BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Exsistance of Extraterrestrial Life

The topic that my opponent has chosen, has no exact proof of the Existence of Aliens. I will try to provide as much evidence as I can to prove that Extraterrestrial Life is not real. Doing so, is no easy task, so Its a challenge for me. To my opponent: The Existence of Extraterrestrial Life, cannot be debated, there is no exact evidence that they exist or not. I am afraid that this Debate cannot be continued. I have made research, and according to all sources and mathematical procedures of life out there are extremely low. This debate might me very much easier for you since you believe that extraterrestrial life exist. I recommend looking for another topic that might interest you, but debating if aliens exist or not, there is no evidence. Its impossible to debate.
Exsistance of Extraterrestrial Life

I will try to take two standing in my argument. One mathematical and the other my own observations. I would also like to say that alien in a general term means some form of life from another planet. Life can mean anything from a creature like us or something as microscopic as bacteria. I do not believe that aliens fly around abducting people. If there is intelligent life out there, I believe that they may be at the same level of technology that we are. Because we are nowhere near planet-to-planet travel, I don't think they are either. If we can hardly get to our moon and back, how can another species move to us? We know that Earth obviously is a planet with life. It has a great amount of water and oxygen, with a wide range of life. We have also observed that it is in a special place called the Goldilocks Zone, which has the perfect temperature to support life. This is only one planet in a solar system around one star. There are thousands of billions of stars out in the universe. The odds of just one if them having as simple of life as bacteria is huge. There is a mathematical formula called the Drake Equation that goes as followed: N=R " Fp " Ne " Fl " Fi. This means that for every star formed, there is an amount of planets that can support life. Then it goes on to the fraction that can actually support life, the time the planet has existed, and the chances of it forming intelligent life. This goes to show that even if there is only thee or more planets that can meet the standard, there is a chance of intelligent life. All the numbers make since.
Homework Should Be Banned

In response to your no. 1 argument:That study is rather outdated: and since we have been doing much more homework. 6% of students in grades 3-12 in 2007 do 3 or more hours per night [1], which is a large amount compared to a study done in 2003, where a graph showed that about 8% of students in grades 3-12 do 2 or more hours per night [2]. There has been an increase of homework amount since then [3], and it is not deniable. Also, students from (ages) 6-8's workload was more than doubled from 1981 to 1997 [3]. In response to your no. 2 argument:While I agree that homework can be a good way to assess where students are in their understanding of the subject, I do not agree that homework is far less stressful, and I am skeptical on your argument about a lot of homework not being graded. In a poll done by Gallup: [4]As for the graded/ungraded homework: it usually depends on the teacher's policy. Some may not grade it at all, some may grade it for correct/incorrect answers, and some will just give a perfect grade if it was done. And mistakes can be found in exercises during class, and the student and teacher can work on that. Homework is not needed for finding mistakes if exercises on the same subject are done during class.In response to your no. 3 argument:You said the homework is repetitive, and that teaches a lesson about working adults: "Many professional workers feel that their existence is filled with repetitive, useless work. This puts a lot of stress on them." How would this lesson help then? We shouldn't want to make students stressed about homework, even if it means not showing them what working is like.You also said that homework only takes 2 hours, while a work day takes 8. But many people forget the rest of the day. While adults spend 8 hours at work, they spend about 1 hour per day at lunch. Students spend about 7 hours per day at school, and spend about 40-50 minutes at lunch. Then they have 2 hours of homework, and they have spent over 8 hours doing schoolwork, whereas an adult worked for 7. And long term projects and reports can serve a much larger lesson than 30 math questions. They have to compile information, and make sometimes presentations. Many businessmen do similar work, scientists always have to research, people based in political matters have to do research and sell what they think. Even teachers have to use presentation skills while teaching their students.Failing tests can put a load of stress on a student, but 2 hours of homework adds to it. They do have negative experiences, so there should be no rush to add to them.The lonely road example makes little sense to me: practice doesn't help in keeping calm. I also don't know how students can practice keeping calm in those situations, and I don't think no homework will make them curl into a ball when presented with work. Nor do I think they will run aimlessly into the woods, with their arms flailing.Sources:[1]: http://www.theatlantic.com...[2]: http://hss.cmu.edu...[3]: http://www.wave3.com...[4]: http://www.gallup.com...
Homework Should Be Banned

I believe homwork should be banned for a few reasons: 1. It can put too much stress on the child and family. 2. The stress may cause a decrease in performance in school. 3. When students don't have the teacher they may not have enough help. Professor Sue Hallam of the Institute of Education at London University believes much of the friction for families is caused by increased amounts of formal written school work coming home [1]. Hallam has studied homework extensively. It is possible that too much homework causes too much stress, and subsequently lowered grades and test scores. The University of Virginia did a study on students with a lot of homework: and they found it was detrimental: except for students who said they do a half hour or more of math homework every night. Their math grades and test scores rose in math, but everything else got worse or stayed about the same [2]. Elizabeth Truss, who is a member of England's Parliament, and is in control of England's education system, delievered a speech at the Oxford Conference of Education about replacing homework with more math lessons at school, and scrapping time-wasting lessons to make the time [3]. She wants this in England because they are falling behind countries such as China. They believe it will help improve test scores so they can catch up with China. The US is also in a similar situation (falling behind China), yet we have yet to even think about a large reform, even though our system is outdated, being called a "mid-twentieth century factory" by some. Homework is not really needed if the US reforms because they can do what Elizabrth Truss wants to do in England and more: they want to cut out time-wasting lessons: the US can cut out time-wasting subjects, such as health and PE. Homework would just be an exercise done at the last few minutes of class, and teachers would be able to help in some subjects such as science. And finally, a student would do better with teacher help rather than having to do things on their own. This argument is based off of opinion and it seems it cannot be backed by sources. It is opinion based. And my opinion is that students may be assigned things they don't understand, and because there is more homework being assigned today than 50 years ago, and the homework is harder, many people don't put much thought to it. But a high school critical thinking problem given to a 7th grader may make the student stuck. They cannot ask their teacher for help when at home, and if they go into school the next day with the problem blank or horribly incorrect, some teachers may make the student redo the homework, and mark it late. The student's grade would then suffer because the teacher was not there to help. [1]: . http://m.bbc.com... [2]: . http://www.newsplex.com...?
Homework Should Be Banned

I EDITED THE ORIGINAL DEBATE, HOPEFULLY IT HELPS MAKE CON'S ARGUMENT NOT IMPOSSIBLE.Structure of rounds:1: Acceptance2: Opening/argument; no rebuttal by con3: Rebuttals; no defense by con4: Defense of original arguments; closing statements; no rebuttals; no new information.Rules:1. No trolling2. Follow the structure3. No personal attacks (ex: "You're a f***tard")Any rule-breaking should result in all 7 points going to the side that did not break the rules. These are very simple rules.Topic: Homework, whether seen as worthwhile or seen non-vital homework should be banned from school.NOTES & CLARIFICATIONS1. Studying for a test should not count as homework. Therefore a student can do assignments such as "study-guides" at home before an exam.2. This is for pre-assigned work: meaning it was planned the students would have to do work at home.3. IF this became law, note that teachers would not be allowed to over-assign so students would have to work at home.4. Does not include long-term assignments (book reports, science labs, oral reports, reading books assigned to the class, etc.)5. Non-vital homework should be seen as assignments that do not help a student's understanding of the assignments (i.e. crossword puzzles [believe it or not they do sometimes show up in higher grades]).6. The assignments that can be seen as homework include worksheets, writing assignments, etc.7. I MADE THIS IMPOSSIBLE TO ACCEPT: IF YOU WANT TO ACCEPT: PLEASE NOTIFY ME THROUGH THE COMMENTS AND I WILL SELECT AN OPPONENT. I MEAN NO DISRESPECT TO WHOEVER I DO NOT CHOOSE.Final thought:I hope this is going to be very interesting.
Should middle school students be allowed to leave campus for lunch.

Confining students to only a certain area off campus may have some benefits, but it would raise some issues as well. Keeping students in small areas could cause harm to business in the area. Students would be highly concentrated in restaurants, parks, or whatever spaces are available to them, creating unnecessary disruption. Considering it is not absolutely necessary for students to use those facilities, it is better to leave them for the public. You also mention having the kids earn money. It would be difficult for most kids to earn the money it would cost to eat out, which after adding tax and tip could amount to 8 or 9 dollars for just one meal. The expense of eating out could lead to most kids just purchasing junk food, or whatever is cheap, which usually tends to be unhealthy. More health conscious kids would simply leave for lunch less often, which would mean fewer people, again raising the safety issue. The other alternative is eating your home lunch off campus, which most students would probably do, leading us back to the issue of confining students to small areas. You say that letting kids eat off campus will help them learn responsibility. I believe that with the walking off campus, restaurant wait times and other distractions, it is going to be hard for students learn to responsibly get back on time. By the time it takes for the students to learn, a lot of class time could have been wasted, and will be wasted, as new students repeat the process. Never mind the problems with hiring a crossing guard, just being off campus away from majority of the staff is sure to increase risk. In response to what you said about little variation in school lunch, a simple solution would be bringing home lunch, or ordering a takeout the day before. Letting students go off campus for lunch creates to many issues and complications without giving enough reason compensate for them.
Should middle school students be allowed to leave campus for lunch.

All very true. But if they may have certain restaurants they can go to near buy it would be easier. Say they let students go to McDonald's Carl's junior and taco bell. That is only three places a student could be . Kids would also probably need to earn the money to be able to go out. So they can start learning how to earn money. They would also have to learn responsibility which is very important. They need to return at a certain time or there will be a punishment such as detention. Students would have the choice. Although it could be dangerous there are many ways to keep a student safe. Like having a crossing guard. Most students have phones. I want a phone but even if students don't have a phone of they go in a group some son probably has one. That is a another way to stay safe. Staying in groups. Some one would not try to do much harm when there are five mistaking together. Lunch food at schools get old. It is the same schedule every month. You eat pizza every other Friday once a month you get corn dogs. It gets very old. If you go to a fast food place you actually eat what you want. Also if a student lives close buy they should be able to go home and have a meal there. That would help with safety and time management. If there parents are home they could drive them back to school on time. That is why I believe that all middle school students should be allowed to go off campus for lunch. Thank you
Should middle school students be allowed to leave campus for lunch.

Although having the option of eating out will save the school lunch program money, it will still not save a lot of money. On a typical day, over 70% of the kids eating school lunch received free or reduced price lunches. This means that if around 70% or more kids eating school lunch depend on the school lunch program to provide their children with a meal, and the federal spending is almost 10 times higher on a free or reduced lunch compared to a paid lunch, then if all the kids eating a paid lunch never ate school lunch again federal spending on the school lunch program would not be much lower. In addition, even though outside food may taste better, it can be very unhealthy. There are standards imposed on lunches funded by the National School Lunch Program that guarantees one third or more of your Recommended Dietary Allowance of key nutrients. There are no such regulations on restaurants. Another issue is time. It takes time to wait at restaurants could easily take up much of lunch time. What if students have not finished their meal or not even received it, are the teachers going to walk into restaurants rounding people up? Even students not eating in restaurants could have trouble remembering when to leave. To cap it off, there is no way to guarantee the safety of students of students outside the school. You could have the students stick together but it will be even harder to control students in an environment with more distractions and higher risk. People could very easily scatter or get lost. Allowing kids to go off campus for lunch is not just unpractical, it could even be dangerous. http://frac.org...
Should middle school students be allowed to leave campus for lunch.

I believe that seventh graders should be able to leave the campus for lunch first of all the school would be saving some money by knelt having to by as much food for meals. Second students usually don't like lunch food. For me I don't like it and I do want to leave campus for lunch. Especially since there is a fast food place right next door! Third we are responsible for ourselves. If we are in a group no me should try to harm us. Especially if they could have school crossing guards come about at lunch hour there would be no troubles.
Limericks!! LOL!!

Sir, your sex life has nothing to do with this Let's step back and do an analysis. Your rhyming has made little to no sense. In fact, all you've tried to do is cause offense, Now allow me to send away your feeble attempts with a kiss. You see, friend, This is the definition of the end For your arguments and thoughts They're all jumbled in many, many knots I'm not sure which way they'll bend. You can sit there and "lol" But trust me, I'm the one having a ball. Before you step to bat with words, Please try to use something that isn't for the birds And once you've managed to do that, give me a call. Apologize all you want, I won't forgive your taunt It was terrible conduct And I won't try to accept what you call a product When all you can do is flaunt For you see, deity, While you sit there and try to beat me I'm pulling out the big gun You know, the one that makes it so you don't have fun And oh boy, is it dreamy. I wish for once you'd take one debate seriously All you do is rant and rave imperiously Hoping to be heard by the site Only to be told to go fly a kite If only they'd listened to you previously Because you weren't always this way At one point you had some sway Then you said the wrong thing, You pulled the wrong string And now you've been left to decay. If you returned to how you were, And weren't quite like a burr Stuck in the side of every one here All of your fellow debaters might lend you their ear And they'd listen as you purr. I wish I could help you a bit more But at this point, I've cut right at your core And I've seen you for who you really are. So next time, before trying to "raise the bar," Do us all a favor and, when you're on your way out, don't get hit by the door. You see, I'm codemeister13 And with my quick wit, I'm quite keen. I'll put you in your place Faster than you can get a look on your face I'm so nimble and quick, unlike the world has ever seen. So let's wrap this up, mon When it's all finished, you know I'm the don Of our little limerick mob.
Limericks!! LOL!!

Get off your SOAP BOX, child! My sex life is WILD you slipped on the box and landed on a fox and got him all riled! My hair is beautiful your TOILET is overflow ing and gushing see my internal RHYMING? I kick you with my GREAT TOE!!! codemeister13? sounds like a SEX SCENE you and your mom and your uncle tom ALL DROWNING INT HE LATRINE!!! Im sorry im crude i dont mean to be rude please accept apologies lets play monopoly after we both strip NUDE VOTE FOR ME NOT CODY! hes stupid and dumb with his head in his bum and his bum is all jiggly You say pound for pound? I'll pound you on the ground BAM BAM BAM SORY MAAAAN hear the echoing sound LOL!!! my opponent WILL LOSE BECAUSE I RAPED HIS RHYMES!! FIGURARTIVELY OF COURSE!!
Limericks!! LOL!!

It appears that my rhyme scheme wasn't proper in the previous round. Allow me to make an adjustment here. *ahem* You sit there trying to insult me Yet all I can see is poultry This man sitting there With the short brown hair You're about to know cuckoldry I wish I could refute But your rhymes are so cute The way you think they make sense But trust me, you'd have to be dense To think that your points are anything but moot Now it's my turn To go dealing sick burns Step into the flames We aren't playing games Don't worry, your ashes will go into the urn You're with the FBI? Oh my You're more sick than I thought I'll start making the soup in my pot And pour it upon you from the sky Sir, before you come back next round And try to match me, pound for pound Take a look at your rhymes Because I haven't the time For a man who can't get his arguments off the ground.
Limericks!! LOL!!

Do you know what limericks are, child? Your RHYMING SCHEME IS WILD!!! You should go to school because your FACE LOOKS LIKE A TOOL!!! And your words are wimpy and mild LOL, listen pupil do you know how to use google? you type in words and find pictures of turds and eggs and steak and bugles A LIMERICK is a certain rhyme, dick If you dont understand that dont know what I get at watch as i do a card trick I put your head in the deck stuff it in my pocket like a bank check say ABRA CADABRA TAKE SOME VIAGRA and pull your head off your neck Go cry like a baby your biased fake atheist christian voters cant sway me i'LL BEAT YOU UP BOY LIKE I DID IN ILLINOIS I'm an FBI agent whos eighty
Limericks!! LOL!!

Here it is folks, the man of the hour Who thinks he has all of the power But what does he not know Is that I am his foe. Look here at this deity He believes he can beat me In a battle of rhymes, he does say I do wonder how much he does pray For I will be bringing the pain And all of this shall end in nothing more than my gain. So come along my dear friend Come this way as you meet your end And I will show you what it means To go against the master poet in his late teens.
Global Alarmists (aka liberals) are causing the global food crisis.

You know what? It doesn't matter whether global warming is man-made or not. I can prove my point without it. "I agree that food shortages have been happening for the last half-century, but the recent food crisis of the last 5 or so years has been drastically worse (notice the riots and deaths over food shortages in Haiti and other countries). I attribute this VASTLY to the global warming alarmists, who are apparently more concerned about the sun than they are about the people." The topic isn't whether global alarmists are making the problem worse, it's that they're causing it. This argument is irrelevant, because all you're proving is that they're making the problem worse, not that they're causing the problem. If the problem has been happening since before global warming was ever theorized, then obviously global alarmists didn't cause it. And even so, it's not necessarily them that's making the problem worse. It's people trying to find a balance between resources, and trying to reduce dependency on oil. (And, in turn, reduce economic dependency on foreign countries and reduce pollution. I think you'll agree that controlling pollution is a major concern whether or not global warming exists and is man-made. After all, it doesn't matter how much food you have if you can't breath the air.) "The problem is that governments are using the battle cry of global warming hysteria to subsidize and take over the wheat and corn fields, driving up demand and prices in food, ALL IN THE NAME OF GLOBAL WARMING. " You've provided no link of evidence for this. Claiming that they're using global warming as a tool to reduce the world's food supply (Which, by the way, doesn't make sense) isn't sufficient to prove it. This is not a self-justifying clause. However, I can give evidence that it is simply scarcity of resources. Thomas Malthus first predicted this problem IN SEVENTEEN HUNDRED NINETY-EIGHT. Why? Because food production cannot possibly keep up with population growth. So, what is the problem here? Overpopulation. This is just natural "economics" evening things out. So, in a way, a food shortage is a positive. It thins out population when it becomes overextended. So remember: Ethanol reduces pollution, which is important whether or not global warming exists. Overpopulation is the actual problem, and this is just nature correcting it. He hasn't even supported the topic, that global alarmists have CAUSED the food crisis. At best, he's proven that they've made it a little worse, and maybe sped Mother Nature up. And I refuse to respond to condescending insults that is nothing more than partisan slander. If you want to be taken seriously, quit blaming everything on liberals. If it wasn't for liberal thought, you wouldn't even be allowed to debate.