BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The Planet Earth will eventually end

Oh, that's normal. That's what happens when someone like you brings BS to the table and wonder why I have a giant water hose instead of a stack of papers to argue your BS. Can't dispute stupidity, sorry. Your "sources" and your "questions" are based on hoaxes and monetary lies. People made money off of this - the "scientists" you refer to are not real "scientists". They are fake ones that air on television to fool people like you. I already told you that a real scientist would not leave us in the dark like your "scientists", so you can stop kicking the dead horse.
The Planet Earth will eventually end

You haven't disputed anything I've said. All you've done is tell me I'm "toying with death" by talking about something that will happen 10^10^120 years in the future. Everything you've said is irrational, incorrect, and really just irrelevant. You've avoided most of what I have to say, and when you address what I have to say, you simply say it's me being pessimistic or fearing death or something.So all in all, you haven't even disputed the subject at hand, you've explained what you believe "science" is, how I'm so "pessimistic" for thinking the world will end, etc. I'm surprised you haven't even said "show me video proof of the world ending," as that would actually make more sense than what you're currently saying.Anyway, glad I could do some research and learn a couple things myself, hopefully you had the same experience here. Cheers!
The Planet Earth will eventually end

The Universe is conscious, but you're too arrogant and naive to understand this. The Universe cannot speak - cannot feel - cannot be anything more than a consciousness emerging into physical functions of experience. Humans don't exist - they are merely the Universe's observing tools based solely on the Universe's physics and governing laws. The only way of explaining why wisdom is accessible; how we are able to bond with the Universe, or why there is a concept called "oneness"; why we can only define ourselves by referencing aspects of the Universe in relation to how we feel at that current moment; how our emotions are related to Newton's Laws of Motion; why we do not know anything at all, but react to an already built-in algorithm that allows some freedom through the power of a level over observation (omni-observation; my term to describe the ability to observe through more than just the eyes via other senses); is that we are the Universe - no questions, no if's and no but's. The moon moving away does not mean anything. That's you assuming the worse case scenario because you are a fool - only fools toy with death. Sources are for the weak-minded. I have the whole Universe living inside my head aspect to aspect. You have to run away and depend on old information that is prone to bias because you are not even remotely capable of discussing ideas on the level I can. I do. I know the Universe more than you'll ever care to admit. That's not Science because it's called Science. "What if" is the definition of fraudulent Science. They demonstrated nothing. They resorted to question begging. They are not real scientists - a real scientist would not resort to ambiguity - fools that pass themselves off as a scientist do. Learn the difference or leave these debates.
The Planet Earth will eventually end

Apologies for late reply.This is a debate regarding the idea that Earth will be destroyed and be unable to sustain life one day. I'm sorry, but discussing out separate thoughts on the reason the Universe is the way it is, or even what it is, should be irrelevant to this debate, as the Universe is what is all around us, the Galaxies, Solar Systems, etc. Not a conscience presence. You saying I'm pessimistic is not an argument. Also, I am not pessimistic; I do not look for bad things, nor do I only see the bad in situations. I have taken into account that the moon IS in fact moving farther away from Earth, and simply accepted that as just that - a fact(1).I haven't only used Wikipedia for sources. And even then, you have zero. I at least have other people saying something to back me up. If the only proof you're willing to accept is watching the world "end" with your own two eyes, then we might as well create a time machine(2).So for me to "get nowhere," you would have to know what our ultimate goal is - as humans. Do you?Calling science "fake" and running away is not... it's not anything.They will most likely behave in similar manners.You're going way off course, come back and talk about if Earth will ever end. Because right now, you're just talking about the idea that the Universe has a conscience.(1) http://news.discovery.com... (2) http://news.nationalgeographic.com...
The Planet Earth will eventually end

The Universe cares about us. It planned our existence throughout its entire evolution. Why would it reset itself if it created human life? What point would it have to destroy itself? Our intelligence is so powerful, that we can legitimately achieve exiting out of our planet - it's so intelligent, that people truly still believe that all events of exiting the planet is faked by the government. We are legitimately the Universe observing itself. Why would it kill us off? Did it ever occur to the scientists that dinosaurs served a purpose before being killed off of this planet? No? Just dinosaurs that do dinosaur things, right? Basically what you're saying is, you're begging the question - a question that is on top of billions of other questions that have yet to be answered. It must be easy to think about these things, while ignoring the actual reality in front of you. When someone told me that the moon was slowly moving away from earth - I did not think anything of it, as I have no reason to assume the worst like you and basically everyone on this god forsaken planet do. Where is the enthusiasm? You never see a wise man saying the world is going to end - start practicing it. You're using Wikipedia - you have already lost all credentials. This is just toying with your fear. Cannot take it anymore than that, I'm afraid (the irony). You're crazy. That's all there is to it. People like you are the reason why nothing gets done in this world. You keep chasing cosmic tails and wonder why it lead you nowhere - it lead the people before you nowhere - and will lead the people in the future nowhere. It's called begging the question - so nice to know that you're a dog. You read sources based on fake science. I'm not going to waste my time debating with this idiocy. Guess what, we are made from stars, like the sun is made from the star - just because that is so, does not mean they will behave in the same manner. I don't see any productivity in sources. It's bias paradise. You're talking about nonsense that was fabricated by psychopaths that make a living off of people like you think think... too much. The Universe is a design - these psychopaths act like the Universe is a cosmic jungle of chaos and randomness, when that's just their own psychopathy talking. It's the same all the alien apologists that keep making up stories that involve aliens crashing. People make it very easy for me to see that these fools do not know the difference between reality and their ideology.
The Planet Earth will eventually end

The reason why our planet ending is such a big deal would not quite be what you were expecting. The planet is a very powerful emblem of our own inner Universe, ideologically speaking. People are not necessarily fearing the planet we live on, but rather their inner planet, so to speak, by the image of our planet in our head being misinterpreted as us thinking of Earth itself. That's why people do not care about the Earth - they just care that the Earth may end. It doesn't make sense because the planet in their head is not earth - it's a symbol of their inner Universe being threatened psychically. Earth, the planet itself, should not end considering that the photo receptors in our eyes existed at the beginning of the Universe prior to the existence of stars. I sincerely cannot believe that a Universe would take 16,000,000,000 years to create human life so it can end in less than a billion years after. That does not sound like a sensible design to the Universe after it's clearly shown its ability to evolve and expand from its old self, which is to say that if I am correct and the Universe is still young, there is no sense of ending itself when it has full control over itself and spent all this time reaching this point. If anything, the fear of the planet dying is an internal issue, not an outward issue. Doomsday concerns have failed every time - the media simply likes to keep the sheep busy from breaking down the actual issues of this damned society in every country through every ruler.
Gay Marriage

Let's start this off smooth and simple, and please do not perceive this the wrong way. If God wanted same sex marriage that's how he'd of made it. If you're not religious then biology would have eliminated the need for a man and woman and made either side capable of that. While I agree that everyone deserves to be happy plain and simple, however, there are boundaries you don't cross. Yes, maybe the bible says do not marry gays specifically. It does state however "Do not lay with a man the same way you lay with a woman, for it is a detestable act." Leviticus 18:22 Going back to the non religious view of this argument. Your theory that " biology is making changes to the human brain making more people gay" is just that a theory. If the earth was overpopulating it could just stop males or females from being able to produce offspring. Also being gay isn't an evolution it has been around for tens of thousands of years. We today as a society are just more lenient about the issue, rather than stoning them to death.
Gay Marriage

Marriage equality is a fundamental right that very human deserves. Imagine going through life without having the right to marry because it makes some unhappy. They will say the bible says so, but that is false. Well one I'm not religious, but if did believe in god don't you think if he hated gays he would of rid them from his earth? Obviously he isn't doing that so your theory is INVALID. Maybe (again I'm atheist) god just wants everyone to be happy. Two I'm not saying everyone is gay, nor will everyone be in the future. But I do think being gay is an evolution, on average Same Sex individuals make able 30,000 more dollars than straight individuals (1). Also the human population in WAY to high for the size of this earth, so biology is making changes to the human brain making more people gay slowing population growth, which at this point is good if not great for societies and decreases the amount of children in the adoption system. Face the facts gay marriage is great for society! Source: 1: http://www.businessinsider.com...
Gay Marriage

Let's start this off smooth and simple, and please do not perceive this the wrong way. If God wanted same sex marriage that's how he'd of made it. If you're not religious then biology would have eliminated the need for a man and woman and made either side capable of that. While I agree that everyone deserves to be happy plain and simple, however, there are boundaries you don't cross. Yes, maybe the bible says do not marry gays specifically. It does state however "Do not lay with a man the same way you lay with a woman, for it is a detestable act. " Leviticus 18:22 Going back to the non religious view of this argument. Your theory that " biology is making changes to the human brain making more people gay" is just that a theory. If the earth was overpopulating it could just stop males or females from being able to produce offspring. Also being gay isn't an evolution it has been around for tens of thousands of years. We today as a society are just more lenient about the issue, rather than stoning them to death. You talk against the bible and then you use it to your advantage. You need to pick a side. Where in the bible did you read that it condones rape? The Bible condemns rape whenever it is mentioned. For example, there is a particular passage in the laws given to the nation of Israel before entering the Promised Land under Joshua"s leadership. This passage (Deuteronomy 22:13"29) spoke directly against forcing a woman into a sexual encounter against her will, or what we know today as rape. Yes I agree that marriage is a fundamental right, but with saying that you have to look at what marriage is. The dictionary definition: the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship (a union between a man and a woman). If you can recall there is a very famous quote when a husband and WIFE are married. "You may kiss the bride" not the groom.
Gay Marriage

Marriage equality is a fundamental right that very human deserves. Imagine going through life without having the right to marry because it makes some unhappy. They will say the bible says so, but that is false. Marriage equality is a fundamental right no matter what the bible says. The bible also condones raping and forcing women into sex slavery. The bible is an out-dated book that longer has a place in our society. As times change so should the rules. These days its acceptable to get a divorce. Im not saying the bible should be rid of completely, but it should change to fit the norms of society. These days all the bible does is make Gays and divorcees not want to be happy. So no the bible should not be a reference for your argument against Gay marriage. There is zero reason for gay marriage to not be legal, as it is NOT bad for society as some opponents say. I hope my case has been made, Thank You
Should kids be home schooled

Overall, experts believe on http://www.theguardian.com... that homeschooling your child/chilren, would be bad for their nature, emotions and friendships. Here are some various points against homeschooling according to http://www.homeschooling-ideas.com... : You are totally responsible for your child's education.You constantly worry about the educational experiences you are providing your child.You can be the top homeschooler in the world, but you will still have moments of doubt and worry about what you are doing. Other people constantly make you justify your decision.Some children can feel isolated.Socialization is usually considered the major argument against homeschooling. You are with your child almost all the timeHomeschooling happens even when you feel ill.You need to be sure that YOU are flexible enough to cope with life, all it throws at you, AND having the children around.It is hard work.You have to be prepared to put in a lot of effort regardless of method you choose.In conclusion, majority of the population believe that homeschooling is a terrible idea, and we should maily focus on helping our child, not giving them lectureson everything.
Should kids be home schooled

Children shouldn't be homeschooled because they won't make as many, or any friends. It would be hard work on the parents to find other homeschooling kids so they could be friends, so why not send them to a school? In that sense, they would then have plenty of friends and be more aware of reality.Also, it is hard work on the parents to have work and give serious tests at home. Parents could just come and helthem during a test for the sake of 'I love my child, I can't watch him/her struggle'. Baised parents could also be an issue. School could stat at 10 and go to 2, depending on work loads and homework.How weird would it be doing school work then homework all at school?So I conclude that children shouldn't be homeschooled, but open to society going to school!
Christianity is more peaceful and tolerant than Islam

"In fact, 60% of Muslims live OUTSIDE the arab world." In the context of your argument, Indonesia, which has the largest population of Muslims of any single country receives foreign aid in the hundreds of millions every year. Islam is a religion whose spread happened to be in countries who weren't in possession of large navies and such and so didn't get large empires with new ideas to challenge the status quo, things are changing, and people in Egypt, Malaysia, Iran have no ill will to women, free speech or human rights, well by comparison to their neighbors, not the richest countries in the world. Christianity is not more peaceful, both religions have a concept of the end times where non believers will be sent to hell for eternity. Therefore neither can make the assertion that they are peaceful, and by deduction, one cannot be more peaceful than another. I didn't have the right country, well, maybe I did, but Boku Haram obviously is much worse than anything else going on, not because of Islam, but because they are radicals, for point of argument, that particular group kills and pillages indiscriminately for the most part, killing basically everyone they encounter. Here is a link to an article about the Central African Republic however. http://www.aljazeera.com... " Almost all scholars and historians, most of them atheists, confirm the existence of both Jesus AND Muhammed as real people. " The counter to that is that while there is relative consensus on the existence of a man named Jesus, that number goes down when you ask how many believe he is God. The same is true for Muhammad, he probably existed, but Michael the angel didn't speak to him in a cave, or at least, the evidence supports that Michael didn't tell Muhammad the things he did, but Muhammad was rallying his people to fight for their lands, but like David did. The end goal can be described as peaceful if you look at it from the context of a believer, it's fine because paradise, basically.
music

Full resolution: The rock genre has the most thought provoking lyrics. Definitions: Music: Musical work or compositions for singing or playing. (1) Rock Music: Rock music is a genre of popular music that entered the mainstream in the 1950s. It has its roots in 1940s and 1950s rock and roll, rhythm and blues, country music and also drew on folk music, jazz and classical music. The sound of rock often revolves around the electric guitar, a back beat laid down by a rhythm section of electric bass guitar and drums, and keyboard instruments such as Hammond organ, piano, or, since the 1970s, synthesizers. (2) Lyrics: The character of a song like outpouring of the poet's own thoughts and feelings, as distinguished from epic and dramatic poetry. (3) I look forward to my opponent's argument. Sources: (1). . http://dictionary.reference.com... (2). . http://en.wikipedia.org... (3). . http://dictionary.reference.com...
music

You again have no formal proof, I could say that I turned to the rock station and heard the following three songs, Too drunk too f*** by the sex pistols. Psychostick - Vah-Jay-Jay. In the garage by weezer. I could then go on to say I turned to the Hip-Hop station and heard B. O. B's "I'll be in the sky. " Which is a very deep song. Even if this was true, since I have no sources or proof, I could not use it in this debate. Also, even if it was sufficient evidence, and you proved that Rock has better lyrics than hip-hop, there would still be countless of other genres to go through. You did not provide the lyrics I asked for, so there is no more that needs to be said in that matter. I believe that nothing more needs to be said. I thank my opponent once more for the wonderful debate. I would also like to thank the audience for reading. Sources: (1). . http://lyrics.wikia.com... (2). . http://en.wikipedia.org... (3). . http://www.metrolyrics.com...
music

well just to prove that the majority of hip hop music is about "clubbing", getting girls, and is self-centered. I watched Mtv at three different random times in one day, these are the songs I heard. 1. "teach me how to douggi" this is song proves my point to the max. it was ego-centric and frankly it didn't make since 2. "I love the way you lie" by rhianna this song is actually a very good song. I learned that its about how Chris brown hit rhiannah 3. "toot it and boot it" this song is by far the worst song I've ever heard its offensive and just plane out terrible. "I met her in the club then I said wassup I took her to the crib and you know I fucked yea toot it and boot it toot it and boot it toot it and boot it that's why I toot and boot it " I changed the channel to a "music choice" channel named "arena rock" and I heard this meaningful song by rob zombie named more human than human.
music

Although my opponent gives a reason why rock has thought provoking lyrics, his argument fails to show how rock is better than other music. He also has provided no sufficient evidence to support his claims. I ask that in round three my opponent provide lyrics that will prove his case. My side of the case is as follows, one may not say that one group of music has the most thought provoking lyrics. For example, I could find a rock song that has very dumb lyrics, then I could find an opera song that has genius lyrics. Looking at these two, I could not say that opera songs have better lyrics than rock , simply because I have not listened to every rock and every opera song there is. The same could be said about all music, in order for you to prove that rock has the most thought provoking lyrics, you would have to listen to every song ever written! Which as you know, would be impossible. You claim that heavier rock genre revolves around topics such as the governments of the world, our purpose here on earth, and life's troubles. Again, does every heavy rock song revolve around that? Obviously not. Some heavy rock does have those good, meaningful, powerful lyrics. But some are simply about how much sex and drugs they can get over the weekend. So, simply because some of the rock songs you listen to have good lyrics, does not mean they are better than all the rest. Here are some dumb lyrics from the rock song 'In the garage' "I've got a Dungeon Master's Guide I've got a 12-sided die I've got Kitty Pryde And Nightcrawler too Waiting there for me Yes I do, I do I've got an electric guitar I play my stupid songs I write these stupid words And I love every one Waiting there for me Yes I do, I do" I again would like to thank my opponent for posting his response, and I look forward to his third and final argument. Thank you.
Is life better than it was 50 years ago

You may be right about technology, but that is not the only thing that technology has done. Technology has made it so we can stop pollution by getting energy out of things like the wind, the sun, and even things like wood and trash! There are some other things that make life better now then 50 years ago. Back then there was a lot of segregation. I bet you if you asked any minority, they wouldn't want to go back 50 years ago.
Is life better than it was 50 years ago

The technology is better, our systems as a community is better. Our capability of international traveling is better. Yet, does all of those examples significantly make life better. Yes it is nice to have those luxuries, but in all honesty a lot of things in life are significantly worse. 50 years ago there was a less obvious sense of media pressure. The pressures on young kids used to be way less. There generally was no social media pressure. In a common household back then, there was one phone in the home to shared. The television programs were bugs bunny and lone ranger for example. Not the shows that we have these days that have pressure, ridiculous and bad influences all wrapped in one. On billboard's in magazines pressure everywhere you turn to look a certain way or act a certain way. 50 years ago things were much simpler, no pressure no obligations of appearances little things may be better, but significant things are not