BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Green is just plainly a "better" color then purple.

I look forward to this highly controversial topic. Dems and Reps have been fighting this matter for years and i would be delighted in debating it with someone ---Argument---- Green-is a color, the perception of which is evoked by light having a spectrum dominated by energy with a wavelength of roughly 520–570 nanometres. In the subtractive color system, it is not a primary color, but is created out of a mixture of yellow and blue, or yellow and cyan Grass is green. Just landscapes are green. Oceans are green. Everything is green. It is generally favored more then purple too The Libyan flag is completely green.I don't see any completely purple colored flags. Green is found in many more flags then purple is. ----references----- http://en.wikipedia.org... GREEN POWER!
We should have homework

How can the student understand the homework, if they don't pay attention in class? How can the student even know WHAT or HOW to do the homework if they don't understand? Some students spend hours after school doing a bunch of homework assigned and get too tired and just end up planning on working on it during class. Or they just don't even do it at all because there's just too much pressure and give up, causing them to have bad grades. Too much homework also cause stress. They already have so much going on in their life. Maybe family problems, friend problems, AND they have to do a bunch of homework due the next day. Also, homework causes kids not to be able to spend time with their family. According to "Smithsonian Magazine" homework actually CAUSE depression. Finland, for example, has best educations. 93% graduation rate and how much does the United States have? 73%. Why? Because they have no homework. FInland also has the highest rate in Europe of students going to College. http://neomam.com...
There is no free will in Heaven

"God made the angels, presumably for worship, and yet he gave them free will enough to turn against him. Why? Because God values free-will. " This further goes to show that the idea of a sin-less heaven is impossible. Angels who were created by God and live with him in heaven still decided to rebel against his rule from time to time, only by taking away their ability to choose would he ensure a sin-less heaven. The same goes for humanity if this is his ultimate game. "I think God will destract us from sin, and pain. If he destracts us, we will not commit sins nor shall we feel pain. This destraction would not voilate free-will which God clearly wants us exercising. " I am unclear of the meaning of the word destract but I assume you mean the removal of sin. Forcibly altering someone"s personality to fit a certain behavior and then claiming in the same sentence that it is free will is mind boggling. Brainwashing with drugs, surgeries, or it"s supernatural equivalent can most certainly not be called free will. A person being altered to act a certain way has had his free will taken away to act out the things he would normally do without such interventions. "We must remember with your examples, that they occurred in the Old Testament. The OT's relationship with Christianity is complex, to the point that many people do not consider it relevant. Even if God would affect our free-will now, why give us free-will in the first place? !" The Old Testament is a massive part of the bible. 60-77 percent of the Bible is made up from the Old Testament. Such a huge chunk of the lore cannot be discounted or ignored for any reason. It is also relevant to the discussion since God does not change. Malachi 3:6 "For I, the Lord, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed. " This indicates that something God once did God has no issue doing again as long as it serves his purpose in the end.
There is no free will in Heaven

Thank you.Now, it is important to realize that free will is one of the most important things to God.God made the angels, presumably for worship, and yet he gave them free will enough to turn against him. Why? Because God values free-will.I think God will destract us from sin, and pain. If he destracts us, we will not commit sins nor shall we feel pain. This destraction would not voilate free-will which God clearly wants us exercising.We must remember with your examples, that they occurred in the Old Testament. The OT's relationship with Christianity is complex, to the point that many people do not consider it relevant. Even if God would affect our free-will now, why give us free-will in the first place?!
There is no free will in Heaven

I have taken the stance that due to the nature of Christianity, God, and the Bible that there can be no free will in Heaven. For my first supporting facts I will turn to the bible itself. There are many descriptions of heaven throughout the bible and many of them simply are not possible with the introduction of humanity. Take for instance Revelation 21:4 "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. " How can that be possible? If we retain free will then emotional pain will always be a possibility. If we retain our ability to choose then inevitably there will be hurt as there are some who choose to sin in heaven. For my second supporting facts I will once again pull from the bible. During the bible we see God has no problem messing with free will if means he achieves his goals. The most notable example is of course Pharaoh from Exodus. In the verses Exodus 4:21, Exodus 7:3-13, Exodus 9:12, Exodus 10:1-27, Exodus 11:10, and Exodus 14:4-17 God shows not only his planning and intent to disturb the free will of Pharaoh but also his willingness to carry out the plan. There are other examples abound through the bible of God doing this, my personal favorite being Deuteronomy 2:30 "But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him: for the LORD thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand, as appeareth this day. " This is followed by the Israelites massacring Sihon"s people all because God messed with his free will. I believe I have not only demonstrated using simple logic have shown that it is impossible for free will to exist in a supposedly sin-less heaven but that God has no issue with manipulating free will for his own ends.
movie jumper

Jumper was an alright movie, but It needed more action which is what the fans were looking for . the key elements to the movie that were missing were its lack of good action, its lack of actually rivalry, and the main character was not someone to even like. He was morally wrong and too much of a pretty boy who could not fight through lack of experience. everyone liked griffin better. If you have seen the movie talk to me. change my mind please.
movie jumper

"Griffin is what made the movie good." This reverses your position, in my view, since I assumed you thought the movie was bad. If we are arguing on the same side, this is no longer a debate. Indeed, you state, "No my argument wasnt an argument." Unfortunately, this website contains nothing BUT arguments. Your general discussions about film are better suited to message boards at imdb.com. It's a great site, arguably (!!) the best movie resource ever. Have fun! As my opponent agrees with my position, I declare the debate over in favour of 'Jumper' being a good film.
movie jumper

No my argument really wasnt an argument I needed more perspective on my point of view. I focused too much on the disappointment of pretty boy getting captured every encounter he had with the paladins. I would not see griffin as a sidekick I would consider pretty boy the annoying 1970s robin. Griffin is what made the movie good. I mean the action was great with him teleporting vehicles at people imgine the possiblities it could almost turnout like a movie that is with anime qualities. Huge fights huge objects being thrown, close combat teleporting within a small room. I did like roland except at the end the way he acted seeing he was on a cliff. but if they make a second one, either pretty boy has a couple years experience or no pretty boy at all. Roland kick ssa every where so does PBs mom and sweet teleprting but doubt they shall make a second one. perspective?
movie jumper

Thanks for starting the debate. What you are debating is somewhat unclear. I have taken your position on the debate to be "Jumper is a weak / disappointing film", so I will debate from the position that "Jumper is a good film". I will begin by responding to your first post, one statement at a time. - Jumper was an alright movie - No need for me to respond, since this statement seems against your own side of the debate. - It needed more action - I disagree: 'Jumper' has action set pieces spread evenly throughout the film, to my mind, as frequently as in most films of the same genre. In addition, some of the action (when it hits full-throttle) is quite spectacular; a dazzling sequence in which two characters fight for possession of a detonator, between a busy road, the Empire State Building and the pyramids, was particularly impressive. - its lack of actually rivalry - I will concede this point, I agree. - He [the main character] was morally wrong and too much of a pretty boy who could not fight through lack of experience. The main character being morally wrong pretty boy who lacks fighting skills does not, to my mind, present an argument for the film being weak. - everyone liked griffin better. - Some great films have had sidekicks who are more engaging than the main heroes, so this isn't a flaw: think Han Solo. Now I will add my thoughts on the film. By no means is Jumper a 'great' action film. I would argue, however, that as a teleportation-themed popcorn flick, it worked. Jamie's Bell's performance as Griffin is charismatic and adds a layer of charm missing from the leads. The action sequences are impressively edited and exciting. It's not overlong. Hardly a layered film. On its own terms, I believe the film is good. (If this is, indeed, the opposite of your position. Please clarify.)
Poem about rape victims

Poem about rape victims You complain about how your life was hard How you were f*ucked in the a*ss by your dad You don't ask whether I care or not when I say I don't, You call me crazy, I am not crazy My mother had me tested I am glad you were molested I don't care about the pain you felt, Because greater pain is being in jail, You don't care about your dad, So why would I care about you. You didn't feel pain when your dad was arrested So I am glad you were molested You deserved it, You gave permit You were a bad girl and you knew it You say you were innocent And your innocence was taken from you But I say it was never there You loved to share You were a whore from the start And your father just took advantage of that because he was smart
Wesker vs your choice

Argument: Strength: Alex is capable of throwing tanks Apcs and many other military vehicles great distances. In prototype 2 intro you can see him flip a tank with one hand with ease. Punch someone through the chest? Please Alex can rip them in half no problem. He can throw people several feet into the air. Mercer is capable of punching holes through almost anything if necessary, including a two-foot steel door. Agility: Alex can run up the Empire state building. If he wanted to he could also jump to speed the process up. To run up the Empire State building you would need a starting speed of 234mph. He can also jump at least as high as a 10 story building. Durability: Alex survived a nuke blast that destroyed Manhattan. Bullets have almost no effect. He can take tank shots without a problem. He can heal ripped limbs in a matter of seconds. "Mercer's endurance far exceeds that of a human's by leaps and bounds. His body no longer possesses weak bones or vital organs, rendering him immune to otherwise debilitating injury. This biological change allows him to survive falls from any height completely unharmed. Bullets of any caliber will pass through his body, causing very little damage that heals instantly. He can withstand direct hits from rockets, hellfire missiles and tank shells, which cause only moderate damage. The superhumanly strong blows of the various type of Hunters and super soldiers cause the most damage of any type of attack. His superhuman stamina allows him to be physically active at all times without tire." - Prototype wiki Abilities: Shape shifting: Mercer's Blacklight infection has granted him the ability to both shape shift and fashion his body into weapons. Superhuman Senses: Mercer's vision and hearing is enhanced, allowing him to see beyond the visible spectrum and hear across great distances even with physical insulation. He has thermal vision which allows him to locate heat signatures, and infected vision which can detect large concentrations of the virus and tap into the hive mind itself. Adaptability: The Blacklight Virus is capable of adapting itself to certain elements after a continuous exposure to said element. Equipment: None, Alex may pick up guns, but he normally only uses his abilities. Conclusion. Wesker will know real fear thanks to Alex. Sources: https://www.quora.com... http://prototype.wikia.com...
Wesker vs your choice

Ah. Virus vs Virus! Let's see if Umbrella's prototype virus was better than Gentek's prototype.Argument:Strength:Wesker is strong enough to punch through a person's chest, able to lift large steel girders, and throws big missles.Agility:Wesker can dodge bullets at point blank range. Bullets go over 70 miles per hour from a simple handgun. Thus, Wesker must be able to move at least 75 mph, and have enough reaction timing to see the bullet fire. He can also run fast, covering 3 yeards in very little time. In fact, he moves so fast, the human brain can't process it, and he looks like he's teleporting.Durability:If Wesker does get hit by a bullet, no problem. He is immensely durable, both his skin, and his organs. A bullet would only penetrate a few inches. If you punched Wesker, like Chris Redfield did once, that would hurt you more than him."The virus he injected also had the added ability of superhuman endurance and near-invulnerability; hardening his skeleton, internal organs, tissue, and skin, to the point that attempting to punch him or engage in hand-to hand combat would most likely result in fractured limbs on the part of the attacker. This is demonstrated in RE5 when attempting to attack Wesker up close as Chris during context sensitive events. Punching him will result in Chris grimacing and shaking the punching hand to alleviate the pain." - Resident Evil wikiAbilities:Master Martial Artist: Even before injecting himself with the prototype virus, Wesker was skilled in all kinds of martial arts, making him skilled in hand to hand combat. Combine that with speed, strength, and impenetrable skin, you're dead.Wesker can also cling to walls. He doesn't have much else than that, though.Equipment:Wesker also wields a pistol, in case he wants to shoot his opponents.Conclusion:Wesker destroys all. No wonder he calls himself a god!Source: http://residentevil.wikia.com...;
Wesker vs your choice

I'm doing yet another debate, where you choose your own fighter.*Please read the rules. Failure to follow the rules will result in endless nightmares! Also, you'll lose the debate.*Rules:1) This time, your character must have originated from a video game. No anime characters, no TV shows, no brands, no real life people, no comics. (Manga counts as a comic.)2) Your character must be defeatable. So no Superman or anything.3) Your character can't be fan fiction. They must have existed within a video game.4) Beware of superhuman feats. Running out of time is an instant loss. (48 hours to post, at least 1 debate completed to accept)5) No trolling of any kind. If the voters see you're trolling in any way, that means an instant loss.5b) Trolling includes: "If someone made a battle between Mario and Wesker, Mario would win, since popularity", "My character is a ghost, and can't die" [violates rule 2 anyways], "My character is [insert inanimate object]", and anything else that is ridiculous. I will call you out.6) No concealing information until Round 4. Doing so is an automatic loss.7) Round 1 is acceptance only.8) The character will be allowed preparation time. They can bring equipment with them, but no healing items. And they can't use any stat boosting items before entering the arena.9) The arena will be 50 ft x 50 ft x 60 ft, and circular. No homefield advantage is present.Stats:We will be going over 5 stats; Strength, Agility, Durability, Abilities, and Equipment.Strength: How physically strong the character is.Agility: How fast and nimble the character is.Durability: How much damage the character can take.Abilities: Magic, special powers, etc.Equipment: Guns, armor, and temporary stat buffs.If you couldn't tell already, I'm using the most powerful character I'm familiar with: Albert Wesker, from Resident Evil.
Wesker vs your choice

I thank JackHex for continuing the debate. Let's start my examination.Rebuttal:Strength:"Alex is capable of throwing tanks Apcs and many other military vehicles great distances. In prototype 2 intro you can see him flip a tank with one hand with ease. Punch someone through the chest? Please Alex can rip them in half no problem. He can throw people several feet into the air. Mercer is capable of punching holes through almost anything if necessary, including a two-foot steel door."Wesker could do similar. Not sure about throwing cars, though.Agility:"Alex can run up the Empire state building. If he wanted to he could also jump to speed the process up. To run up the Empire State building you would need a starting speed of 234mph. He can also jump at least as high as a 10 story building."Not sure if Wesker could jump 10 stories, but he might be able to climb a building.Durability:"Alex survived a nuke blast that destroyed Manhattan. Bullets have almost no effect. He can take tank shots without a problem. He can heal ripped limbs in a matter of seconds."I don't think Wesker can regenerate limbs. But his skin is tough!Abilities:Conceded. Wesker doesn't have any real abilities. He does, however, have powerful stats.Equipment:Wesker does use his gun at a distance. But when in a hand to hand combat situation, he uses his inhanced strength and speed. So this is sort of tied.Conclusion:RIP Wesker. I don't think you can top all that. As much as you call yourself a god, Alex Mercer is much stronger.
Religion isn't true but serves a purpose.

Before I'd begin, I'd like to point out to anyone reading this that Pro is referring to a positive purpose and that through these positive purposes, religion brings more good than bad, as he mentioned in the comments. So, overall, I will prove that religion brings more bad than good to the world. C1-Warfare & Terrorism Throughout human history up until today religion has led to several wars and terrorist acts. Overall, religious extremism is found to be the leading cause of terrorism. (4) Recently, many of these have been caused by Islam. (1) The most famous example would be the September 11th attacks by Islamic terrorist group Al Qaeda against the United States. This attack killed nearly 3000 people and led to over 6000 non-fatal injuries. (2) Osama Bin Laden, who organized the attack, claimed he did it "In the Name of Allah." (3) This is an example of a terrible tragedy caused by religion which caused death, fear, and an ongoing war. C2-Discrimination Historically and today, religion has led to several examples of discrimination. Even in areas such as the United States where religion does not play a big of a role in society as some places, people are fired, refused service, and refused employment for doing or being something that goes against someone else's religion. (5) However, it's even worse in other places. For example, in Egypt Copts (Christians) are denied equal access to education and equal opportunities for recruitment and promotion, that the Muslim majority enjoys. (6) Women especially are discriminated against, especially in Saudi Arabia by its Sharia Law. This includes not being allowed to vote, drive a car, or go anywhere without a male chaperone. (7) C3-Ignorance/R1 Historically and today, religion has resisted science because it disproves the beliefs in their religion. One famous example being Galileo Galilei, who proved that the Earth revolves around the Sun (which went against the teachings of the Church) so he was imprisoned for life. However, even today scientific concepts such as the Theory of Evolution are being resisted in schools, specifically in the United States which has a Christian majority. (8) This can lead to a slow down in scientific advancement. Also, ignorance is perhaps one of the most dangerous things in society. Ignorance can lead to destruction, discrimination, and errors in activities. Since we are accepting that religion is false, having religion around keeps people in ignorance believing something that is not true. So to rebut Pro's point, even if religion may get people through a hard time it is making them ignorant. Not to mention, getting some people through a hard time doesn't even compare to the war, terrorism, discrimination, or ignorance. 1-http://en.wikipedia.org... 2-http://en.wikipedia.org... 3-http://www.theguardian.com... 4-http://www.theguardian.com... 5-https://www.aclu.org... 6-http://www.ilo.org... 7-http://www.theweek.co.uk... 8-http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
Religion isn't true but serves a purpose.

As I said, the religion was a rallying cry. It was something that unified people who were angry for other reasons. If Islam didn't exist then people would still be very angry about what the United States did. You just listed a lot of reasons for them to be angry, so you are kind of agreeing. The decline of religion in nations that are facing a raise in standards of life proves my point that religion is important to those in need. Its main purpose is as a coping mechanism. The Klu Klux Klan is something that is hard not to bring up when one mentions discrimination by religious lines in the United States. I apologize if you felt that I was burning down a straw man instead of shooting down an argument. The whole basis of your argument seems to be that it is one more line on which people are divided. I will now address your argument about the Copts, as I should have done earlier. The conflict between the Christians and the Muslims had more to do with deeper seeded culture, and even race on a level.(1) The Christian Copts viewed themselves as the Egyptian people. The Muslims were mostly Arab. The conflict between those two groups still runs very deep. Being Arab is a big deal in Arab countries.(2) Nationality is a very big part of their culture, and that sometimes includes Islam. It doesn't have to though. Pan-Arabism had Christianity in it in the formation of the Ba'ath Party and promoted secular ideas and often socialism. The problems in Egypt have more to do with race. There are a lot of cultural and racial issues in Africa that people blame on religion. Boko Haram is an excellent example of this.(6) You can definitely say that Theocracy wouldn't exist without religion, but there is a very fine line between Theocracy and Monarchy. Most Monarchs claim to have their power given to them by some God(3), or in some occasions to be Gods themselves.(4) And in reality none of them are ruling for the good of their faith, but using their faith to continue their rule. Their lust for power caused them to pervert the scriptures to hold their positions. That is more about politics than it is about religion. There is every reason to assume that a lot of those help groups wouldn't exist without religion. The entire point of the 12 step program that most rehabilitation programs are based on come from finding a higher power.(5) It is the second step and the rest of it builds on that. 1: http://en.wikipedia.org... 2: http://www.jimena.org... 3: http://en.wikipedia.org... 4: http://en.wikipedia.org... 5: http://www.12step.org... 6: http://www.youtube.com...