BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
"Black" people are more racist than "whites".

If you ask how I can prove it, how can you disprove it? WHAT was the percentage of blacks voting for Obama- 90%; WHITES for Obama- roughly 50%. If this was like any other election, blacks and whites would have been split approx. 50-50. HOWEVER- well over 50% of blacks voted for Obama- a statistical anomaly. THEREFORE- Blacks overwhelmingly DID NOT vote for Obama because of his politics but because he is BLACK- THAT IS RACISM!!!
Big Bang theory is real

Rebuttal(s): 1) Does cold exist? Cold does not exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat; all matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat." Does darkness exist? Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in reality the absence of light. Light we can study, but not darkness. In fact we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wavelengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present." Does evil exist? Evil does not exist, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light." 2) You atheists fail to account for existence. God doesn't have a cause. He did not come into existence. He is eternal. He exists outside of space, time, etc. thus making his existence possible. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ You are working on the Premise of Duality. Your philosophical premise is flawed. YOU EVEN SAID THAT IN YOUR OLDEST ARGUMENT! Yet, you use that. Why is that so?
Big Bang theory is real

There are two different types of when stars end. When the little stars die, it"s just like a small poof. They just turn into a planetary nebula. But the big ones, above 1.4 solar masses, blow up in one giant explosion, a supernova. What it does, is, in larger stars there is a larger mass, and it can fuse higher elements because it"s more dense.So you get all the elements, all the different materials, from those bigger stars. The little stars, they just make hydrogen and helium, and when they blow up, all the carbon that remains in them is just in the white dwarf; it never really comes off.So in the big-bang theory, what they do is, there is this big explosion and there is all this temperature going off and the temperature decreases really rapidly because it"s really big. The other day I calculated, they have this period where they suppose the hydrogen and helium were created, and, I don"t care about the hydrogen and helium, but I thought, wouldn"t there have to be some sort of carbon?Otherwise, the carbon would have to be coming out of the stars and hence the Earth, made mostly of carbon, we wouldn"t be here. So I calculated, the time it would take to create 2 percent of the carbon in the universe, it would actually have to be several micro-seconds. Or a couple of nano-seconds, or something like that. An extremely small period of time. Like faster than a snap. That isn"t gonna happen.Because of that, that means that the world would have never been created because none of the carbon would have been given 7 billion years to fuse together. We"d have to be 21 billion years old . . . and that would just screw everything up.
On Balance a Majority of Dota 2 Heroes Have More Advanced Kits Than LoL Champions

Hi! I'm interested in debating this topic. My argument: A majority of Dota 2 Heroes' kits are more advanced than League of Legends Champions' kits. On balance - All things considered I assume entering this debate opponent knows what the two games are. Opponent is arguing: A majority of Dota 2 Heroes' kits are NOT more advanced than League of Legends Champions' kits OR A majority of League of Legends Champions' kits are more advanced than Dota 2 Heroes' kits (preferably second as it will be easier for opponent based on the style of this debate). BoP is on Pro (me), unless opponent wishes to do the second form of his argument, in which BoP is shared. More advanced - Having more complex meaning/requiring a deeper understanding to use to its fullest potential Rules: 1. No trolling or semantics - results in a loss 2. Forfeit on either side results in a loss for that side 3. Opponent, by agreeing to the debate, agrees to the above definitions 4. (Voters only) Voters MUST have a valid RFD for voting. 5. No arguments in Round 1: Simply acceptance. Failure to comply in the rules results in a loss. PROCEDURE: Opponent will provide five champions, and I shall provide five heroes. Opponent must show that those heroes are NOT more advanced than their LoL champions OR that their champions have more advanced kits than the Dota 2 heroes I provide. Gaben voice: Thanks, and have fun.
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

Though all players are needed to play, there are players needed greater than others. When a left is up to bat I rather have a strong right fielder that strong left fielder. To the fact that most lefty batters are pull hitters and hit the ball to the right side of the field. If a pitcher is to throw a pitch to a catcher whom can't catch the ball, then there would be no strikes and nothing but walks. That being, runs would be scored having that team loose all games in which a terrible catcher is in. All players are "valuable" during the game. Though the catcher is the most important player because he keeps the game moving and has control over the pitcher and the other players. He calls the pick off plays, he chooses the pitch, he sets the tone of the game, and he is the play who has the most the majority of the game (more than the pitcher).
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

I will be arguing that all the players are equal. "Not do they only catch the ball thrown by the pitcher, but they have visual of the whole field during game play." They would not be able to catch the ball without the pitcher. Also, what does it matter that they have visual of the whole field? "Besides seeing the whole field he calls the pitching game as well. He calls the pitches that should be thrown and the location of the pitches." It is true that the catcher is important, however, if the other players did not exist, he would not be able to do anything. "The Cather moves the game along and sets the rhythem for the rest of his team." But without the other players, the catcher is useless. Conclusion All the players are equal because the rest of the players, each player is useless. For example, wthout the rest of the players, the catcher is useless. Sources http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.instructables.com...
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

In baseball the most important position is the catcher. Not do they only catch the ball thrown by the pitcher, but they have visual of the whole field during game play. When some players have their back turned to some bases, the catcher can see them all. Besides seeing the whole field he calls the pitching game as well. He calls the pitches that should be thrown and the location of the pitches. The Cather moves the game along and sets the rhythem for the rest of his team. Therefore, making the catcher the most important player on the field
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

Rebuttals "But in order to have a pitcher be important, to some level, you need to have a catcher." The same goes the other way around. "The catcher sees the whole field and controls where the ball is to be thrown. He sets the tone of the game. The catcher is what makes the game. The catcher is the brains on the field. As the pitcher looks in towards home plate it is the catcher that tells him what to throw and where to throw it. He is the most important player on the field." My opponent's only argument is that the pitcher and the rest of the players are useless without the catcher. But my point is that the same can be said the other way around. The catcher is useless without the pitcher and the other players. Conclusion The pitcher and catcher are equally important because without the other, each is useless. http://mlb.mlb.com... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://baseball.about.com...
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

"You can still play without cleats, just like you can still play without outfielders.." You cannot play without outfielders. In order to have a game you need at least eight players to play (at least two outfielders). You need a certain number of players at certain positions to play the game. It is nice that you went on mlb.com and took their opinion of the importance of a pitcher. But in order to have a pitcher be important, to some level, you need to have a catcher. I will quote it again. "Why has our pitching been so great? Our catcher that's why. He looks cumbersome but he's quick as a cat." - Casey Stengel The catcher sees the whole field and controls where the ball is to be thrown. He sets the tone of the game. The catcher is what makes the game. The catcher is the brains on the field. As the pitcher looks in towards home plate it is the catcher that tells him what to throw and where to throw it. He is the most important player on the field. source- http://www.baseball-almanac.com...
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

"All players are needed to play the game. Just as gloves, bats, and cleats needed to play the game. Though you can say that you don't really need cleats to play the game, but they are better to have when playing baseball. You can prioritize what you need to play the game. You would need a bat and a glove, though you can still play without a pair of cleats." You can still play without cleats, just like you can still play without outfielders, but the pitcher and catcher are equal because you can't play without them. "You need to have all the players in order to play baseball. But the most important player of the game is the catcher. He controls the game and is the captain over the field. He is the person who calls the game, moves the game, and sets the tone of the game." Pitcher- Pitchers are the most used player and if I had to choose a most important position, it would be the pitcher. The pitcher starts everything. The pitcher throws the strikes. The pitcher controls the game because unless their ball is thrown, the game and/or play hasn't started yet. They have to have a good arm and good pitch. They are the only player who takes part in EVERY play. They are used extensively. The pitcher and catcher are equally important. http://mlb.mlb.com...
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

All players are needed to play the game. Just as gloves, bats, and cleats needed to play the game. Though you can say that you don't really need cleats to play the game, but they are better to have when playing baseball. You can prioritize what you need to play the game. You would need a bat and a glove, though you can still play without a pair of cleats. You need to have all the players in order to play baseball. But the most important player of the game is the catcher. He controls the game and is the captain over the field. He is the person who calls the game, moves the game, and sets the tone of the game. "Why has our pitching been so great? Our catcher that's why. He looks cumbersome but he's quick as a cat." - Casey Stengel Source- http://www.baseball-almanac.com...
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

"But with no catcher who does the pitcher throw to? The pitcher is needed to play as another other player is needed. But where would the pitcher throw if there is no target behind the mound." That just proves that all the players are equal. It is true that without the catcher, the pitcher would not be able to throw the ball, but it is just as true that without the pitcher, the catcher would not be able to catch the ball. "If there is no catcher then there is no where for the pitcher to pitch to." The same could be said for any of the players. Without the pitcher there is no ball for the catcher to catch.
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

"Without the pitcher, the catcher is useless, thus the catcher is not the most important player." Without a pitcher on the mound there is not game. Without a catcher on the field there is no game. Without nine players on the field there is no game. Yes, all the players are , as I said, ""valuable" during the game.", in order to have the game be played. But with no catcher who does the pitcher throw to? The pitcher is needed to play as another other player is needed. But where would the pitcher throw if there is no target behind the mound. Conclusion The catcher is the most important player on the field and in order for the game to occur the catcher is needed. If there is no catcher then there is no where for the pitcher to pitch to. Thus, being no game without the catcher.
Most important position in baseball is the catcher

"All players are "valuable" during the game. Though the catcher is the most important player because he keeps the game moving and has control over the pitcher and the other players. He calls the pick off plays, he chooses the pitch, he sets the tone of the game, and he is the play who has the most the majority of the game (more than the pitcher)." My opponent does not address the fact that without the pitcher, the catcher is rendered useless. Conclusion Without the pitcher, the catcher is useless, thus the catcher is not the most important player.
Ron Paul is a better candidate for president than Joe Bieden.

So Bieden wants to try and keep drugs out of America? That is a cause that will take years to solve. This country will be a dictatorship by then. Ron Paul wants to pull out of Iraq and restore freedom in the US! When asked what he would do if Hong Kong was taken over by China he said, "I wouldn't let thousands of Americans die in a war we weren't involved in. We agreed to not police the world, why are we?" Here are some Youtube video links, just a few. They are categorized by what they represent in Ron Paul winning. Post a few Bieden ones. I invite you too watch every video. SMACKING DOWN REPORTERS--- http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... SMACKING DOWN CANDIDATES--- http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... OTHER CANDIDATES ARE SCARED-- http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... IN DEMAND--- http://www.youtube.com... ENDORSMENTS--- http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... Coalitions--- http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com... OTHERS--- http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com...
Ron Paul is a better candidate for president than Joe Bieden.

HEALTHCARE- You asked me why Dr.Paul isn't using the European system? He doesn't really support it because it is a very liberal thing to do. I would think that you would support Ron PAul. In 1988, he ran for Libertarian in the presidential election. Haha, go and make your cracks about how he isn't dedicated. Iran- please explain the situatuion there. IRS and Federal Reserve- Ron Paul would easily be able to sway the republicans and a majority of democrats to vote for this. No matter what you say about him, even if he wasn't able to destroy it, at least he isn't as ignorant as the other candidates who don't recognize this problem. What do you think of Dennis Kunich? P.S. You say Ron Paul would pull out of Iraq without a plan. What would Joe Bieden do, keep them there? And why the hell do we need a plan, in the sense of this war isn't about us really, it is about their religion, something we agreed to never intervene on.
Ron Paul is a better candidate for president than Joe Bieden.

I will only respond to the situation in Iraq for this round because I think it is most important. Thanks by the way, for finally debating me on this. Not many people on this site are willing to defend their candidate against me. You say Joe Bieden will put Iraq lower on the list of priorities, right? How exactly is that working for the hundreds of thousands of troops located there right now? My dad served in Iraq for 1 year. Not many troops will be happy to find out that sorting out our healthcare issues is considered more important by them. He should just use the European healthcare system if it is so important to him, European is by far the best system. You also tell me tuitions are important to Bieden. As in college, I'm guessing. There are plenty of federal college funds to give support right now. I don't think that a fake and illegal war on terror should rank lower than little Johnny getting even more money for his college. What will the college degree matter when the US economy is in the crapper because we are in such debt to the PRIVATE COMPANIES like Federal Reserve and IRS which we borrow money from, also foreign nations we borrow from.
3 divided by 0 is 3

No its a place holder. Not normally used as a single equation. Only small children do just 3+0=0 grown ups use equations like: Rent paid: Jan $395 Feb $0 March $600 or $395+0+$600. Yes this could be done with out the zero but you need the zero when doing rent for 30,000 tenants over the last 20 year or 7,200,000 rent payments. No one can remember the no payments when there is that many numbers to add.
3 divided by 0 is 3

3 divided by 0 is 3 because the equation doesn't go through, so you still have 3 and nothing happend, and it can not be explained through and equation so 3/0(3) or just 3 That is not 3/0=0 That is 3-(nothing or 0)=3 0+0+0=0 or 3/0=0
3 divided by 0 is 3

Your right and that is why the answer is 0. You have given 0 sodas, to 0 people, 0 times, or 3*0=0. Three non actions have had no effect on anything because they never happened. The answer only becomes 3 because you are doing this:I have three sodas. I cant give anyone a soda. No one is there. No matter how many times you tell me to.This is 4 variables: I have three sodas: That is 3 for the amount of sodas you have. I cant give anyone a soda: 0 because you have not done any actions because it is not possible to give something tosome one that is not there No one is there: 0 for the amount of people that are there No matter how many times you tell me to: 0 for the amount of times you can complete this loop of events and successfully give someone a soda. This is why your agrument is wrong: You have expressed this as 3*0=3 in this debate. This only 3 out of the 4 variables. Your missing a number. In some other debates, on this site, you have used 3*0(3). This is every close to the right answer. () is the same as * in math. So that equation is 3*0*3 that answere is also 0. The correct way of stating the formual is like this: You simply add all 4 variables. 3+0+0+0=3 In math we simplify, or try to write the equalition using less characters. I have 3 and 0,0,0. I can use less characters by expressing that I have 3 zeros. In math * means the word of. So I have 3 of the zeros. In math there is no symbol for the word the. I left with a bit of bad grammor with 3 of zero. We still have 3+ from the beginning of the equation. So now its 3+3 of zero. In math we use () to seperate our bad grammer sentaces from the rest of the equation. That gives us 3+(3 of 0) or 3+(3*0)=3 Your logical agrument word problem is 3+(3*0)=3. This still means 3*0=0
3 divided by 0 is 3

Not just money. Its also how your brain and computer work. Both are in binary so: 1010101010110001 is 2+0+0+0+0+32+64+0+256+0+1024+0+4096+0+16384+0+65536 "3 sodas cant be shared by 0 people, so you have 3 sodas" You not setting up your equation correctly, because your not writing it correctly. Its 3 sodas shared with 0 people, so 0 people have sodas. (Sodas)/(Times shared)=(people I have GIVEN sodas to) Not (sodas)/(Times shared)=(Sodas) or (Sodas)/(Times shared)=(HOW MANY SODAS I HAD)
Social Abortions ought to be banned in the US.

First things first: this has been one of my favorite debates in a while, whether in an actual competition or online. I'd like to thank the Pro yet again for offering this up... Hobey ho, let's go! ______________________________________________________________________________________________ In my final speech, I'm going to sum up what this debate has boiled down to. 1) Definition of Human Life So, as we travel through the time machine that is the scroll bar, we see the initial offered definition- it first appears as a determined embodied process. This embodied process, from the outset, has an active capacity to be manifest in human ways. Now, this definition is from a somewhat credible source, aka the 'scientific community'. But, it does not cover the vast majority of definitions floating around the internet. As anyone who has researched for a debate, a school paper, or even for personal knowledge knows, there are always many sides to the same story, or in this case, definition. When my opponent attempts to limit the debate to this singular definition, without looking at the whole spectrum of this phrase mind you, it hinders the resolution. Everyone has a personal connotation of what is the murder of a fetus, and what isn't. Some, like my opponent, say it is extremely early in the pregnancy, or even at conception. Others say it is the moment a woman goes into labor. Some even say it is the moment that child is pronounced born in the hospital/home. Basically what I'm getting at is this; we cannot look at this topic without looking at the numerous definitions and the Pro cannot uphold the resolution without appeasing a majority of the definitions, or even showing that the majority of the scientific community accepts this definition. Unfortunately, they do not do this, and therefore, the whole case falls, leaving only my counterarguments... Speaking of which.... 2) Back-Alley Abortion/ Government Involvment First off, I'd like to clear up the whole 'choice' thing. I'm sorry that I misunderstood what you were saying. a) Back-Alley Abortion-- I have succefully shown that, if abortions were banned, there would be abortions anyway. Furthermore, they would be dirty and unsafe for the woman. If we look to history, we see that during Prohibition, bootleggers were rampant. Why? Just because the government mandates that an action not be done, doesn't mean it won't be done. I am not saying that the women should. I am not saying that the women who would potentially partake in this illegal action aren't at fault. I AM saying that we should prevent as many deaths as possible. And the illegalization of social abortion is NOT the way to achieve this. b) Government Involvment-- When the government does not make a mandate forcing an action, they are not condoning the action. They are just keeping the opinions of the public at heart. After all, they need thier votes. ;) Conclusion/ Voting Issues: Based on the fact that my opponent's entire case must be dropped because of narrowness; the fact that if we allow this to happen, thousands of women will die; there is no other alternative to a vote to the Con. Thank you.