BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Evolution is NOT a fact, but rather falls short in evidence

I did not bring up any new "evidence" due to the lack of time I had to research, sorry. "Now who was the 16th President of the United States? Abraham Lincoln was for some time until he was murdered. Eye witness accounts have been written and are cited today. Now, we weren't there so that takes out observational science. We have to trust the historical documents of the eye witness accounts." Or, we can trust in the documents that were actually written by Lincoln himself, along with the numerous eye witnesses. (There's actually a website dedicated to Lincoln's written documents http://www.papersofabrahamlincoln.org...). So, saying Lincoln is to Bible as Bible is to Lincoln is completely illogical, as no documents were ever written by Christ, "his" teachings that were supposedly seen / heard were. "The Bible, however, is the most published book in history and read by millions every day." So what? I could say that Harry Potter was the most published book in history and is read by millions every day, but it doesn't prove Hogwarts exists, does it? "Prophecies in the book have known to come true as well as having very credible historical accounts." Let me give you a passage from Ezekiel 26, A Prophecy Against Tyre: 21"I will bring terrors on you and you will be no more; though you will be sought, you will never be found again," declares the Lord GOD." According to God, no matter how hard you try, how hard you look, you will NEVER find the city of Tyre ever again... This is obviously not true, as it literally takes a 5 second google search to find Tyre. Allow me to "trash" living fossils as it does not provide any sort of evidence for evolution. I realized that it means nothing. My apologies. "DNA. Now you try to use DNA to help you, so I'll do the same. It's a complex subject and I have found this video to be very logical and great at explaining my points (I can't say it better than him!) Please take a look (this'll count as my current argument): https://www.youtube.com...; I don't see how that video refutes evolution at all. Evolutionists never claimed to know why everything seems to be put in place perfectly, but to say something like, "I can't answer this, therefore God," is completely ridiculous. But I'll try to refute: I'm sure you know the Miller-Urey experiment, (Yes, I know that this is not an amazing piece of evidence), but the "updated" version of the experiment is. (http://www.livescience.com...) This will be my counter-argument.
Evolution is NOT a fact, but rather falls short in evidence

I have "faith" that evolution is real, not *blind* faith. Like you stated, you can't "prove" evolution happened, as it takes millions upon millions of years to take place-- but you can back up your claim with evidence, (which evolution and science as a whole repeatedly does). Also, even if it was based off of faith, does that suddenly disprove evolution? You admit your religion is based off loads of blind faith, does that disprove your religion as well? Where is the evidence that a man walked on water, was brutally tortured, then rose from the dead? You bring up fossils as a false/weak way to prove evolution ever took place. "Firstly, fossils are bad for scientific reasoning as you don't know if that fossil had any kids/ancestors. All you know about that animal/dinosaur is that it died." What about living fossils? Ex: The crocodile. (http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net...). "Either way, the billions of fossils that we find all over the world actually point to a worldwide flood!" No, it doesn't. Perhaps yes, the flood may have occurred, but not the entire Earth. Think logically. Would the Earth be the same if a worldwide flood ever occurred?
Evolution is NOT a fact, but rather falls short in evidence

Exactly in what way does it fall short in evidence? DNA sequencing, vestigial organs, homologous structures,-- ALL contribute as a sufficient amount of "evidence" needed to prove evolution's existence. DNA: Science has proven that we are 96% related to the common chimpanzee, why would we be so related if we didn't evolve from the same type of species? We evolved due to the changes in environments. An example of this is, let's say the food of the chimp became higher than usual; harder to get-- the tallest chimp would thrive in that environment, and would then reproduce with other chimps that would then have taller offspring. That offspring would reproduce, so on and so forth... Vestigial Organs: These structures provide evidence of genes coding for structures that are not present. Not because they are useful to us now, but because they were once useful to an ancestor. An example of this is the plantaris muscle. This muscle is often removed by doctors since it does not affect the balance when we walk. However, this same muscle is found more fully developed in the feet and/or calves of other primates, as It is the muscle used for grasping with the feet. Homologous Structures: Let's take a look at this photo: http://itc.gsw.edu... Do you see any resemblance in the bone structure of these organisms? The closer the organisms are related, the more homologous structures they have. The structure was taken by different organisms due to how well it performs in their environment.
Abortion

For the second round, I will give several reasons on why abortion is fine while you provide a counter-framework. 1. In the United States, rape has been a big issue. One in six American women have been raped or had someone try to rape them in their lives [1]. With so many women being raped, so many babies can be born crust is why abortion can then be an option for women who were raped. Since it is an unwanted baby, it should be fine because it was a result if rape. 2. Abortion saves women the hardships of raising an unwanted baby. This second reason actually links with my first one. The cost of raising is very high. The cost in 2013 to raise a child was close to $250,00 [2]. For middle class or upper class incomes, this may not be much of a big problem. But with lower class incomes, this can be a huge problem. They would have to pay for rent, food and water, electricity and gas bills, and on top of all that, the cost for raising a child. This is another reason on why abortion is fine because it benefits everyone. These are my two reasons that I can start with and I look forward to my opponent's response. Sources [1] rainn. org [2] Wall Street Journal
Abortion

The definition of the word alive is a big question in this debate. How can we determine if the baby inside the womb of a woman is dead or alive? Alive has several definitions: [1] 1. Living, not dead. 2. Alert and active, animated. 3. Aware of and interested in, responsive. Now let's talk a little bit about this definition. People like you and me should have a birth cirtificate, which is a document that records our birth, or our coming of exsistence into this world. This birth certificate tells us exactly when we took our first breath, when a new life was born. This is when we are alive. This is the definition of the opposite of alive, dead: [2] 1. No longer alive. 2. Complete, absolute. These are pretty depressing definitions, but it is what it is. So let's compare the definition of dead and alive. Alive is when you are moving and learning, while dead is when you are done and no longer functioning. So what is the status of a baby in the woman's womb? The answer: it is neither dead nor alive. It makes sense. The baby is not still, but it is not exactly fully functioning either. This argument counters my opponent's on the matter of the status or a baby. My opponent mentions that abortions can have serious effects on the women who have them. This may be true, but I didn't say that all women should get an abortion. This is only for women who understand the risks and are willing to take it. Sources: [1]: merriam-webster.com [2]: See [1]
PC gaming is much better than console gaming

They are willing to pay the extra buck for a better gaming experience? Let me explain why all of the points you made are either not relevant or incorrect. 1. The controller is outdated and inaccurate. I find it funny that mentioned that the controller is better on FPS games. Controllers are arguably the worst on FPS games. The controller is very inaccurate while the mouse and keyboard is extremely precise. Also if you're looking for greater immersion, a controller does not help any which way. Greater immersion comes from the Oculus Rift, or any VR headset, which consoles do not have while PC does. 2. If you really want to, you can play your PC from your couch with the TV using specialized wireless keyboards that have mouse pads on them (Razer Turret). So you can enjoy couch gaming even with the superior keyboard and mouse. But if you truly want to, you can use a familiar Xbox 360 or One controller to enjoy it. 3. Motion gaming was a fad of 2011. Do any serious gamers play with motion controls? The answer is no. The PC might not have motion gaming, but that's considerably a good thing. Motion gaming is already dead.
PC gaming is much better than console gaming

Hello opponent I will be chronically rebutting the points you've stated and tell you why console gaming is better than PC gaming. Now you've addressed only one issue and that is the monetary part of it which is a very small part of the whole gaming world. Now you need to realize people game because its fun and because it gives them joy, people are willing to pay that extra buck got the better gaming experience and console it the way to go and let me tell you why. Firstly, is the great use of the controller the console had to offer, especially with first person shooter games, it gives the player an amazingly imeersive experience with the controller vibrating when you hit a target and so on. It is arguably way more convenient to play multiple games on the controller, and with the availability of wireless controllers, player can move around and game unlike like restrictive sitting in fran of the desktop. Now there's motion sensing gaming available with the consoles which is miles away from desktop gaming. Now playes can interact with the game through motion which is amazing. If money is what matters to you, there are multiple methods to get these games for way cheaper in different markers. Consoles let you play on the wide screen unlike comparatively tiny desktop screens. Console is worth the extra bucks.
Metalcore Battle

Half the voters are dead from the boredom you spreadI fell asleep trying to read that load of sh!t that you saidYOUR BARS MAKE ME WANNA PUT A ROUND IN YOUR HEADBut I'll just use this round to put you in your place insteadLittle man, you thought that you could play with the godsBut your logic is flawed, I've seen through your facadeYou say you're metal, but you're just a FAKE AND A FRAUDAND NOW YOU'RE TARGET PRACTICE FOR MY FIRING SQUADYou're sinking fast in a bottomless pitSlowly drowning in the sh!t that you spitYour battered carcass taking hit after hitFrom the furious fists of my wisdom and witYour kitten comment is just laughable kitschSpongebob's about as metal as LILO AND STITCHYour skills are broke while mine are FILTHY RICHNOW TAKE YOUR WHIPPING LIKE A GOOD LITTLE BITCHWhen I started this, I intended for it to just be a rap battle. The metalcore part was kind of a joke, since metalcore is basically just screamed rap. I didn't mean for it to become a death metal battle. I apologize to any readers that this may have scarred.
Metalcore Battle

I'm more metal than Anton Lavey shooing through Columbine with Kurt Cobain's shotgun I PUT KITTENS IN BLENDERS AND EAT THE MOIST REMAINS UPON TORTILLA CHIPSSS Bottling my sperm in mason jars for future consumption THEY CALL ME SPOOGEJARRR TRIPP PANTSSS Raping your Bikini Bottom with a pineapple NOW YOU'VE GOT CRABBBSSS Contrary to what you have said my suicide is not my demise FOR DEATH IS MORE METAL THAN LIFE AND THROUGH IT I GAIN VICTORY I go to the glory hole disguised as a womaannnnn FOR SODOMY IS THE DESTRUCTION OF LIFE- NO PROCREATION MAKES ME METALLL Getting mass bukakes from Jesus, Buddha, and Mohammed WHILE JOSEPH SMITH FILMS AND MASTURBATEESSS THE WORD OF GOD COAGULATES IN MY SPOON RELIGION DRUG IS INJECTING SOON ABORT ME FIRST BEFORE REBIRTH LIVING FOR GOD IS HELL ON EARTH
Metalcore Battle

Just as I prophecied, the suicide begins I grin as I witness your inevitable end Again and again, you pretend you can bend the bars to your will, but your rhymes are a sin "Garb" and "Lord"? WHAT THE FUK? IS YOUR BRAIN STUCK? You opened your mouth, now you're all outa luck Far better to forfeit, than look like a schmuck Now everyone can see that you FUKIN' SUCK Since you're from down under, I guess that's ok It's the best place to stay when you're sucking all day I'm not saying you're gay, JUST A FUKIN' ASH TRAY FOR CUM SPRAY; Enjoy the COK BUFFET Pedophilic abuse? You're pathetic and sick I should do the world a favor and sever your dik Amputate, castrate, before the animal mates SO YOU CAN'T PROCREATE, IN CASE THE TRAITS ARE INNATE My rhythm and rhyme are nailing you to the wall Like it's nothing at all, and I'm fukin' appalled At your sh!t; Sick of it; why don't you limp and crawl Back to your own little world, so empty and small
Metalcore Battle

Spelling and grammar do not apply to obscenities, as the site regulates against them. I stood over the virgin womb, spewing puss and smelling of doom I crushed the Fallopian tube, no lube my Fallopian tomb It smelled of $hit and mascara, made me harder than Viagra My Cum of blood sprayed forth, more powerful than falls of Niagra Jesus Christ came down from Heaven, smirking in woman's garb I penetrated the divine virgin and offered genital mutilation to the Lord I DRIVE AN ICE CREAM TRUCK TO ALL THE DAY CARES MAKE THE CHILDREN HELP ME WALK, FOR I AM IMPAIRED THEY RIDE ON MY LAP IN MY WHEELCHAIR I SPEW THE CUM OF BLOOD IT DYES THEIR HAIR Satanic pedophilia, nihilistic from Australia For I come from down under, from the underworld I HOPE YOU GET DIAGNOSED WITH CANCERRRR AND ON THE WAY OUT OF THE CLINICCCCC I'LL IMPREGNATE YOU WITH MY SPERM OF AIDDSSSSSSSS
Metalcore Battle

Normal words = low-pitched screamingALL CAPS WORDS = high-pitched screamingPut out your candles, fuk your black massHell's got better things to do than SAVE YOUR A$$If demonic support was your master plan,YOU'RE FUKED: I'M SATAN'S RIGHT-HAND MANBegging on your knees won't help you rockBut now you're just the right height to SUCK MY COKA deal with the devil won't help you rollI OWN CONTROL OF YOUR WHOLE FUKIN' SOULBetter pray for mercy from me insteadMy broken cross is painted bright redI suffered and bled, NOW I'M BACK FROM THE DEADTo put infernal fear into your INBRED HEADPray to me, btchPRAY TO MEYou put on a front, but you're shaking insideIT'S TOO LATE TO HIDE, BUCKLE UP FOR THE RIDEAll chance of saving your pride died when you tried to take meYour confidence lied, YOU WON'T GET OUT ALIVEYour mother will cry when the cops notify herThat your sudden demise seemed to be SUICIDEI'll comfort her heart, and she'll get over it quickTHEN I'LL COMFORT HER CNT WITH MY DEVILISH DIKShe'll come running to me to help her grieveThen she'll cum for me, FACE DOWN, ON HER KNEESCUM FOR ME, BTCHCUM FOR ME
Metalcore Battle

Screamed-Spoken Intro: My opponent has apologized to the voters for the scarring content of my lyrical force....I stand above the voters and urinate UNAPOLOGETICALLY -guitar solo- I'm so metal that as an altar boy I molested the priest I'M SO METAL THAT I SOLVED S=Pi Akc^3/2hG AS THOUGH IT WERE SIMPLE ADDITION I;m so metal that I use semicolons instead of apostrophes FOR I AM SO POWERFUL THAT THE LETTER REPRESENTING ME MUST BE DIVIDED FROM THE REST OF MY SENTENCE AS A SEPARATE THOUGHT I'm so matel thet I disragard spall chack I'M SO METAL THAT MY ENTIRE HIP IS LITERALLY MADE OF METAL -Bridge- And as I rise above the flames of my destruction I urinate great balls of fire as from a kidney stone obstruction You think you could beat the son of Satan in a rap battle??? YOLO SWAG YOUNG MONEY GUCCI BURR! TWERK HO THOT #WTF #YOUMUSTVOTECON
Resolved: The Government has too much power.

Please only except this debate if you have the time to finish it. I will be taking the possition of pro for this debate. It will be my job to prove that the U. S. government has too much power, by using the U. S. constitution as a means to measure governmental power. The job of the con is to prove that is not the case by either; only refuting my case or bringing up a case of their own while refuting my case.
When in conflict, Security should be prefered to rights

Sorry for the misunderstanding... I'll argue against the argument where it says security is more important. The first thing I want to point out is that is the resolution says "when in conflict" meaning when security conflicts with rights. The warrant my opponent gives is talking about the fact that we can value other people's rights because we all have the same basic rights. This isn't true at all. People who live in Afghanistan certainly don't have the same lifestyle as people in the United States. Secondly, it is true that everyone deserves the same basic rights, but when our own security comes in conflict other people's rights, we overvalue our security and undervalue their rights. If that's the case, and we cannot give each right their due weight when weighing costs and benefits, then how are we to know if violating that right is really the right thing to do. His main argument talks about how without security, we cannot exercise our rights. This isn't true either. It's true that life is a prerequisite to exercising our rights, but absolute security isn't. We all tolerate risks everyday, like driving a car, and we can still execute our rights. If that's the case, than the argument doesn't make any sense. Then he talks about how if we loose our security, than someone will take us over. This argument doesn't make any sense either because I can drive a car, which is a risk to my security, and no one will take me over. Secondly, if we do bring up national security, it isn't necessarily guaranteed that anyone will take anybody over either. Then he provides a second point stating that, if we take the rights of the few then we can save everyone else. But never once does he say how much security would be gained by violating people's rights. Surely it wouldn't be just, or even sensible, to enslave two or three people to add small benefits to the rest of society. Secondly, he hasn't given any sort of reason as to why we should violate rights to gain security because the only reason he gave that makes security important has already been refuted and proved to be fallacious. Now lets go over to my arguments. Keep in mind, he never refuted any of my objectivity links to justice. If it is unrefuted that you need to have an objective power to violate other people's rights for the benefit of others, than all I have to prove is that objectivity is impossible to achieve. I have already shown that. He then goes further to define my value of Justice. He defines it as "the quality of being just or fair", but he never gives a definition of what is just and fair. I would say that what is just and fair is to not violate innocent people's rights, even if trying to add a speculative increase in security. Therefore what is left is proof that no one cannot be biased, especially when the biased person's security comes in conflict with other people's rights. If you cannot give each right their due weight on the grand scale of cost and benefit, then it would be unjust to violate them in the first place.
When in conflict, Security should be prefered to rights

Well because my opponent failed to answer my question I will pose two argument and we can go with whatever one we both fancy. Security Bad: First off my opponent is resolutionaly bound to arguing that rights should be preferred first and THEN security thus arguing that security is good. Here is where I will be arguing that it is not so. I will be arguing that security is bad whilst my opponent can retain his original argument (I will cover it later). Security is overall bad because to maintain security a country either needs massive hegemony, a powerful army or both. The problem with this is that if we are trying to guarantee our security we are living in a world of fear and that is bad for our society. If we continue in our futile search for ultimate security we can never live life to it's fullest and thus what is the point in living? Also, if we advocate security we are self-imposing threats that will inevitably come true due to the fact that two countries will want security and thus have a massive army or massive hegemony and that will ultimately result in violence. The delusion of security is merely a a prophecy of violence and it is self fulfilling. or Security more important: ((First we must realize that my opponent did not define his value and thus I must do so. Justice is defined as "the quality of being just or fair" [1] The very first claim my opponent makes is incorrect. He claims // No one can value other people's rights because they don't apply to them.// But this is just not true. According to Stanford: "every citizen has certain basic rights that the state cannot take away from them" [2] All people have the same rights and thus others peoples rights do apply to us because they are the same and are granted to everyone. My opponent then copies an argument that talks about the fact that some rights we might not use and thus we cannot make an objective claim about them but that is not necessarily true. We can see a right, such as the right to a fair and speedy trial, and say that other people will need that and/or I or a family member might need it. Assuming that people will never us a right is a pretty big assumption to make.)) Cross apply to previous argument. Security outweighs: The simple reason this is true is that if we are not secure, we are liable to be taken over and if that happens then we loose our rights all together. Essentially, security is a prerequisite to having rights and thus it must be preferred because a) if we loose our security and someone takes us over, we have no rights anyway and b) if we take away the rights of a few to save everyone then that outweighs. As the great Spock once said, "The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few." So as we can see, security is the most important because it guarantees us our rights as well as protects our citizens and thusly I urge a pro ballot. [1] http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu... [2] http://www.stanford.edu...