BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The black death was caused by a volcano and not by germs.

1. My article does mention the Black Death which has included the possibility of volcanic causation. Reference quote - "When archaeologists discovered thousands of medieval skeletons in a mass burial pit in east London in the 1990s, they assumed they were 14th-century victims of the Black Death or the Great Famine of 1315-17." Thus, my opponent is misrepresenting the evidence given. Note - The Balck Death occurred in the 14th century. 2. The graph below shows a history of global climate history. Note- That the global climate peaked in around 1200 AD and declined in temperature by about 1.5 degrees by 1600 AD. Thus, we could easily say that the global population reached its peak in 1200 AD and declined in periods of crop failure due to persistent rainfall during periods of harvest which leads to periods of famine known commonly as 'plagues'. Due to the uneducated population, it was assumed that germs were the cause of death. Little was known about vitamins at this time in history. http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu... https://faculty.history.wisc.edu... 3.Note - Increased volcanic ash in the atmosphere causes an increase in rainfall. https://www.nsf.gov... 4. Thus, I have proven that an increase in rainfall and a cooling of the global temperatures will cause massive crop failure and lead to conditions described as 'plague'. Germs, rats and fleas are blamed as being the cause of these events due to ignorance of vitamins and how the human body functions. 5. It has also been proven that fleas are incapable of moving at a speed 5 kilometres per day which was the rate at which the Black Death spread. 6. The Dark Ages caused by 2 large volcanoes. https://motherboard.vice.com... Thus, we can plainly see that all the major catastrophes were the result of volcanic activity and had nothing to do with germs. "Germs are the result of a disease and are not the cause of it" Antoine Bechamp.
The black death was caused by a volcano and not by germs.

CON has in fact read the article posted by PRO. CON is not disputing the facts in the article, but rather CON disputes the conclusion reached by PRO. To wit the article states that "" Scientific evidence " including radiocarbon dating of the bones and geological data from across the globe " shows for the first time that mass fatalities in the 13th century were caused by one of the largest volcanic eruptions of the past 10,000 years."" The article clearly relates to "mass fatalities in the 13th century ". If one were to check on the dates of the Black Death one would find that it was a " pandemic that ravaged Europe between 1347 and 1351, taking a proportionately greater toll of life than any other known epidemic or war up to that time." (1) Note well the 14th century dates. 1347 was almost a century after the "heavy rains" of 1258 to which PRO's article refers. Perhaps the 13th century event did occur, but it is NOT the historical "Black Death" Further information from Britannica states..."The next great plague pandemic was the dreaded Black Death of Europe in the 14th century." (2) Therefore since the PRO article refers to a 13th century event, and the Black Death was a 14th century event, CON has clearly shown the merits of his argument that the Black Death was NOT caused by a volcano. (1) ...https://www.britannica.com... (2)....https://www.britannica.com...
Famer's Story-writing debate tournament Round#1 Lannan13 vs. Mouthwash

(sorry I'm going to have to rush since I'm at work and I'm on lunch break.) The alarm went off, one of the guards must have hit it. I began racing down the hallway and began to see illusions. People that I knew or have seen was popping up everywhere. I went into a sprint as I turned the corner to begin down a long and dark hallway. There was Zachary and Charlie fighting it out. I sceemed and Charlie looked my way and when he did this Zachary took this oppertunity and cut through Charlie's neck with a pair of scissors. "NO!!!!!!!" I screemed at the top of my lungs and I fell to my knees in despare. Zach just smiled and at me then turned his attention back to Charlie, who had fallen on his back grasping his neck as blood was pouring out of his body. Zach took the scissors and raised them into the air and stabbed him right in his heart. Moments latter Charlie's gasps stoped and he stopped moving. He was dead. I rose to my feet and sprouted out my wings. Zach just stood up and smiled at me and said, "Tek-Tah-Lah mother fvcker." I looked back at him and maybe even stared. "That's right princess, we have seen your dreams, read you thoughts, and manipulated you into different situtations and now, dear, you have given us victory over God and your child!""My child! What have you done with it!" I yelled at him, as I threw a steel chair that was next to me against the wall which dented, but it didn't look like it phased him."He, has been transported away from his mother were he can be keep safe from harm... and were we can wire him up like a fvcken Christmas tree and run all the inhumane tests on him we want. Since he isn't a human. He's a fvcking freak, just like his mother." He snarled and mocked me. Things were beginning to seem suspicous, where were the other guards? I asked myself."He's not a freak and you have no right taking him from his mother, and as a matter of fact you didn't have any right taking me from my mother or getting me pregnent and violating the law." I blasted him with my words. He gave me the evil eye and I mean if looks could kill, I would be six feet under by now, but his exspression changed just as quickly as it had arrived making me doubt if I saw it at all and said, "The United States Constitution only applies to humans, which you are not." He brakes open a cabinent and grabs a sword that look an aweful lot light my Tek-Tah-Lah sword, except it didn't have the light blearing from it. He then charged at me.*************************************************************************************************To be continued.
Famer's Story-writing debate tournament Round#1 Lannan13 vs. Mouthwash

I was in a forested area. Light shinning through the trees and moss was growing on everything. I heard the sound of a rushing stream, but all didn’t feel right. Where am I? I thought to myself. Then he appeared. Charlie Aston, with that sexy grin, I tried to run to him but I couldn’t. “Charlie what are you doing here?” I asked as he came up and embraced me. “Shhh…. Listen I’m here for you now, baby.” He said, “Listen, I want you to promise me one thing, girl, just this one thing. Can you do this?” “Anything baby, but I’m not so sure if I can get much done, because I’m being held by the IOFOT somewhere.” I said, as he broke away from me.“The International Organization of Freaks.” The way Charlie said it sound more like a statement then a question. He turned and looked away and said something to himself. Then after what seemed like hours he turned back around and looked at me and said, “Listen, there isn’t much that it seems like that you can do you, but-” I cut him off and said, “Yah okay you’re telling me.” I meant it to sound sarcastic, but it made me sound very intimidated. He just grinned back at me and said, “Listen I know your secrate.” I stared back at him and even a stare, and looked to my right them back at him and whispered, “Ho..w do you know this?!” His grin just grew wider and he stated, “I know you, more then you know you. I’m your guardian angle here to protect you and to make sure that you don’t fall prey to the evils of this world. Truth is that you used to be an angle, but you gave your live to protect me…” He paused for a moment as tears started coming to his eyes. “So you died as an angle and become a special human…and demons posses humans to for such organizations inorder to seek out and forever silence the angles. You as a past angle, you can only use such abilities such as the wings, you have an incredible mind, but your most powerful wepon is you sword of just.” I look at him in disbelief, “And your telling me this why?” “Because once you die as a human you return to me and we can live together again. Hold out you hand.” I did as he said. “Tak-Tah-Lah.” As he said these words a bright light appeared in my hand and then the light turned into a sword. “This sword will only appear if you say these ancient words, but you can only use it on demons and people who are pure evil or else the sword won’t cut.” The whole forest began to shake and trees began to fall. “No! I been with you to long! Go my dear and free yourself only you can do it.” “No Charlie, I don’t know what to do CHARLIE!” I said and screamed as my dream faded to black. I woke up crying and I grabbed my pillow. “Why God, why.” “Everyone has a purpose to life,” said a voice in my head.
Manmade global climate change is real and a threat.

Your arguments are long and with little breaks between paragraphs. I'm going to ignore your response and attempt to talk through you. I lost any hope of convincing you when you stated. "Not only is the idea that Co2 is causing the recent warming preposterous, but it just doesn"t make any sense. " epidexipteryxThe temperature has increased .87 Celsius. [2] The 400 ppm mark was hit in 2013. "has reached 400 parts per million (ppm) for the first time in recorded history, according to data from the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii." [3]Impact, there is a clear and strong positive correlation between CO2 and tempature. To my opponent's arguments struggle as much as you need against scientific data. Thanks for the debate. Sources2. http://climate.nasa.gov...3. http://climate.nasa.gov...
Manmade global climate change is real and a threat.

I'm putting this under religion since people are talking faith based approaches to climate change.I have noticed that a surprising number of people still think global climate change is a hoax. I hope to destroy some of that myth. Pope Francis recognizes climate change and calls for swift action. [0]Impact: I think the Pope knows what he is doing and thus man-made global climate change is real and a threat.The scientific angle, inconvenient truth [1]. Impact, scientific evidence clearly backs up this claim in the documentary an inconvenient truth. [1]Sources0. http://www.nytimes.com...1. http://www.imdb.com...
Manmade global climate change is real and a threat.

Thank you for being honest and admitting you don't understand my arguments. Many people would not do that and it is a very honorable thing to do. I strongly encourage you to do your own research into both sides of the argument. That is what I did and ultimately found that the con side has a better argument. Two things that could help you get started in your research into the con side are these YouTube videos: 1. The Great Global Warming Swindle Full Movie ( I know this is long but if you have the time then watch at least some of it) 2. Climate Change in 12 minutes - the skeptics case These two sources are really great and show a lot of flaws in your side of the argument Sadly, I only saw them yesterday so I couldn't use their points in this debate :) Thank you for debating and I hope you look into both sides because there are legitimate reasons why people don't believe in man made global warming.
social media good for young children

I cannot agree with you more in the sense that it must be used appropriately but I do not believe that the benefits of Social Media in any way shape or form can outweigh the negatives aspects and dangers it Poses to children. The internet is a terrible place, filled with terrible people, when you allow children to access social media you are allowing children to be let into the same world as pedophiles and child predators. This is putting children in so much danger. Child pornography is already a major issue in today's society. As the topic of the debate implies, it will be YOUNG children that you propose will be using social media. Young children are not aware of the threats and risks of being online, they are the MOST vulnerable targets for these predators. Without proper education - We may be putting our Children in an enormous amount of danger by letting them online.
social media good for young children

The Internet is a web of information, and social media is no exemption. A report by Globe and Mail indicated that social media is actually making kids smarter. Aside from improved social skills, social media can also help improve cognitive abilities, like problem solving skills, comprehension, critical thinking, and memory. For example, they learn to critically discern which information is useful and which is not. In a related study, the e-Learning Foundation showed that children with Internet access at home get higher grade. In addition to helping school children with their research and assignments, the internet can also provide them with insights useful in their daily lives. When you log on to social media, you can find news events, helpful tips, the latest in music, movies, and sports, etc. Social media can help kids understand what's happening and what they need to know. Researchers from Iowa University found that pro-social video games, or games that require interaction via social platforms, can encourage better behavior and tolerance for others. The study revealed that kids tend to be more helpful after playing pro-social games. This is another reason why parents should allow their kids to use social media: children can become more compassionate and empathetic, and even feel like they have to protect their friends and share stuff with them. Pro-social video games can also reduce aggressive cognitions. Social media can help mitigate stress by providing an outlet through which children can express their disappointments, frustrations, and fears. It can also provide additional social support from a wide range of people. At the same time, social media can also be a means of distraction that can help children get over stressful experiences. Being part of a social network can make a child feel that he is part of something bigger than himself. The feeling of belonging to a network can help in building a child's self-belief and confidence, while also enhancing a child's sense of responsibility and connection to his "team". In a social network, kids can generate shared experiences with their friends and feel appreciated and loved. Social media is here to stay and yes, it can help. Allowing your kids to use social media comes with a list of pros and cons, but when parents commit themselves to providing guidance and watching over the child's online activities, social media can help in a child's development.
Quran has contradictions and discrepencies.

Rules:1. The source must be cited for every quote.2. Images are allowed to post verses from Quran as images (arabic only)3. The pro must post which translation of Quran he/she uses, so con can check it.4. Also, pro must show which translation of hadith he/she uses, so con can check it.5. Any verse(s) is (are) going to be quoted by pro, will be accepted as he/she knows how muslim scholars interpreted that (those) verse(s).6. In case pro or con violates rules, pro or con will recieve 7-point-loss.7. Because of pro posts the first argument, on last round he/she must post "No argument will be posted here as agreed."Definitions:Allah - One True GodProphet/Messenger - The person who is chosen by God to deliver The Message.Revelation - The Message which God reveales to prophet in order to guide people.Quran - The Last Revelation for all humankind.Hadith - Sayings, actions of Muhammed (pbuh) and things that he confirmed.If Pro wants to define something that is not on this list, he/she must post it first on Comment section, so that we can come to agreement on definition.The PRO must post the first argument, and burden of prove on him/her. Proof must be valid and sound.
Quran has contradictions and discrepencies.

First of all I did not say you should use or you could have used better translation, I just pointed out you are using Pickthall translation, which means the web site you were quoting from also uses Pickthall translation, obviously you were not aware of that. Secondly, I did not attack your argument, I said what is obvious, that you are using Copy-Paste argument. And I know the fact that you have to show at least 1 (one) contradiction, and you are entitled to your opinion, but facts are facts. So, let's go to the “contradictions”. 1. The verse 2.109 is talking about the People of Scripture, who will try to turn you away from the truth, and verse 9.28 is talking about Al-Masjid Al-Haram and idolaters of Mecca (after conquest of Mecca). And they are two separate issues. For example, If you try to turn me away from truth I will use 2.109, but if you try to enter Mecca I will use 9.28. By the way, “mushrik” means “the person who is in state of shirk” and “shirk” is “the establishment of partners placed beside God.” 2. About “the second contradiction,” I explained the adverbs and what you believe is irrelevant, we are dealing with facts here not belief. Do you speak Arabic or do you know any orientalist who agrees with your point (well, Google says there is none). 3. “The third contradiction” - 6.101 is speaking about offspring of two partners. God does not have any partner, therefor God does not have any offspring. God is Absolute and Eternal, therefor all attributes of God is absolute for eternity. I already explained this. Asking “Can God have son?” is equivalent to “can you draw triangle which is also circle at the same time?” It shows deficiency of the person who asks such question, not of the God, as God does not have any deficiency. 4.“And they will bid thee hasten on the Doom, and Allah faileth not His promise, but lo! a Day with Allah is as a thousand years of what ye reckon.” 22.47 “He directeth the ordinance from the heaven unto the earth; then it ascendeth unto Him in a Day, whereof the measure is a thousand years of that ye reckon.” 32.5 “(Whereby) the angels and the Spirit ascend unto Him in a Day whereof the span is fifty thousand years.” 70.4 As you read the verse 70.4 is talking about the angels and Spirit and “Day” (yawm) in these verses does not mean 24-hour-day, it means period (time period, or long period of time). So there is no contradiction here. 5. I already explained the issue of “forgiving” and you are still insisting and trying to make your point using the half of the verse by ignoring other half. Very “rational” thing to do. If a person is a disbeliever and deal in wrong when (s)he dies (s)he goes to hell, exception is if (s)he recognizes the truth and seeks forgiveness. 6. Pro tries to scrutinize my point, by saying therefor God is not needed anymore. If that is case then why don't we see it now in nature around as, and if it did happened by accident, surely it can be reproduced artificially in labs. Examine the following example: “I used ….. to make pie” (a) ….. water ….. (b) ….. flour ….. (c) ..... dough ….. How are these statements contradictory?! God Knows The Best.
Jesus Christ never existed and was created by Constantine

*victory lap* You did good. You did good. Maybe one day you can be just like me. I am Blaedz and I am living proof that dreams do come true. The best things in life cannot be seen; they can't be heard, they will be felt in your heart and all you have to do is #BLieve! Now I want every real American in this room to be stand and with your hands over your heart, in a clear loud voice, say it with me, "WE THE PEOPLE!"
Jesus Christ never existed and was created by Constantine

Well, I'm quite disappointed that you did not post an argument in the days you were given due to other's incapability to respect one another, but I truly hope this debate will still go on and that people will be more fair in their votings than bias. Anyways, in hope of the debate still going to be able to happen, I suppose I shall be the one to begin the opening argument. As mentioned in the comments, historians have come to the consensus that Jesus Christ was indeed a real historical figure (I truly hope you do not mind me not arguing about all the miracles Jesus had done, but just the mere existence of the Jesus of Nazareth), take historian's Bart Erhman's writing about Jesus for example where I felt like he had given a fairly good argument about why he believe's Jesus to have existed. Anyhow before the argument of ad-populum may appear in this debate, I will say that I would agree that would not mean he had existed if, this were not just agreement between historians that he had existed, but due to it being people who had dedicated their lives to a profession in studying history, a major agreement like the one historians had about Jesus existing is likely to mean he had existed. There is also another case that could be argued where Jesus was not created by any other type of god where it is said that the stories of these gods were not fully shared among the people around the time of the time of the publication of the Holy Bible and that there were little way of them knowing the full stories of these former gods. It wasn't even until we began to unbury these mysteries a few hundred years back that we ourselves were even full aware of the full story of these gods. We must always remember that correlation does not equate to causation when coming to conclusions of things. I truly hope that this debate does not end before it begins, so I'll also just stop there to give you a chance to have your say without me like dominating this whole thing, lol. So peace, mate.
Jesus Christ never existed and was created by Constantine

Well, kind sir, I know not what you mean when you say acceptance. If you mean whether or not I accept the challenge than I do accept your challenge, for I have never backed down from one in my lifetime, and don't plan on doing so with this. If you mean if I acknowledge that you too may have a view point on this topic and that it is not just the one that I hold than I accept that as well. I wish you the most of luck in this debate sir, for you may need it. I hold a very passionate view on this topic and I am willing to do all I can do to protect it.