since. You explain it...I can't. I also know people who faced the same kind of thing, in regards to railway crossings, where they did not see a train that was almost 'on top' of them. Again, accidents happened at these crossings on perfectly clear, sunny days. The police know of these things. There is nothing that they can do about it. We also, cannot live our lives in a 'paranoid' state. If we were to question every situation at intersections, as being something actually different than what we are seeing & hearing, then no one would would ever enter the intersections.
There is another 'dimension' alongside of the dimension we can see/hear in.

In short:Your argument is not supported by evidence.Since you claim this occurrence is so common that even traffic cops 50 years ago knew about it, by now (if true) it should be listed on the Department Of Transportation website [1]. Please provide a link to the relevant page that lists other dimensions being to blame for traffic accidents."at the intersection, is perfectly aligned with magnetic east-west"There are no magnetic poles in the east and west. "I was about to make a left turn on to highway 11, but could not do so. It was if 'there was a hand holding me back'."A hand would be unable to hold back a car, even were it invisible.More likely you dozed out for a minute, and were surprised by the appearance of a truck (Occam's Razor).Or you were an inattentive driver, who was so used to the route you did not notice the truck until it was close enough; which would explain the sound even under the past images idea; since why would the fill in the blanks image be a truck instead of the empty road that is most common there?"The drivers of the smaller vehicles (including one motorcycle driver), were all killed"Your argument begins to counter itself, since you previously stated there's a magical hand holding people back from the dangers.Sources:[1] (provided to assist pro) http://www.dot.gov...