BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
I am God

My opponent has incorrectly answered every question, thus showing that he is not God, the creator of the universe. Proofs: 1. You can plainly see by the picture of me on my debate.org profile, that i do not have 110,293 hairs on my head, this was a mere random guess by my opponent who clearly had no idea how many hairs i have on my head. __________________________________________________________________________________ 2. I do have pets, i have 4. They are: 1. http://i16.photobucket.com... This is one of my pet dogs, his name is Pippin, he is a pure bred Jack Russel Terrier. 2&3. http://i16.photobucket.com... These are my pets, my Betta fish and in the lower left corner is my "Golden mystery snail". Their names are Chip (The Betta fish) And Skip (The snail) I took the picture right next to my computer screen that is currently on the "My debates" page, just to prove that they are in fact mine. 4. http://i16.photobucket.com... And last but not least this is a picture of my other dog Lucy, a Pug. _________________________________________________________________________________ 3. http://i16.photobucket.com... This is one of my rose bushes, showing clearly that i do in fact have flowers in my back yard. __________________________________________________________________________ 4. My only grass is a patch that's about 10 feet by 10 feet, which clearly there are not over 9 trillion blades of grass in. ________________________________________________________________________ 5. http://i16.photobucket.com... As you can see i pulled up 5 blades of grass from my yard. ___________________________________________________________________________ 6. I have many more freckles than my opponents suggested 23. ______________________________________________________________ 7. I actually have 31 teeth, due to having one pulled. But the average human has 32 teeth. (Without having any pulled) http://www.cyh.com... _______________________________________________________ Conclusion: My opponent has given no proof that he is in fact God, the creator of the universe. I have asked him simple questions that the Creator of the Universe (And everything in it) would EASILY know, which he has proven nothing more than his ability to guess incorrectly. He did not get one of the questions right, proving that he is not the All powerful, all knowing, creator of the Universe and everything in it. Resolution NEGATED.
I am God

1. There are currently 110,293 hairs on your head 2. You have no pets, this is a trick question 3. You have no flowers currently placed in your backyard 4. There are currently 9,123,832,190,983,412 blades of grass in your yard 5. You pulled up no blades of grass, this is a trick question 6. You have 23 freckles on your face, many which come in go in regards to the season 7. You have 30 teeth in your mouth Now that I have successfully answered all of you questions that you have given me, I ask you one favor in return. .. .. Since I understand your faith in me is weak, it is likely that you will say that I am incorrect regarding many of the answers I have given to you. When you do this, I ask that you SHOW PROOF to all the voters that I was indeed wrong. In conclusion, my opponent can not prove I am not god, since he currently lacks any evidence which would do so.
I am God

Alright, ill give. If you are God, the creator of the universe and everything in it than surely you will be able to answer a few simple questions about your creations. All numbers must refer and be answered in the human (American) numerical system. All names of any objects, animals, etc must be answered in the American given names. 1. How many hairs are currently on my head? 2. What are my 4 pets, and what are the breeds/species of said pets? 3. What kind of flowers are currently planted in my back yard, and how many petals are there on all the plants combined? 4. How many blades of grass are currently in my yard? 5. How many blades of grass did i just pull up from my yard? 6. How many freckles are on my face? 7. How many teeth do i have in my mouth? If you are truly the creator of the universe and everything in it, the all knowing God, than these are easy questions for you, if you cannot answer them correctly than you are not the All powerful all knowing God, creator of the Universe, and the resolution fails.
I am God

"Since your page says your an atheist, that means you do not believe such a God could exist, thus negating that you would actually believe you are God the creator of the universe." I have stated on my page that I am a disbeliever in myself solely for testing your faith in me. As I can see from looking at your page, you believe in me. If you really are the Christian you say you are, you must use your faith to understand the reality that I AM GOD. Also, I challenged you to prove that I am not god. Your argument is pretty weak thus far while mine is completely solid, considering I completely answered your single statement above. In conclusion: I challenged you to prove that I am not God. You accepted. This means you must prove I am not god to win the debate. You have not done this at all. I will await YOUR epic proof that I am not God, the creator of the universe
The Big One - Pro or Anti Choice for Abortion...

"Okay, so you didn't make your own argument, brilliant."I used sources to support my contention. That doesn't mean I am not making a contention.My opponent, as usual with "pro-choicers" ends the debate with the case of rape. Does the fact that the mother is the victim of an atrcious crime make the child less human? Furthermore, abortions because of rape make up less than 1% off all abortions in the United States, according to the Allen Guttmacher Institute (the research arm of Planned Parenthood).My opponent offered no counter to my argument for the humanity of the preborn, supported by expert testimony. So the only question the voter has left to ponder is the morality of killing a human being.
The Big One - Pro or Anti Choice for Abortion...

Okay, so you didn't make your own argument, brilliant. Big Picture Argument Lets just place a scenario down now: imagine a woman in her 20s, unemployment has hit hard, and she is unable to get a job because she is busy caring for her child. One afternoon, she returns home to a wrecked house. Upon climbing the stairs, she is attacked by an intruder, who remained in the house. Eventually the police arrive, and she is sent to the psychiatrist to be treated for the trauma, a couple of days later, she admits that the intruder raped her, and she is worried for her health, she heads to the hospital, soon finding out that she is pregnant. If this woman allowed the child to be born, she would be left in a position where her entire life is in shreds, her family told her that they wouldn't be able to cope with another child. She has barely enough money to sustain herself and a child. A future of suffering, or the possibility of another child when the time is right. From "death" comes new life.
The Big One - Pro or Anti Choice for Abortion...

Life begins at conception.[1] The heart begins to beat at 21-days and brainwaves are detectable at 40-days gestation.[2] So, my opponent asks what the fetus is until just prior to birth? Answer: A Human Being. A human being with just as much right to live as you or I. Sources 1. http://www.epm.org... 2. http://www.pregnancy.org...
The Big One - Pro or Anti Choice for Abortion...

Oh... A pro-lifer, lovely. That was pretty quick though, good for you. Part 1 - Biological Argument Tell me, what is the baby until around a month before it is born? It is a sack of bones and flesh, still connected to the mother and completely part of the woman's body, in the month leading up to the pregnancy, abortion may kill or severely harm the mother, so there is a practical reason for that being the point of no return. Part 2 - The Philosophical Argument What is life? Really, what is it but a tool of itself to prolong its own existence. The religious attitude to life shows that it is a mere plaything of god, a toy for the great entity to play with or destroy according to he/she/it's designs. A product of an experiment. Part 3 - The Evolutionary Argument It is undeniable that in the evolutionary context, the ending of one single life from a bloodline isn't going to result in the demise of that branch of the species, the woman can always have another child when she is ready.
The Big One - Pro or Anti Choice for Abortion...

Swearing and stuff like that are allowed, you can attack my atheism all you want, but remember, words spent fudging my views could be spent throwing your own. I believe that a woman should have the right to abort an embryo or foetus before it is born. I am looking for a moral argument, so any religious beliefs chucked into the debate pile should remain unconsidered by the reader. Regardless of their religion. No arguments in the first round, simply state your belief and wait. ..
Schools should be required to teach a trade skill class.

I understand that trade skills jobs are very important in our society and I have seen already how desperately the society is lacking in these specific skills, even seeing in current times how many of our trade labor forces are beginning to lessen. I am not against trade skills being taught, they are an important part of our society, but by requiring them for students to take during their public schooling should not be fully allowed. I am not concerned toward these trade skills taking up all modern education but what I am concerned for is the students themselves. Students can only learn so much at a time, especially teenagers, and then easily lose focus again. I battle through 6 classes each day in my high school, 4 being the essential math, english, science, and history, while the other 2 being elective. Yes, there are openings for 2 electives where possible trade skill requirements may belong, but after focusing so much on the essential math, english, science, and history I can imagine, not just myself, but others too must be mentally exhausted. Then putting the student through another important class such as their required trade skill may even be too much for the student. Seeing in the online Forbes article, "Motivation Matters: 40% Of High School Students Chronically Disengaged From School", that on average 40% of high school students lose all motivation facing such demanding classes. By requiring trade skill courses then it will only push that much more of a burden upon the student. My high school has already implemented some trade skill courses has I have mentioned before, but the difference is that they are not required and are the student's choice whether or not they would want to take the class. By leaving the decision in the student's hands rather than requiring them to take the course it will ensure not all students face this academic suicide while others then take up the task and work through the skill.
Schools should be required to teach a trade skill class.

As common core is seeping into the education system of our youth, which is a different debat topic for another time, I want to ensure your understanding of my complete agreement in maintaining the "modern education". I feel education is extremely important and do not wish to take anything away from that importance. I simply feel like opening a new avenue of choices to all students will help eliminate some unneeded stress that can arise when a student realizes they do not want to do the traditional college route but they want to be successful. The path for education is not a one size fits all path when it comes to interests. In my life I have learned that if you are not happy with a path you are on, you will not be as successful as doing something that do want to be doing. The saying holds true, "if you find something you enjoy, then you will never work a day in your life". The traditional education path may not be for everyone, and as a society we should introduce different options in an attempt to help those who don't have a means of being introduced to a trade that may bring them the enjoyment they arelooking for, which can help create a stronger economy for all of us. A person sucessfully working in a trade is more beneficial to society than a peron who is unemployed or underemployed in a career or a job that they are not truly happy in. Education is very important, I am only asking to include trades into the educational environment.
Schools should be required to teach a trade skill class.

Seeing and reading how important these trade skills are is quite an eye opener to the different opportunities and paths students may take toward their future. Like you said these are skills that will never go anywhere and the person may also go anywhere in order to fulfill their role. However, as you have mentioned before these trade skills are also available past high school and into community colleges at, what seems, a much lower cost than any other four year university. Our debate focuses around the requirement of public schools to teach these trade skills but despite how important these skills may be there is still modern education that many students need. Due to the recently implemented Common Core for nationwide schools there are now set expectations for students to learn and even though it is about "making the grade" at times these skills are no doubt just as important for students as preparing our future labor forces. By implementing trade skill courses it will no doubt broaden many students horizons, but there is still other necessary education that students require that cannot also fit requiring trade skill classes. Perhaps instead of requiring trade skill classes let them continually be an option for all students to have and take if so desired. Leaving actual trade skill opportunities in the student's capable hands and having them take the responsibility of finding ways to learn of a new skill or even taking the two year community college degree as mentioned before. As the Common Core State Standards Initiative website states, through further implication of these math, englishes, and sciences, students will be able hoan their learning abilities and apply them to later requirements in life such as those trade skills that may take later in life.
Schools should be required to teach a trade skill class.

Students being afforded the opportunity to take some of the trade classes you mentioned is an exciting bit of knowledge to learn. I do want to stress the portion of this debate that calls for the schools being "required" to teach a trade skill class. The requirement would be designed to reach those students that do not yet understand what they are interested in doing as a career. Some high school students are fortunate enough to have been exposed to "other knowledge" outside of a traditional classroom environment because maybe they had a family that had experience with a trade, whether it's a business or just a passion or hobby. The requirement would be most beneficial to the students that don't get that exposure simply because the life they have outside of school doesn't afford them the opportunities to learn a trade skill. As for a trade skill constricting the knowledge to one's career and the possibility to change careers if one decides to later in life, I do agree a bit but, people are responsible for the knowledge they receive through the experiences they have in life. The education you receive initially is not intended, in either scope (traditional education or vocational) to be the final bit of knowledge that is gained. In both paths, the initial knowledge gained is only a stepping stone to further educating ones self to succeed in any industry. A trade school does not have to be a one way road to a career that never changes. In fact a March 2015 article written by BLS.gov states that on average the baby boomer generation held on average 11.5 jobs over their lifetime. It is not uncommon to experience job changes due to downsizing, or technology replacing a workforce. A trade like electrician, or heating and ventilation technician can never be outsourced. They require unique skills and hands on work. With the right trade, not only will your job never go anywhere, you could go anywhere and find a job as long as you are willing to work.
Schools should be required to teach a trade skill class.

By currently being a high school student I have personal experience of understanding how these school systems prefer "making the grades" but just because schools may enforce this does not mean they are not attempting to teach trade skills. In Rubidoux High School there are many opportunities such like those of Video Production, Agriculture, Publishing, Culinary, Auto Body, and even a Nursing program but it is up to the student if they wish to take these courses. According to the National Center for Educational Statistics we see that most vocational and trade skill courses are already taught in public high schools but high school students typically do not formally enroll. Despite the many advantages these courses may hold it is really the student's own responsibility to enroll in them and if they do not they may seek an education past that of just trade skills. Many students alone already find it difficult enough to decide on their final major and seeing that 80% of students end up changing their life ambitions at least once in their life based off Borderzine Reporting Across Frontiers article. These trade skill classes having a lack of diversity and based off the online site, Classroom, the lack of course and subject diversity constricts a vocational student's knowledge to his career, which he/she may decide to change later on. Trade skill classes preparing students for that job force, but overall limiting to a multiple variety of other jobs that are open for them which they may then decide to strive for.
Schools should be required to teach a trade skill class.

The focus in primary education has shifted in recent decades. With common core policies across the nation, primary schools main focus has turned towards "making the grades" needed to be accepted into a university system to continue education with an importance focused on continuing for a bachelors degree. According to collegedata.com college board, the average cost of tuition and fees for the 2016"2017 school year was $33,480 at private colleges, $9,650 for state residents at public colleges, and $24,930 for out-of-state residents attending public universities. Take a trade like Heating, ventilation, and refrigeration technician, you could take the entire program at RCC for $1,276 plus about $500 for books and fees. If you go to college for a non STEM related degree your average first year job offer is around $49,000 according to business insider. As a first year HVAC technician in California the average first year salary not including overtime hours is in the range of $43,000 -$53,000. If primary schools could help give the needed skills and access to a new trade, it can help streamline the decision process and help put people into the workforce with a good paying job sooner, which will help the economy grow.
WW2 Atomic Bomb usage

My opponent has failed to counter any of my arguments. The opposition stands by its argument that there are better ways for the war to have ended, such as through peaceful negotiations. While the possibility of a peace treaty was in question, it was not impossible. Nothing is nonnegotiable, and this is especially true with peace treaties. While the opposition recognizes the fact that a peace treaty would have been very difficult, I would also like to remind the proposition that a treaty was not impossible, as many peace treaties have been formed in situations that were deemed impossible to do so. Examples of "impossible peace": The Egyptian"Hittite peace treaty: http://en.wikipedia.org... Treaty of Lutatius (First Punic War): http://en.wikipedia.org... The Treaty of Ghent (War of 1812): http://www.eighteentwelve.ca... Parties in all these wars had extremely bitter "blood grudges", but made peace in the end.
WW2 Atomic Bomb usage

My opponent has stated that the Japanese had many fortifications, and that because of this it was necessary to nuke the Japanese. But he has failed to provide sources for his statistical evidence! However, this is irrelevant. Whether or not it was necessary does not affect the fact that: A nuclear deterrent is never the best way to end a war, And the debate is an argument over what would have been the best way to end the war, not whether it was necessary. I still stand by my argument that nuking Japan was not the best way to end a war. The best war to have ended that would would have been through peaceful negotiations. Despite what the proposition might think, a peace treaty may have been forged! This is entirely possible when you look at other situations which were deemed impossible to create a neutral agreement between two warring parties. Despite the mutual hate between Axis and Ally they were able to make a treaty after the capture of Berlin, so a Japanese treaty would be possible!
WW2 Atomic Bomb usage

Firstly, looking at the amount of fortifications Japan had on islands near it, it is hard to imagine how many fortifications there would have been in the Japanese homeland. It has saved Allied lives which would otherwise have been lost in two invasions like the one that occurred during the D-Day where around 156,000 Allied troops lost their live trying to invade the mainland, and would have had the similar results in the invasion of the main islands of the Japanese homeland. If we had not dropped the bombs on the Japanese homeland, the Japanese would have not surrendered. They would have rather committed suicide missions. Studies estimate that if we had gone through with the invasion, in the first 30 days about 40,000 Allied troops would have lost their lives. Like the military the civilians had the same mentality due to Japanese propaganda.
WW2 Atomic Bomb usage

The atomic bomb in WW2 was not the best way to end the war. Nuclear deterrents have not been the answer, are not the answer, and never will be the answer. While it is true that the looming threat of a powerful weapon can cause wars to end (and this has happened in the past many times throughout history), the use of nuclear weapons cannot be justified in any situation whatsoever. The effects of nuclear weapons on the Japanese is simply atrocious. Thousands of innocent lives ended in a split second because America decided that it was needed. How could you justify such an act? Such needless death and pain? To inflict undue agony and hardship unto generation after generation of children in the radiation radius? Hundreds of children were born with birth defects, or even worse, not born at all after the payload was delivered. And yet you would suggest that this was the best way for a war to end? Literally EVAPORATING innocent people? The Opposition strongly opposes the use of nuclear weapons