BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Which theory of our world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro) God (Con)

Here we go again, more quotes from man's written scriptures (the Bible, Torah, Quran, etc.). Like all who interprets man's written scriptures, there is a bias to pick and choose to fit one's narrative. For example, on Pro's rant about the creation “of this Earth,” she left out where God said “Let there be light; and there was light.” This spontaneous light, perhaps, light from the Big Bang. My take on this light from a Big Bang is simply a matter of interpretation, just like Pro's interpretation of Genesis (https://www.biblegateway.com...). Man's written scriptures of the Bible, Torah, and Quran been in the news a lot these days for their followers are killing each other. However, at the beginning of those scriptures there is one God who created everything; after that, it gets fuzzy. https://www.biblegateway.com...http://www.mechon-mamre.org...http://www.answering-islam.org...Just like the news between FOX and MSMBC, right from the beginning the news event is the same; after that, it gets very fuzzy. Con, being a deists, also believes in one God who created everything, but when reading God's handwriting---the Laws of Nature, comes enlightenment. This enlightenment is enjoyed by all those who follow the Bible, Torah, and Quran, when they drive their automobile to a drive-through restaurant to get a meal to feed their kids in 5 minutes. A compelling example of one from a list of many, of what happens when our Unalienable Rights are morally free to flow, having minimal resistance (Constructal Law), within the awesome machinery of God's nature, the “invisible hand” (Con, Round 2 of this debate). From the light of God's handwriting, evolution continues and includes advances in technology, food production, medicine, etc, the stables of human existence throughout the world today.In closing, this deists [Con] finds it morally proper to thank Pro for her time in this debate, and to wish Pro a long and healthy “Life,” having ample freedom (“Liberty”), “in the” moral “pursuit of Happiness.”
Which theory of our world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro) God (Con)

Although Einstein is a creditable source I disagree that this answer is simple. Yes I believe in God as being the saviour of my soul but as being the creator of this Earth it's all opinion. In the bible there is no talk of a big bang. There is only God who began to create a masterpiece that we call home. There is no talk of evolution but that he created the animals and humans. Nothing is portrayed in the bible that there was a big bang there. So you have no actual proof that "God's law of nature" is accurate but we can and have proved that the laws of nature exists and that no higher being stamped his name on our planet.
Which theory of our world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro) God (Con)

Within the scope of this debate, both Pro and Con believe in God, so the existence of God is not the issue and therefore, not part of this debate. Con explained to Pro that Con is a deists. That is, a deists believes that God set off the Big Bang but has since remained indifferent to the universe, as God's Laws of Nature is the instructions, or program, defining the evolutionary process of the universe both inanimate and animate. Therefore, God created evolution (the product of God's handwriting---the Laws of Nature), the machinery which created life. Since Pro also believes in God, one would think Pro would be rejoicing over Con's perspective that evolution is God's creation. However, Pro is stuck in man's written scriptures about God (aka the Bible). For example, Pro stated, “You cannot prove that God came out of nowhere and created everything in seven days.” Where “God came out of,” we simply do not know. As for “created everything in seven days,” we now know, thanks to Albert Einstein's discovery of one of God's Laws of Nature known as “Time Dilation.” Equations: http://www.phy.olemiss.edu...Video presentation: https://www.youtube.com...According to Einstein's discovery, time is relative; God's timeframe of seven days could have been billions of years in our timeframe. This is the point Con was making to Pro in the last Round. Use God's Laws of Nature as a filter when reading man's written scriptures about God. In other words, since God created everything, including that theory humanity stumble upon via the scientific method, known today as, evolution. Therefore, “Which theory of our world holds more true: Evolution (Pro), God (Con)”? Since both Pro and Con believe in God, the answer is, God; for God created evolution. As Albert Einstein once said, “When the solution is simple, God is answering.” http://www.simpletoremember.com...
Which theory of our world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro) God (Con)

The name of the argument is "Which theory holds more truth" meaning I explain how the evolution theory holds more truth and you show how the God theory is better. No I can not prove the existence that God exists but neither can you. You can not prove that God came out of nowhere and created everything in seven days. Now the evolution can and has been proved by science and actual facts. What proof do you have that a spirit can do all that the bible has said he has done? This video explains in full how the Earth came to be: http://www.history.com...
Which theory of our world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro) God (Con)

Con's position is one in believing God is some event-entity that caused the Big Bang, nothing more, nothing less. It was the handwriting of God, the physical Laws of Nature that started the evolution process of the universe, and it continues today. It would be too naive to think us humans, like those “dinosaurs” is the end product of evolution. Evolution will continue with or without humanity. All what we need today, is an asteroid hitting the earth, and one day some other species will be excavating our bones calling us “dinosaurs.” Con's position of God is one of a deists. That is, God set off the Big Bang but has since remained indifferent to it, as God's Laws of Nature is the instructions, or program, defining the evolutionary process of the universe both inanimate and animate. Can Con prove the existence of a God, of course not; nor could humanity prove the existence of radio waves 300 years ago. Our metrology has not yet evolved to a state of probing the event-entity that cause the Big Bang. Until then, belief is all what we have, for those who wish to believe. Today, we are reading the handwriting of God via the scientific method. Coming to understand God's handwriting and trying to correlate it with man's scriptures about God will simply end in confusion, as Pro's dialog demonstrates. In Round 1 Pro did not define what “God theory” was, leaving the “theory” open for discussion. Con's “God theory” supports evolution via God's physical Laws of Nature. Pro's “God theory” seems to be based on man's written scriptures. Con's recommendation to Pro, use God's Laws of Nature as a filter when studying man's scriptures about God.
Which theory of our world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro) God (Con)

Although I am a strong believer in God and Christ himself there are still parts of his existence and how this Earth came to be that I question. First off Genesis 2:7 says "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul" https://www.biblegateway.com... This here states that Man and other animals were the first living things on this Earth when there is no actual fact on it. How do you explain the existence of dinosaurs? Did the human race become extinct during this time? If so how did they come extinct and why aren't there any remains of them to be found? We have proof that at one point dinosaurs we here and that they roamed the Earth. I don't understand how many people can say that God came and made the heavens and the Earth and man and not question all the facts that tell us we were not here first. Take this website for example http://paleobiology.si.edu... it explains how we all started from a single celled organism and how we EVOLVED from that. Your last argument had a lot but really said nothing. How am I suppose to believe that this spirit first appeared from out of thin air, created the heavens and the Earth, then humans, then killed us all put dinosaurs in place, then killed them all and put us back into place. How do you go from the complex and majestic creature such as the dinosaur then settle for the monstrosity we call the human race.
Which theory of our world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro) God (Con)

Noun 1.theory of evolution - (biology) a scientific theory of the origin of species of plants and animals [1] sci"en"tif"ic adjective based on or characterized by the methods and principles of science. This means that my theory has been proved by facts. Each living that has existed or exists has a beginning and an end while the God theory has many holes and open ended questions. Therefore the evolution theory can better explain the history of the world
Which theory of our world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro) God (Con)

I believe that the Evolution Theory, or the big bang theory, hold more truth in it than that of the God theory. Now I am strong believer in God himself but if this one man created the heaves and the earth who created him? How did he get here? The big bang theory seems clearer to me everything is unquestionable. Everything has a beginning and it has and end. With the God theory there are so many open, unanswered questions.
An AR15 is a suitable option for home defence and hunting

My argument will likely not focus on the AR15 specifically, but on guns in general. A 'suitable option' is not one which is perfect; however, I think there is certainly a standard to attain in order to be deemed 'suitable'. How effective are guns at defending the home? Well, a study by A. L. Kellerman et al investigating "the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide" found that from 626 shootings at residences, that "every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides."[1] This gives a 22:1 ratio of 'unsuitable' use to 'suitable' use, which means that just 4.3% of the shootings studied were legal, and it is important to note that police officers carried out 23% of these legal shootings, giving a final, lowly figure of 3.3% of shootings being carried out by law-abiding citizens. It does not appear reasonable to suggest that a weapon which is used wrongly 96.7% of the time is a 'suitable option', for this 'margin of error' is truly leviathan, and I think the strength of the conclusion lends credibility to the study. You may wish to argue that when 'used correctly' it functions well, but it appears to be incredibly difficult to ensure this. N.B. This is not an isolated study, there are others with similarly outrageous findings. [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
An AR15 is a suitable option for home defence and hunting

Home Defense:An AR15 is a suitable option for home defence because it is a short, lightweight firearm that is known for having little recoil and being very easy to shoot. The model of AR15 I own and have trained with is 32.5 inches and 6 pounds exactly(IV). I've calculated a quick average of 3 home defense shotguns and they average 39.3 inches and 6.9 pounds(I,II,III). A shorter overall length means that it will be easier to navigate through doorways and around corners and such. Because they have low recoil and an adjustable stock(IV), they can be easily used by any person of any age and size. The 5.56 NATO/.223 remington round utilized by the AR15 is an excellent choice for home defense because it gives you the most lethality of a rifle/shotgun, without nearly as much over-penetration if you miss or the round happens to go through the home intruder (V). They are semi-automatic and come standard with 30 round magazines, which allows you to make quick follow through shots and prevents you from having to reload as much as other firearms if there are multiple perpetrators. The M4 carbine (which is a military/LE version of the AR15) has recently been adopted by the Chicago P.D in order to more effectivelty combat gangs (VI). If it's good enough to be used by the police department, wouldn't you say it's good enough to use in your own home?Hunting:Yes, there have been models of the AR15 specifically designed to be used as hunting rifles as shown by VII and VIII. The reason being is that the 5.56/.223 Remington is also a very popular round to be used on varmint such as rabbit, prarie dogs and the like, as well as being able to take down deer and hogs if you're a good shot, and it's fairly inexpensive (IX). It's weight, which I mentioned earlier, makes it easier to carry out in the field for long periods of time.It will seem like V is empty, but it's the youtube video. My apologies for the different font sizes for the sources. I'm still trying to figure out the font size and style changes.I. http://www.mossberg.com...II. http://www.remington.com...III. http://www.winchesterguns.com...IV. http://www.bushmaster.com...V.http://www.youtube.com...VI.http://www.infiniteunknown.net...VII. http://www.bushmaster.com...VIII. http://www.fulton-armory.com...IX.http://en.wikipedia.org...
An AR15 is a suitable option for home defence and hunting

Self defence : First off, you can't just change the posted definitions. If you had a problem with the definitions you should have said so in Round 1. Secondly, I clearly stated in the Thesis of the debate, that the firearm in question here is about the AR15, not guns in general. Thirdly, since when does something have to be "perfect" in order to be suitable for a task? You cite that guns are more often used in crime than in self defense, but how exactly does this automaticlly make it ill-suited to be used for the task at hand? "Oh my gosh, it was used in a crime, we can't defend ourselves with it anymore". How does that make any sense? Firearms are without a doubt, the most suited tools for self defense in general because they are effective against multiple attackers in a rapid manner, and use lethal force. So if a firearm is unsuitable for home defense, where you very well may be facing multiple, possibly armed criminals, as shown by 1,2 and 3. Also, your cited study was done in 1998 and in only 3 cities. 15 years ago. I thinks it's just a tad outdated, don't you? Gary Kleck, a renouned criminologist, has found that foricble resistance against an attacker is will improve your odds of not being injured in your confrontation. He also cites that firearms are used over 2 million times in self defense(4). Lastly, you, overall, claim that all guns are unsuitable for home defence. That is not the burden of proof to be upheld by your position, your burden of proof is to show that an AR15 specifically is unsuitable for home defence and hunting, which you have not showed.Hunting: I have no further arguments until Con addresses them.1.http://www.youtube.com...2.http://www.youtube.com...3.http://www.youtube.com...4.http://www.youtube.com...
Rap Battle!

West coast, my @ss, I know you don't live in Cali... And I'm not NYC, you know nothin' about me 313, Detroit rap arena is where I do my prowling! Come up here you get shot like Outsider's Dally That's right, I read S.E. Hinton, that's what I'm hinting And your bjtch of a mom tomorrow night I'll be hitting. No HIV for me cause I gotta condom that's befitting So all night long I'll be over her, continuous gizzing... You live in Constantinople? Well bjtch don't get hopeful I converting to Islam and us jihads are coming by the boatful Turn the Hagia Sophia Muslim, to Istanbul, you're woeful. We wage jihad, cause you need God,our cause is noble! Now really I'm Christian, last stanza was just metaphorical LittleD has got to listen, because when HE talks it's horrible I got insight in my vision, what you spit is just deplorable... Rapping with precision, you could say that I'm Jim the oracle.
Rap Battle!

you said you f*cked my mom well that's quite funny because she has HIV, i hope your nose don't get runny i find your bars stupid, they're not smart, they are not punny you chat so much sh*t it's like believing in the Easter bunny you believe in God, now that's quite obscene you've got my anti religious views kicking up a scene im beating you here like the Muslims to byzantine im driving straight past you firing shots out the limousine my house is like Constantinople, it's royal and large, your house is like Chernobyl, toxic like a barge you need to run because im setting down a charge cus if you don't get away LittleT will be at large, in charge cus you're a little b*tch vaginal discharge west side outtie, f* ck ya'll east side rappers
Rap Battle!

LittleT spits (literally) and slobbers all over the mic Like it's a big djck, didn't no I'm fighting a dyke... Well you're fighting a kike with all his Jewish might With my Israeli Uzi, no "excuse me" and fight into the night! Against this Nazi, he thinks he's all rolled up like Yahtzee Got a bifta? A rod? Then with my spike I'll kill you like Trotsky Right hand man of Stalin, but you fallin; like a Fvckin' commie You reds can't beat conservatives, for example, Mitt Romney On me, you got nothing, But on your mom I got something juicy My wet cummin' djck and it aint goin' in loosely! But firm! And after I fvcked your mom LittleT rues the... ...day that be battled me, cause his body is now bruising. Your losing, excusing, is it confusing? Well too bad, @ss hole You're fuming, but still puny, so just go and step back, h0e Cause your swooning at my dueling, felt nothing from your last go This Jew tired of moving and scooting, I'll break free from Krak"w !
Rap Battle!

Yo, yes, light the bifta I'm gonna ra*e your little sister Five chicken licking I'm gonna give her a kicking Yo, yes, my name's called Tate Har-dar-dar with your head off a gate Might be a bimbo, put your head through a window That's why we have beef Yes, calm down with your bars Talk about my mum, talk about yours Yo, you was abortion at birth Your mum look like an ape from Planet the Earth Um, yeah, I'm going in, haha Jim, think you're a gypsy, don't get lippy You will get drop kick, it'll be easy Sh*t scared of Reece Lindsay Listens to Bimbi, how embarrassing Brother so fat, can't do a marathon Marco you will get sparko Your mum's on crack, you look like your mum's mac Yeah Yo, your mum is a fiend You suck your dad off while your ma flicks her bean Yo, think you're big? You will get dropped yeah, straight in a dig Crying all over the floor Imagrety I'm war Everybody knows your mum is a wh*re Getting round Piccadilly looking for willy Punters pull up and say 'don't be silly' It's my time to shine Shut your mouth or I'll break your mum's spine Snap a leg like a twig Rob a car like I'm something out of Stig Yo
Rap Battle!

Oh man.... Is this guy serious, cause if he is I'm about to get serial Not like Lucky Charms but like Grand Moff, imperial. You fvcking grand mof, like Yoda "cringe in fear, you will" You think your rhymes are lit but the crowds feels dreary, still Here we will get right to the chase, like we playing Mario Kart Get that Blue Shell, fling it at you, and hit you so hard you will fart Oh, and blow up, Don't show up, and if you do, are you gon' start? Or did you forget gas, dumb bjtch, surely you are a retard! Me? hard, and that's what I shove in your mom, nice and deep. In so far that she just dies and goes peaceful like some sheep I'm tryna see why this guy's so bleak, he's such a creep I'll get him on the run and hiding, it's like we're playing Hide and seek The last day for this anarchist, his final hour it'll be Throw anything at me and I just laugh cause it's brittle, weak! This guy's profile picture is so gay, you're colorful like Skittles, G... This queer @ss mof should just rename himself as LittleD.
Rap Battle!

Jimshady yes, we know who you are Jimshady yeah, you're really not hard Jimshady yeah, you're gonna get parred Yo Jimshady, we know who you are You're that guy who copies my bars You're that guy who is a r*tard Look at your makeup, look at your clothes By the way that you got a big nose In your profile picture what the f**k's that pose When I see your brother he'd better get on toes Cos I'm gonna give him some sick blows right to the nose Yes, Jimshady, we know who you are Jimshady, yeah, you're gonna get parred Jimshady, yes, we know who you are Why's this guy, yeah, trying to spit BG Media, I run that sh*t Lyrically spun that sh*t I bet you got hair, under your armpits, look Yes, you're not the boys Finished with CallyMan, play with your toys Yes, starving Marvin, that's what you are Come round here, you'll get lyrically parred Link me now, link me later All that money, better get that paper a street educator Jimshady yeah Remember when you wanted to get on a track with me? Are you mental? Yeah, I'm done now, yeah Bang
Witch is better, Pokemon or digimon

Let me point out that you used incorrect grammar when saying "witch. " You should have said "which. " So, I'll go ahead and break your claim to pieces one by one. 1. Language Pokemon don't have a language, they just say the name of themselves. Example, Pikachu says "Pika, pika pika" and "PiiikaaaaaaaaachhhUUUUUUUUU. " Plus, "human language" isn't a language. If you're talking about the English language, than you should have said English.
Witch is better, Pokemon or digimon

Pokemon is definitely better than Digimon. I think this is because Pokemon have a language, and that is really cool, but Digimon speak human language, witch makes Pokemon unique. Another argument is that Pokemon do not die as often as Digimon do. That makes Digimon a really sad show to watch. My last argument is that Pokemon have WAY more attacks than Digimon does. Digimon usually have 1 or 2 moves, but Pokemon have lots of moves. So are you on my side that Pokemon are better than Digimon is :).