BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
A just society ought not to use the death penalty as a form of punishment.

As much as I am pleased with his set up or context, I am much displeased with his characterizations. On where death penalty is used and on why death penalty is even approved in status quo. So before I begin my arguments I would first rebut his points. His Points The death penalty is not a form of punishment First and for most, Nazi regime and status quo is very much different. Death penalty is only given to people who have committed heinous crimes. Crimes that are so grave and the only commensurate punishment is Death penalty. Justice must be preserved. We all agree on that, but is it really preserved when we don't give death penalty? When heinous crimes are done like rape etc and you only going to give them Life time imprisonment? Death Penalty will equate to societal breakdown. Obviously false, there are current countries who has death penalty. Yet no societal breakdown is happening. Next, He hinges all his points on the idea of morality. That death penalty is not a moral action that a society and a government should not take. But the question is, Where is morality hinged on? Does the definition of morality changes when mixed under different circumstances? Of course it does. For example, a person stole from a convenient store and he gets caught, I guess its not right for us to give him death penalty because the crime of this person is not that grave. But when it comes to rape, murder etc, is it okay for us to give them lifetime imprisonment? Of course not, It doesn't become commensurate and then justice lost it's essence. Next, HE says. Government overstepping their bounds. Let's assume that we go under his logic. It's not right for a government to use death penalty. but as you can see his argument boils down to this. The state has no right nor power to punish a person For that person has a right that the government should protect. So then, if thats the case, lifetime imprisonment should not also be applied. For it takes away the liberty of a person. Liberty is a right. So in lifetime imprisonment the state oversteps their boundaries. SO in his logic, there should be no punishment since "Punishment" does effect or over ride rights. However, The true essence of punishment is this, The state has the right to curtail your right Since The "Crime" you did is something that curtails others right. In this, Death penalty is one of those punishments. And it is better for it ensures that justice is commensurable. I was able to prove that our moral obligation is to preserve justice. And in my side, it's being preserved for justice is gained when we give the right punishment. I will argue later on the second round.
Advertisements Trigger Impulsive Buying

I have one thing to say and evidence to back it up. The thing is: Sorry, but you're wrong. We do not think things through clearly, even if we think we are. So let's say you see a burger in an advertisement for a restaurant on television. A food stylist worked on this burger to make it look attractive (even though that isn't what you get in the actual restaurant). You're brain is attracted to bright and gold colors, so if the stylist makes the burger look brighter with certain sprays, your brain makes a comparison to what it has seen before, and reaches a conclusion, "This looks great! " This then sends a message to your body that goes back to the brain and triggers hunger. This tactic is best for fast-food restaurants. See, the brain never makes absolute decisions, instead only relative ones. Though you may think you are making clear choices, every small detail actually effects what you want. Suppose you see two brownies. One is misshaped and looks generally terrible, while the other is cleanly cut and a brighter color. Even if you are told the misshaped one tastes better, you're brain won't give in on it's original conclusions. Food isn't the only thing that effects your brain. Many things are styled and exaggerated to get the best of you. That mattress looks very good and the actors seem to be enjoying it, but really they just put more effort in the manufacturing for that one. They forfeited the expenses of making one mattress to attract the brain into thinking it is good. It pays off in the long run by far. Gold is famous not only because of its rarity, but it's color. It's engraved in the brain to appreciate it. This is a great advantage for advertisers and other images, for example on the packaging. Though you may not know it, your brain is always being fooled. The tiniest details can still make a huge difference. Even if you aren't consciously thinking about it, your brain is still making comparisons, and will send you the message of want whenever it feels. Sources: . http://en.wikipedia.org... Brain Games (I checked this with sources before, but I don't know what the sources are, if you don't believe me I can look it up again and give you the links).
Advertisements Trigger Impulsive Buying

The television is a powerful tool that has reshaped the world itself. Among the foremost means of media communication, the television influences the human emotional world greatly, by tapping into unseen human potential and manipulating it to ensure a rational attraction to any particular subject, here a form of sheer entertainment or practical knowledge. But, more than the programs on television, the advertisements influence us strongly. Today, most of us make strictly thought decisions based on the clear, accurate description of an organization's product. We subconsciously judge our decision thoroughly before deciding to purchase a product. In the older days, people used to buy products on a brain-triggered impulse, but today, knowledge and awareness is spreading. The power of money is realized by the now psychologically-conscious people prepared to logically dispute their plausible purchase of a product, evaluating all necessities before purchasing the product.
Advertisements Trigger Impulsive Buying

An exceptional argument. Yet, in today's world, people are raised with an intellectually powerful force of conscience. While we watch the burger advertisement, we catch sight of an artistically crafted burger ... yet, that impulsive buying is due to the brain's subconscious analysis of neurons. Let us say there is a person who hates burgers ... even the most artistically crafted burger will not seem appealing to him/her. People who have not tasted burgers, you might argue, might be tempted. That is because, as you said correctly, the brain is attracted to certain colors in food. But that is primarily because the brain associates those colors (subconsciously) to the taste of that food. So, what goes on in the brain without the knowledge of the person who watches the advertisement is the subconsciously performed complete analysis of the burger. Let's say someone is on a weight loss diet - the brain will then consciously analyze why they can't have the burger. The subconscious analysis of the brain drifts deeply into all previous conscious analyses. It stresses on neuro-connective electron charges in the brain, that send flaring impulses through the nerves and the secretion of hormones. The reason for emotional impulse is generally the uncontrollable secretion of endorphins, and nervous impulses. Yet, we are psychologically raised to trust intellectual analysis greater than intuitive analysis. Therefore, the brain will transmit messages to the nerves to repulse the psychological-nervous stimulation of the endorphins. In older days, perhaps these impulses were common, but today, with an intellectual environment, we are not as subject to these impulses as we were now. Also, advertisements create strict awareness about their products. They clearly describe their products. In earlier times, perhaps we used to judge primarily images, but today, the television-trained human mind clearly analyzes the logic in advertising statements, perhaps even more than the images, subconsciously. Conclusion: Our brain subconsciously analyzes advertising statements, even more than images, and then provides us with clear information about the product. Any "impulsive" buying is after a strict analysis of the brain. Only those with impulsive buying tendency, or those who go shopping just for fun, buy impulsively, and the latter is generally not influenced by television advertisements. This distinctive phenomenon of lifestyle is, in truth, not so stressed in today's world.
Rap Battle of 2014

No te preocupes. (Don't worry) No offense taken. Now for my rap... Turn off the lights, Shadow is here. Get out of the driver"s seat, cuz it"s my turn to steer You made a mistake, you shouldn't have challenged me, Beating you will be easier than ABC Mr. jp, your raps are mediocre, They make me laugh, just like the Joker My raps are alien, they"re out of this world They make your mind spin like ice cream swirls Every verse my raps are more fortified, and your expression shows you"re mortified Please, just grease up your gears You"re falling down with each of my jeers Your appearance doesn't compensate for your bad rhymes My raps make you speechless, just like mimes The moment I enter this room, you call it a breach That"s because my skills are way out of your reach I"m gonna take over this battle by force I"ll be riding in on my horse Don"t act tough, I know you"ll be hidin" I"ll be laughing, just like Joe Biden I"m gonna shut down this place Tears are gonna fall, right down your face We have a dilemma here, so tie your shoelace Because catching up to me will be quite a race. You think you are the best, you seem quite inept Do you know what that means? It means unskilled. You got flipped over, barbecue grilled. Covered in ask, but you aren't black Challenging me, shaky attack I come to town, and shut you down, In a river of disgrace, this clown will drown. - Shadow-Dragon -
Rap Battle of 2014

Man, I'm the best from the West, While you sittin' around takin tests. I'm down in the club, You cuttin a shrub, You're lucky to geta foot rub. I got big balls, You blowin a doll. I get up in the class, while you scratch your a**. I flock to the finish line, You actin like Calvin Kline. All these schmucks getting hit with pucks like a canuck, You do this while I don't give a f**k. P.S. The insults are meant not to be taken to offense, they are simply for the rap. I am sure my opponent is a great person in real life.
It is possible to show that 1 is exactly equal to 0.999999999 (recurring to infinite).

Sorry, the equation I presented was most definitely an inequation based on pattern seen in the above example. Let me rewrite the rule. Proof: Rule: N(1) = 3/10 N(x) = N(x-1) + 3/10^x Therefor: N(1) = 3/10 = .3 N(2) = 33/100 = .33 N(3) = 333/1000 = .333 N(4) = 3333/10000 = .3333 N(5) = 33333/100000 = .33333 And so on.... No matter how far out you go with this pattern the denominator will always be a multiple of 10, the numerator will always be a multiple of 3. However this is not true of 1/3. The fraction 1/3 will always have a numerator a multiple of 1 and the denominator a multiple of 3. For example: 3/10 is not equal to 3/9 33/100 is not equal to 33/99 333/1000 is not equal to 333/999 3333/10000 is not equal to 3333/9999 33333/100000 is not equal to 33333/99999 No matter the magnitude of this pattern the two fractions will never be exactly equal, there will always be a minuscule difference. As x approaches infinity the limit of the function x approaches 1/3 BUT is NOT "exactly" 1/3. It will become infinitely close, but it will never be exactly equal. So while yes, for all practical purposes you can go ahead and substitute .9 repetend for 1 as it will doubtlessly not effect whatever math problem you happen to be doing but this does not change the fact that in reality .9 repetend is not "exactly" equal to 1.
It is possible to show that 1 is exactly equal to 0.999999999 (recurring to infinite).

You said: ---------------------------------- Examples .3 = 3/10 .33 = 33/100 .333 = 333/1000 Let x be the number of digits present on the left side of the above equation. Rule: x = x/10^x ---------------------------------- This 'Rule' is incorrect for the above examples. I think you'll find that the correct 'Rule' would be: x = 3x/10^x Furthermore, and far more importantly, I don't think your reasoning is sound here. This is more of an inequation. For example, taking x=1, we get: 1 = 3/10 Which is clearly incorrect. While the left side of the equation does equal the number of digits in the right-hand side's decimal value, this equation is clearly incorrect and cannot be used to prove or disprove anything. Also, you have gone on to let x = infinity. The concept of infinity should not be used in this manner (ie. let x =), unless used in regards to limits (ie. as x approaches infinity). It is an absolute fact that 1/3 does in fact exactly equal 0.333333 (recurring to infinite). They are two different ways to describe the exact same number. Now, while researching for this debate, I found several websites that deal with the very issue: . http://polymathematics.typepad.com... I urge you to check this site out, as it provides a large number of various proofs for my suggestion that 1 exactly equals 0.999999999 (recurring to infinite). For example: 2/7 = 0.285714285714. .. . (to infinity) +5/7 = 0.714285714285. .. . (to infinity) ------------------------- 7/7 = 0.999999999999. .. . (to infinity) If you can provide any basis for why this is incorrect, please do so. Also, check out: . http://en.wikipedia.org... "In mathematics, the recurring decimal 0.999… , which is also written as or , denotes a real number equal to 1. In other words, the notations "0.999…" and "1" represent the same number. The equality has long been accepted by professional mathematicians and taught in textbooks. Various proofs of this identity have been formulated with varying rigour, preferred development of the real numbers, background assumptions, historical context, and target audience. " My initial proof from Round 1 is also still unchallenged, as I have shown in a number of ways how the mathematics was flawed in your first argument. Cheers for the debate, it was fun.
It is possible to show that 1 is exactly equal to 0.999999999 (recurring to infinite).

The error of your argument is simple. You assume that 1/3 is the equivalent of .3 repetend. While I admit that this idea is common in every mathematics because they are so infinitely close together it is none-the-less untrue. 1/3 is cited as the equivalent of .3 repetend in much the same way pi is often cited as 3.14. The numbers are very close, but not exact. Proof: Examples .3 = 3/10 .33 = 33/100 .333 = 333/1000 Let x be the number of digits present on the left side of the above equation. Rule: x = x/10^x Substitute infinity for x Infinity = infinity/10^infinity. While this is quite literally infinitely close to 1/3 it is not 1/3. Thus 1/3 d.n.e .3 repetend.
It is possible to show that 1 is exactly equal to 0.999999999 (recurring to infinite).

First, let me say that I do believe it is possible to show that 1 is exactly equal to 0.99999999999 (recurring to infinite), despite the counter-intuitiveness of the statement. HOWEVER, I posted this debate because if I am wrong anywhere in my reasoning, I want to know about it. That said, I would like this debate to be taken on by a mathematically-minded person who legitimately wants to debate the mathematical side of this topic. I ask please for no semantically-based argument (ie. the definition of 'possible' etc.), so I can know for myself whether I'm correct or not. Ok, to my argument... Let x = 1/3 y = 0.333333333333 (recurring to infinite) There is no doubt that 1/3 exactly equals 0.333333333333 (recurring to infinite), and we can therefore safely say that x=y. Therefore, it is obvious that 3x=3y, as both sides of the equation have merely been multiplied by 3. If we substitute the values of x and y into this equation we get: (3 x 1/3) = (3 * 0.333333333333 (recurring to infinite)) 3/3 = 0.9999999999 (recurring to infinite) 1 = 0.9999999999 (recurring to infinite) So that's my reasoning. Please, if you are going to accept this debate, take note of my opening paragraph. Cheers.
2 Timothy 3:15-17 Proves Sola Scriptura.

I do have evidence. Number one, look at Jesus compared to Horus and Hercules, it's the same story. ===== First of all I must note that my opponent is way off topic. The topic is regarding wether 2 Timothy 3:15-17 proves sola scriptura or not. Not only did he enter this debate with out a regard or respect for the topic, but he then starts his own topic and proceeds to make ASSERTIONS without actually providing any evidence. Although he did say he does have it. I still haven't seen any. What he calls evidence simply begins with an implication, i.e., that the details of Jesus are actually take from Horus and Hercules. The burden of proof is on my opponent to demonstrate his assertion. Not on me to disprove it. Since Jesus was prophesied about in the OT scripture, it could very well be that Horus and Hercules are stories that were stolen from the OT scriptures and then adapted to someone's own religion. Either way my opponent has ====== Plus ehy don't Primates worship god. Chimps and Humans intelligence level is very close. ====== I really wonder when was the last time that my opponent talked to a monkey to ask him what he thought about God? ===== Plus there's not one God. There are ATLEAST thousands. ===== Sure, there are at least thousands being claimed. It is possible that they read the bible, decided they didn't like the God revealed there and so decided to make their own. I simply don't know what my opponents arguments are supposed to prove? ===== I'm atheist and proud. ATLEAST I don't prove to the world that I have an Imaginary friend after age 5. ===== My opponent, like many atheists, seems to spend a lot of time trying to prove that he doesn't have an imaginary friend. Why is that?
2 Timothy 3:15-17 Proves Sola Scriptura.

I do have evidence. Number one, look at Jesus compared to Horus and Hercules, it's the same story. And God's not real. He's a frag,eng of man's imagination. Plus the first humans didn't worship god. It took Humans6 millions years to worship god. Plus ehy don't Primates worship god. Chimps and Humans intelligence level is very close. Why don't chimps worship God!! Plus there's not one God. There are ATLEAST thousands. I'm atheist and proud. ATLEAST I don't prove to the world that I have an Imaginary friend after age 5.
2 Timothy 3:15-17 Proves Sola Scriptura.

See I'm Atheist. I don't even like Christianity. It's a rip off of the Ancient Greek religion, and the Greeks Ripped of the Egyptians religion. So Christianity is nothing but a rip off of Egyptian religion. Then "Jesus Christ" is just bullcrap. His name wasn't jesus, it was Yashua. He spoke Hebrew not Latin. Then Jesus Bullcrap Christ is a Religious Copyright of Horus. So Christianity is bull crap.
2 Timothy 3:15-17 Proves Sola Scriptura.

This is not the Opening round, this is simply initiation. The person taking the affirmative must meet/do the following: 1) Actually be affirming Sola Scriptura. 2) Provide arguments in his/her opening statement (Round 2) showing how 2 Tim 3:15-17 actually proves Sola Scriptura. The debate will follow this format: Round 1 Initiation - no arguing, no opening statements or rebuttals. Round 2 Opening statement. "Con" can rebut the opening statement. Round 3 Rebuttals Round 4 Rebuttals of Rebuttals Round 5 Conclusion The passage in focus taken from the KJV: 2 Timothy 3:15-17 15And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
should all teenagers have mobile phone

Although some teenagers see cell phones as fashion accessories or gaming devices, the basic safety conferred by continual access to a telephone is reason enough for every teenager to own one. A teen with a cell phone can call parents . Cell phones also give parents the ability to check in on teenagers at parties or after-school events. For teens with a history of rule breaking, some cell phones double as GPS devices, allowing parents to confirm that the teenager is where he is supposed to be.
should all teenagers have mobile phone

I am completely against the idea that all teens should have cell phones. - Teenage is the most complicated age in persons life its where we leave our childhood and become mature. At this age teens are exposed to the world and giving them a phone is a not-so-good idea. Teens are exposed to the adult world before they should and a personal phone makes it harder for parents to stop them. - During teenage children feel they should be a social butterfly and waste most of their time on social websites and chatting while they could be studying for their Tenth or +2. - Studies have proven that teens with their own phones lack concentration in most other things and are absent minded. - When teens are given their phones they become so addicted to it that they cannot sit quietly without their phone for one moment. Due to this they start scoring low grades and sometimes fail in their studies.
should all teenagers have mobile phone

I will argue that teens should indeed have cell phones, because of these reasons: 1. Emergencies and safety. I believe this is the biggest reason. Teens must need cell phones so they can call the police if for example someone try to kill them or something. They will also need it if a accident happens, especially teens, because most teen begins driving. So a teen should have a cell phone for safety, if a accident happens, or for life threating emergencies. Just these 3 reasons alone is enough to any rational person to know that a teen should indeed have a cell phone. And also, some cell phone companies offer GPS tracking programs that can help parents know the teenager's location. This can be very helpful if the teenager has been lost or kidnapped. 2. No excuses. Teens should have cell phones because it will eliminate the excuse for not calling home when they are going to be late or to ask permission about something. If teens have cell phones, they can’t use none of these excuses.3. Busy schedules. If teens have cell phones, the parents can call to let them know if they are running late or if there’s been a change of plans etc. This is very important because of the fact that many families have such busy schedules these days. This basically becomes a important and very helpful issue for the parents.4. Communication with Friends. Its very important to a teenager to be social. Basically, having a cell phone allow teenagers to communicate with their friends regularly, and encourage them to take time to sustain and grow relationships with their friends.5. Responsibility. Giving a teen a cell phone teache teens responsibility. It also gives them a kind of independence. They are almost adults and they can't even have cell phones? Teens are almost adults and should therefore be ready to it. Giving your teen a cell phone is a perfect way to do so. He learns to take responsibility and becomes more ready for the adult life. just because your dad got his first phone when he has 40, it doesn't mean you have to follow his footsteps.6. Impact on teen lifeA majority (57%) of teens view their cell phone as the key to their social life. 80% say their cell phone provides a sense of security while on the go, confirming that the cell phone has become their mobile safety net when needing a ride (79%), getting important information (51%), or just helping out someone in trouble (35%). Second only to clothing, teens say, a person’s cell phone tells the most about their social status or popularity, outranking jewelry, watches and shoes.ConclusionWe are living in the modern age, not in the stone age. Teens should indeed have cell phones for their own safety and for they own happiness. Thank you and I'm looking forward to your round.Sources The statistics showed at 'Impact on teen life', are from: http://www.marketingcharts.com......http://www.phoneservice.org......