BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Is the evidence for the biblical flood sufficient

and as believer would say, in those upcoming events, that is when Noah built the ark, saving all of the animals 2 by 2. Now, if you delve deeper, you can see that this argument is flawed if you take into account other biblical happenings. For instance, diseases can survive in specific hosts or in laboratories, that is to say that the animals on Noah's ark weren't enough to host all the diseases in the world. Also, the bible says that God created the earth in six days and rested on the seventh. If he indeed took six days to create the earth, all of the diseases wouldn't have been on the earth, instead they would have needed a host, so God would've had to place all of the diseases in the world in Adam and Eve, who then passed it down to their posterity. Now, in accordance with my last argument, in order for water to pour atop the earth, creating one giant ocean, the sun would have to produce a lot of energy to evaporate the water. To put this in perspective, the amount of rain required (that creates such a flood), to cover mount everest would be 30 feet per hour for 40 days. Lets say that the flood has been instated already, creationists believe that there was a water vapor canopy that caused a greenhouse effect, causing luscious vegetation to sprout all over the world before the flood. This much biomass couldn't have been spontaneously created, because the laws of thermodynamics clearly state that energy cannot be created. Therefore, the animals under the sea would have had to be fueled by the sun. The second law of thermodynamics basically states that if a natural increase of energy has been instated, it cannot be reversed, so the sun's solar energy back then having to be an amazing amount, wouldn't have gone back to the way it was before. But if the sun did spontaneously have that sort of power, it would have fried all of the undersea animals before the flood had been complete. After all of the rain, the flood had to have been lifted in some way. The sun had to have evaporated all of it. The earth's average temperature is 60.5 degrees Fahrenheit, therefore, the average temperature then would have had to be 128 degrees fahrenheit to evaporate that much water over a 100 year period.
We are the one who will create our own destiny.

My opponent violated the rule.Round 1 should only be for acceptance. *Being responsible means responding in the moment, and moment by moment, with the freshness of pure consciousness, pure awareness. If we are reacting in our mind, then we are not responding. When we respond, we interact with Absolute Consciousness, and through that interaction with Absolute Consciousness we are absolutely purified and freed from all our dilemmas. When we are responsible, we see clearly what must be done and we do it, without over-thinking or over analyzing. When we over-think we under-do. Over analyzing is a form of procrastination; it is an ego habit which only prolongs our ignorance and suffering. You said:Our Destinies are made up of much more than just our own influence. ~So you are saying that there is a entity that creates things that you don't choose.Creating your own destiny means that you're the only one choosing from your freewill.Even though mannerism and deviance(by others) are upon our willpower because we choose to do it.Since we're the only one choosing what to do even it is influenced by others,We;'re making our own destiny *Base upon what you said also external matters affects our destiny. No,you are it isn't. Even it affects us we're the one who will make our own decision which will lead to the creation of destiny by ourselves. If you have illness.Then,make a way for it to heal. If you're going to be killed.Then,defend your self. If you want to be happy.Then,be.You are the one that can make yourself happy.External factors can help but the final decision lies upon yourself. *Laws guide us,natural laws and mortal's law. We can break the mortal's law if we want. We can't break natural laws(ex.gravity),Even if we pursue,We will end up dying if we do so.But it doesn't mean that we don't make our own destiny.Destiny doesn't depend upon what lies upon us but what we will upon which lies us. Your turn Mr.Ahriman :) resource: http://adityadham.com...
We are the one who will create our own destiny.

Our Destinies are made up of much more than just our own influence. How might those taken by plague or disease, beaten by cultural and societal mayhem create for themselves a destiny of luxury and wealth? Many people stand idly by, behind polished wood tables, marking up what nature produces naturally, only to sell it back to those who worked very hard for it. These hubs of corruption dispense their poison all over the earth and none are unaffected. You may say our Destinies are created by ourselves, but I only take that as true on the Global scale, as I feel there are many things in our bodies and cultural belief systems that we didn't produce but are almost forced to abide by.
We are the one who will create our own destiny.

I like to make an argument(reasoning) about this topic. Maximum of 2,000 characters only per side. definition:Destiny is used with regard to the finality of events as they have worked themselves out; and to that same sense of "destination", projected into the future to become the flow of events as they will work themselves out. *I will take the Pro side and prove that we are the one who will create our own destiny.My opponent will take the con side and prove that we are not the one who will create our own destiny. Round 1 is for acceptance. ***Good luck to both sides*** :) reference:http://en.wikipedia.org...
We are the one who will create our own destiny.

I appologize for violating round 1's acceptence rule, I am new to debate and wasn't quite sure what was implied by the word. While I agree that "When we over-think we under-do." I fail to see how it ;pure inert concsiousness, can change ones destiny past what is possible in set conditions. Plato's allegory of a cave fits if no one ever turns around. Most humans born in modern times contain trace amounts of heavy metals and other toxic chemicals, leaving side effects much out of the control of Absolute Consciousness. Sure Absolute Consciousness is able to spend its free will to fight such battles, but many battles are fought in vain or to the point of death of the body, as you pointed out with natural laws. At some point though, mortal laws might mingle with natural laws, creating a lasting singular moment condusive to misery in the being. I.E.:Global pollution from the sky to the sea. Even if Absolute consciousness can refresh itself and remain Happy through excercise of free will it still may be shackled infinitely by ties it remains ignorant of. Not to say happiness is absolutely unobtainable, and who could want much more in a destiny? :) Plato: http://faculty.washington.edu...
Street Fighter vs Mortal Kombat

Ok, so Mortal Kombat IS quite bloody and violent, but it's for more mature audiences, and what's more? You are 10 years old, and you like a game with extreme violence, and it has some sexual references to it. Street Fighter, however, is for ages 10+. And your saying mortal kombat has lots of characters, I only said 4 character names, well, look at this link: http://streetfighter.wikia.com.... And as for mortal kombat characters, we got Scorpian, and Sub Zero. if I'm not mistaken, they look similar, except color change. plus, the link you sent only has 1 picture, that of Hanzo Hasashi. Street Fighter, however, has tons of characters.
Street Fighter vs Mortal Kombat

I like Mortal Kombat for it's bloody, Gorey setting in the now. I dunno why it seems impossible to destroy everyone, but it's all but impossible really. BUT what about things like the amount of total characters? http://mortalkombat.wikia.com... well, there you go! I ha enough resaerch today. so... YOU VIEW IT! but anyways... yeah my opening comment was said I'll quote it "I like Mortal Kombat for it's bloody, Gorey setting in the now. " there.that's my opening statement. so now... What's next? FIND OUT!
Street Fighter vs Mortal Kombat

This is me and my sister's (Skylandersfan1111) first debate. We agreed on Street Fighter vs Mortal Kombat. I'm with Street Fighter, and my sister is for Mortal Kombat. Skylandersfan1111, don't expect me to give up easily, I came prepared. Round 1 will have our opening comments and basic facts. Round 2 wil be a rebuttal against the opponing side. 3rd round will be our closing arguments/summary. Street Fighter is made by Capcom, which made all kinds of other games you may recognize. Fighters include Ryu, Ken, Akuma, and M. Bison. Also, there's various moves, like the Hadoken, Tatsumaki, and Shoryuken. It also has tons of games in the series. Also, it has a movie.
Margaret Thatcher's Policies Benefited Britain

ResolutionAs Pro, I will argue that Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's policies, both domestic and foreign, benefitted Britain. My opponent must arguet the opposite, that Britain was worse when she left office than when she came in. The burden of proof is on Con to do so.Rules and Structure Round 1: Introduction/AcceptanceRound 2: ArgumentsRound 3: RebuttalsRound 4: Defense of Arguments, more rebuttalsRound 5: Final defenses and rebuttals, conclusionIf one debater is to break the rules, they lose the debate. Forfeits are not tolerated and the one who does so will lose. If one debater cannot continue, he or she must tell the other debate and it must be confimed in the debate for voters, resulting in a tie.
Please explain to me why Jimi Hendrix is the greatest guitarist of all time.

First..Poejoe...one of my questions was "what talent" i could not find any. please read further i did not mean that in the way that it sounded. although i did not know he didnt know how to read or write music and i wasnt aware he was enlisted into the army. but he did pioneer EFFECts for the guitar and that i admire but i dont know where "greatest" guitarist comes from. The only thing he should really be admired for is effects for guitar not for greatest guitar. especially since his Star spangled banner performance was just (good hand work dont get me wrong, i am not saying he was terrible, just not "greatest") reverb and overdrive.
Please explain to me why Jimi Hendrix is the greatest guitarist of all time.

"First...he did not develop any kind of music he had great Influences and followed their music. second...he did not lead the rock genre as i have heard many times... he did not CREATE rock either. although he did invent Guitar Amplifications such as reverb and he should be known for that and only that this is personal but when i watched a few of his videos of for instance Star spangled banner i didnt see much talent and in a few others i didnt see any "stand out" talent, that differed him from any other guitarist" from http://www.jimi-hendrix.com... Widely recognized as one of the most creative and influential musicians of the 20th century, Jimi Hendrix pioneered the explosive possibilities of the electric guitar. Hendrix's innovative style of combining fuzz, feedback and controlled distortion created a new musical form. Because he was unable to read or write music, it is nothing short of remarkable that Jimi Hendrix's meteoric rise in the music took place in just four short years. In 1961, Jimmy left home to enlist in the United States Army and in November 1962 earned the right to wear the "Screaming Eagles" patch for the paratroop division. While stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, Jimmy formed The King Casuals with bassist Billy Cox. After being discharged due to an injury he received during a parachute jump, Jimmy began working as a session guitarist under the name Jimmy James. From demo recordings to finished masters, Jimi Hendrix generated an amazing collection of songs over the course of his short career. The music of Jimi Hendrix embraced the influences of blues, ballads, rock, R&B, and jazz a collection of styles that continue to make Hendrix one of the most popular figures in the history of rock music. In short; he was an inspiration, a role model. He served for his country, he ignored the fact he couldn't read or write music, and kept going anyway. His new musical form, an innovative style. He inspired us to be ourselves. (Plus, he rocks.)
Please explain to me why Jimi Hendrix is the greatest guitarist of all time.

First...he did not develop any kind of music he had great Influences and followed their music. second...he did not lead the rock genre as i have heard many times... he did not CREATE rock either. although he did invent Guitar Amplifications such as reverb and he should be known for that and only that this is personal but when i watched a few of his videos of for instance Star spangled banner i didnt see much talent and in a few others i didnt see any "stand out" talent, that differed him from any other guitarist
Why dont they believe in the trinity and its in torah. Trinity is real

Genesis1- God is talking about time, space, and matter. In the beginning=(time) God created heaven=(space) andthe earth=(matter).Whatis Time-pass, present, future. Whatis Space-width,depth,height.Whatis Earth/Matter-solid,liquid,gas What are you a human- body,soul,spirit.Or mind,body,soul. See the understandingoftrinity is allaroundus.ReadRoman1:20(inmyown word Romans 1:20 says that God say if you can't understand the trinity look at what I made.) Atom-protons,neutrons,electrons.Tree-root,trunk,leaves.Music-melody,harmony,rhythm.The understanding is all around us
Due to alternative fuel initiatives Indiana's Economy is heading towards growth

The dependence on corn and soy as the primary crop in Indiana will not lead to a development of other basic industries but only an increase in dependence on corn and soy. The increased revenue from the increase in corn subsidies goes into the pockets of family farmers or into the profit margins of large corporate farms. They money in no way goes to develop other industries. In fact, as corn prices go up and subsidies go up, more and more land gets converted from other crops or other uses into ethanol corn farms. This means that Indiana is decreasing the diversity of the crops that are being farmed and only making itself more and more dependent on corn. As such, all this corn planting actually prevents Indiana from developing other industries or other crops (like sweet corn for eating) because all the land is being taken up by corn farming. Moreover, the increased reliance on a single type of crop increases Indiana's vulnerability to disease, pests, changing weather, or natural disasters. A single disease or single unkind weather season or a single type of best could rip through Indiana, killing all the corn crops. A diversity of crops creates safety because all the different crops are vulnerable to different things, meaning if one crop fails because of not enough rain, crops which like dry conditions and would die if it rained too much survive. If there is only one main type of crop being planted, that makes Indiana's economy much more vulnerable because if that one crop fails for some reason, the whole economy of the state would fail.
Due to alternative fuel initiatives Indiana's Economy is heading towards growth

ill admit that indianas economy will become dependent on ethanol for about twenty years, but the short surplus of money will help indiana develope its basic industries. its obvious that indiana has an untapped supplie of natural resources, limestone hasn't been adequateky mined due to a lack of funds to get new mining instruments. corn its self is set to cost more to buy... good for indiana, sweet corn has become the delicacy of japan, making corn a international export. Indiana needs a small advance, ethanol, to set off other "dominoes" of indianas economic boom!
Due to alternative fuel initiatives Indiana's Economy is heading towards growth

While it is undisputed that recently the large increase in focus on ethanol has benefited the economy of Indiana. However this economic growth is both temporary and artificial and will, in the long run, hurt Indiana's economy. The enormous increase in corn and soy beans being grown has been the result of the unique particularities in American politics. The President, congress, and state legislatures have been pouring billions of dollars into ethanol. This is because it is politically advantageous to do so. The ability to pander to farmers (an important constituency in any state) and appear "green" is an opportunity no politician can pass up. This is particularly powerful in presidential politics because any presidential race starts off with several months of pandering to Iowa. The best and easier way to do that is promise increased ethanol subsidies. This is problematic because absent these subsidies, the bottom would completely fall out of the corn and soybean ethanol market. Ethanol is not a sustainable industry that can survive on its own. There are several reasons for this. First is that it takes more energy to make ethanol then you get from burning it. There is the gas it takes to run the machines that plant, maintain, and harvest the crops. There is the gas that is burned transporting all the corn from the ethanol refining plant and then all the energy that is taken up processing the corn or soybeans into ethanol. That means you actually burn more fossil fuels creating ethanol then you save by using it. These two articles explain it better than I can. http://www.nytimes.com... http://www.cbsnews.com... At the point where ethanol is not only not economically viable, but emits more pollution than it prevents, corn and soy ethanol are not viable industries. That means that as soon as political support for ethanol disappears, ethanol market will collapse, collapsing the economy of Indiana.
The United States Should Adopt an Equal Time Policy in Broadcasted Media With Political Candidates

Alright, let me begin. The policy in question is limited only to media that is broadcasted, such as television, radio, and live streams. So, should a news outlet wish to put a story out there about a political candidate, they could upload it to the internet, or they could print it in the newspaper. Thereby, the apparent break of freedom of speech would no longer exist. All that would change is the medium in which the speech is spoken. Now that that is out of the way, let me get in to the reason why we should implement this. Recently, as everybody knows, Donald Trump has become the Republican nominee. He is one of the most inflammatory, wishy-washy, and downright idiotic candidates in U.S. history. So why did he get so popular, compared to somebody like Jeb Bush? The answer lies in the media. The media does effect how much people here about politicians, and increases the likelihood of people voting for them. One can look at the amount of television coverage that any presidential candidate receives, and you'll notice that it correlates almost directly with their position in the polls [1]. Therefore, we must conclude that, for the good of this country, we must equalize the amount of broadcasted media coverage for a candidate in order to generate interest. After that point, should anybody want to learn more, they can go on the internet, which, due to public libraries, everybody has access to. This should create a situation where the American public can learn more about candidates, and every candidate will have a chance to run. Sources: 1 -
Prophecies in Religious Books do not prove Religions True

Alrighty midnight, CLARAFICATION 1 I was defending a statement and in the future we should stay on topic. 2 Totally! I think it would be fun! (if it is not nearly as heated as this debate was) 3 Yes I did, I linked it because sometimes reasoning can act as evidence. Remember in the comments Backwardseden's statement? Both of those videos were CLEARLY made by atheists, Yet I believe that evidence or reasoning, No matter where they come from, Can be used. So you cannot penalize me for linking an apologetics website. 4 I'll get back to this one. 5 Not only did you intentionally choose a vague title, You also penalize me for sticking to the topic. Just to clarify because there seemed to be some issues with communication. My claim is this: prophecies in some religions can be used as evidence toward that religion. Now you've made me waste a considerable amount of this debate to either clarify, Or defend my claims back in R1. Good job. Now to the actual closing arguments. The topic of this debate is whether or not prophecies can be used as evidence for a religion. I am not just defending my religion, But the fact that prophecies can be used as evidence toward your religion. The prophecies in the bible were said to give hope to the jewish people. However many prophecies in the Quran are meant to prove the religion true. My claim has stayed the same this entire debate. I hope you have a great day, Whatever the results of this debate may be.
Prophecies in Religious Books do not prove Religions True

Here we go 11:00. 1, The dead sea scrolls prove that the bible wasn't tampered with over time because it's nearly word for word. 2, Cosmological argument: No, Its actually EXTREMELY hard to argue with, 3, Census: unfortunately the only people who really care about the census is christians but it is archeological records that have been authenticated so here you go: https://www. Apologeticspress. Org/apcontent. Aspx? Category=6&article=907 4 Those were meant to prove the point that theres more than just prophecies to a religion. I was specific. 5 You seem to think that prophecies make or break a religion when I'm saying that theres other evidence to prove a religion valid. 6 Essentially there are a two things that people use in choosing a religion: Ideology (whether or not you agree with its teachings) and Evidence (archeological or otherwise). Prophecies could fit into either one. Some religions use prophecies in the evidence category (Prophecies simply to prove themselves correct), Or Ideology (prophecies to send a message). Christianity tends to use its prophecies to send a message, NOT as evidence. Although many other religions use prophecies as evidence. If a prophecy was made and fits all of your requirements then it CAN be used a evidence towards a religion. So there you go. Good luck, And have fun!