BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Pro gaming should be considered a "sport"

Rebuttals. "It requires skill like other sports." and "clicking a mouse or hitting keys does require skill" Does walking require skill? No. Why? Because everyone who are able to use theirs feet and legs can walk. The same thing with clicking and hitting keys. Clicking a mouse and hitting keys does not require skill. Anyone who are able to use their hands and fingers can click a mouse and hit keys. For an action to be considered a skill, the person must be able to do it better than other people. skill - the ability to do something well; expertise Source: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... "It's competitive like other sports." I agree that gaming is sometimes competitive like other sports, but it does not require much physical activity. "It's like other sports." My third argument will answer this statement. "There are many sponsored Pro gaming teams by gaming hardware companies and game developers." You did not cite any sources or examples. "Playing video games at a Professional level requires skill and team coordination and thus should be considered a sport." Playing video games though hardly requires any physical activity which is one of the criteria for it to be considered a sport.
Pro gaming should be considered a "sport"

Since Pro did not lay down any definitions I will offer them. sport : a contest or game in which people do certain physical activities according to a specific set of rules and compete against each other professional : paid to participate in a sport or activity gaming : the activity of playing computer games Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com... http://www.merriam-webster.com... http://www.merriam-webster.com... I am arguing professional gaming (gamers paid to participate in tournaments, competitions, etc) should not be considered a sport (a contest or game in which people do certain physical activities). 1. Playing computer games is not a physical activity. A sport requires physical skill and ability. Anything where you're sitting still in a chair isn't a sport. The only physical attributes one needs for computer gaming is hand eye coordination and fingers that possess some form of dexterity, while real sports like basketball, soccer and tennis requires you to use your whole body. Therefore playing computer games is not a sport. 2. Their is no such thing as professional gaming. I never heard of someone investing their money on a gamer/team of gamers to play in a tournament. Gaming teams join tournaments for free or for with a fee. No one is paying them to participate in a tournament and they join tournaments to win and have fun. 3. Computer gaming are not like other sports. EA-sports is games about sports and does not mean that it is a sport. Computer gaming is a computerized game played by manipulating images on a video display or television screen. Sport is an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.
The Beatles are one of the greatest rock artists of all time

Con plagiarized all his arguments Unfortunately Con was too lazy to make up his own arguments and plagiarized his entire case from here . http://www.scaruffi.com... Even his first round was plagiarized though it was only until this round that I noticed. Every single word posted by Con is from the article and thus Con hasn't posted one authentic sentence besides the acceptance round. It would be absurd if I were obligated to refute the arguments since they cannot be counted anyway and that would force me to spend lengthy time researching and refuting a scholar when Con just copy and pasted. Therefore, I'll make known Con's blatant transgression of debate ethics and leave it to the voters to vote for the only reasonable choice here. Con dropped all my points Even if Con had not plagiarized, he hasn't responded once to anything I've said. All my arguments remain untouched; he's just talked past me.
The Beatles are one of the greatest rock artists of all time

The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success: the Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worth of being saved.
Political correctness is an issue in the U.S.

To begin the first example cited by the Pro was not an American example. The debate is over the idea that PC is an issue in the US, therefore this example should be disregarded. Furthermore, that is an example of a high school trying to make things more comfortable for some refugees in an academic environment. If the intention is for the refugees and others to receive high quality education, then an environment must be created in which everyone is able to learn comfortably. The example of colleges changing from "Freshmen" to first year is because the term Freshman is not an accurate term, and thus colleges have adopted a more accurate term. As more and more nontraditional students enroll in college, the word "freshman" does not adequately describe new students on campus. "First year" is a much more encompassing and flexible term. "Freshman" refers to the traditional, fresh-out-of-high-school student. While the word does not necessarily have a bad connotation, it is not truly representative of the population, which is a variety of students, including nontraditional, international, transfer, and traditional students beginning their first year on the college campus. While it could be said that the term is more correct, there is no political notion to this at all.
Political correctness is an issue in the U.S.

I'm not quite sure how to respond rather than I think we agree more than disagree on our oversensitivity epidemic, but I'm curious as to why you would describe political correctness as non-existent. Recently in Bavaria (although not in the U.S.), a refugee host school sent out a letter forbidding girls to wear revealing clothing due to the influx of Muslim refugees under the notion of "discrepancy." I see this kind of move as a hindrance rather than helpful. This is the kind of political correctness I am talking about. Or, many colleges forbidding the use of the term "freshmen," and instead using the term "first-year."
Political correctness is an issue in the U.S.

While at times it does seem that we are oversensitive in society today, there is no such thing as "political correctness." The term is nothing more than a pejorative, typically used by conservatives against liberals and leftists. So called "opponents" of political correctness are traditionally people who go on to say racist or xenophobic things, under the guise of opposing political correctness and multiculturalism. They claim they are the victims of the "PC Police", allowing them to justify their false victim mentality. To define what is correct in this world, we use several types of determinants. We use ethics and morals to justify what is right and wrong, we use the sciences to determine what is factual, but there is no special form of "political correctness." The example cited about the Starbucks incident only further proves my point. While the woman's reaction was extreme to a minor offense, this is simply oversensitivity. The mention of race in that instance was not actually necessary. The friend could have simply told the barista that the coffee belonged to the man in the blue shirt.
Political correctness is an issue in the U.S.

Political correctness is becoming increasingly ridiculous. Although the original idea of political correctness is good, I believe its effect has been harmful. I once heard a story from a friend about an experience she had at Starbucks. Laura had accidentally picked up the wrong coffee (before drinking it, of course), and almost immediately came back in the store to give it to its rightful owner. Laura explained to the barista that she had grabbed the wrong coffee and thought that it belonged to the man in front of her, saying, "I'm sorry, I picked up the wrong coffee. I think it belongs to the black man over there who was in front of me." After saying this, a lady who was standing near her began berating her because she "unnecessarily" brought up race. I fully disagree with this. Skin color should never be used against someone because it is not a bad thing at all, but it still exists. It is part of who we are. Laura was simply using it as a descriptor so the barista would know who she was talking about. Political correctness is so much more than simply race, but this story has stuck out to me and gives a general understanding of my issue with it. I also think that political correctness has made it so we as a society choose to avoid talking about race, religion, gender, etc. as a whole. The article I've listed below clearly presents my point of view. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
The Protastant Reformation Weakened the Christian Church

The Protestant reformation was the religious upheaval of the 16th century that lead to the disunity of Organized Christianity in the Western world. I am arguing that the fallout from the Protestant Reformation, and specifically the splintering of the Catholic church, lead to a politically, socially, and spiritually weaker Christian church (meaning organized Christianity. ) Social Weakness The fragmentation of the church caused by the protestant reformation drastically reduced the church's economic power; and thus their ability to promote social change through their various institutions, i. e schools, orphanages, hospitals, etc. The various denominations of economic power would be stronger combined than they are separated. Political Weakness The fragmented church caused by the protestant reformation lacks the unity needed to effect social change through democracy. One example is the divisions between Christian denominations about abortion. If their position was the same they would hold a larger voice in the political landscape of today. Spiritual Weakness The descent into denominationalism caused competition between the different churches. This competition urges the leaders of these churches to have doctrines that appeal to their congregations instead of doctrines that are meant to "save" their congregation. An example of this is the prosperity theology practiced by many denominations today.
Conspiracy I: The Philadelphia Experiments

>>Some quotes from still-living members of the USS Eldridge on 26 March, 1999: Ed Wise: "I think it's somebody's pipe dream" Ted Davis: "It never happened" Bill Van Allen: "I have not the slightest idea how these stories got started" Ray Perrino: "When people would ask me about it, I would play along with them and tell them I disappeared. After a while they realized I was pulling their legs" Mike Perlstien: "I tell them I know nothing about it. I've seen the movie, and it's a good movie, but there's no truth to it" (Philadelphia Inquirer) As you can see, the crew of the Eldridge considers the whole notion of the Philadelphia experiment to be false and in some cases, even humorously so.<< This has already been negated. "The most recent reports from Lt. Col. Philip Corso, reprinted on Dr. Steven Greer's CSETI website, indicate that almost everything in the description of the Philadelphia Experiment was true, except that in order to protect the story, a different ship was used than the one normally described to the public. The actual ship was a minesweeper, not a destroyer. Therefore, it makes sense when aging crewmembers of the Destroyer Escort U.S.S. Eldridge were queried about this, they remembered nothing of the sort. Although the evidence now suggests that the Eldridge was not the ship, we are told that the experiment itself apparently did occur." - David Wilcock >>[according to himself] "...one of two sailors who fell through time from the 1940's to 1988... and alien technology was used by secret government agencies to erase [Ed Duncan] from his own time track and give him the body and background of Al Bielek." Right. Because people really fall through time and have alien technology used to transport them into another body. Law of parsimony states that Bielek is lying.<< When you are traveling through hyperspace, it is rather likely that you might end up in a different time period because you are outside of space-time. Sources say that aliens provided the technology for the experiment, so it's no surprise that the aliens were there to help him switch bodies. In conclusion, all my opponent had for evidence was crew members and captains who were not even aboard the actual ship that was used in the experiment. The Eldridge was not the ship used, it was a minesweeper, but the public is told it was the Eldridge to protect the story.
Conspiracy I: The Philadelphia Experiments

I'm afraid this debate has turned into a he said / she said argument. I'm arguing that the survivors who were victims of the experiment testified that various advanced scientific experiments took place. He is citing captains who deny all of this. He's trying to make my direct sources look like attention seeking liars. Though one must ask, what would be the motive to lie about such a thing if no financial benefit is involved, and, if anything, damages your reputation. My opponent is citing captains who are making their own claims by denying it ever happened. In this case, lying makes sense as it is part of a government cover-up trying to keep the public ignorant of advanced technology. Also, sources say that the experiments took place because Einstein completed his Unified Field Theory, but Einstein contended that it would be used for purposes other than helping humanity and decided to conceal the theory. This would make absolute sense as to why the captains would lie. My opponent also failed to explain the following vital questions concerning the experiment: - Why were the families of several crewmembers being told that their relative sailors died that night? - Why did the entire rest of the crew involved receive discharges from the Navy for being medically unfit? These questions can be answered by simply accepting that the Philadelphia Experiments took place and that they were victims of the horrifying events. If not, my opponent must provide a valid answer to these questions.
Conspiracy I: The Philadelphia Experiments

I will argue my position using direct evidence to prove that the Philadelphia Experiments were not a hoax and that various anomalies did occur. Direct evidence is defined as "testimony/other proof which expressly or straight-forwardly proves the existence of a fact. Direct evidence is evidence which, if believed, proves the existence of the fact in issue without inference or presumption. It is evidence which comes from one who speaks directly of his or her own knowledge on the main or ultimate fact to be proved, or who saw or heard the factual matters which are the subject of the testimony." [1] *Let me note that there is an experiment called the Montauk Project which is an extension of the Philadelphia Experiment. I will use some of the following Philadelphia Experiment/Montauk survivors, witnesses, and scientists as direct evidence: Survivors/Witnesses: - Al Bielek - Duncan Cameron - Preston Nichols - Stewart Swerdlow - Larry James - Carlos Allende Scientists: - Dr. James Corum - Dr. Albert Einstein - Dr. Jon Von Neumann - Dr. Nikola Tesla To affirm that the USS Eldridge was teleported, eye witness Carlos Allende confirms that the USS Eldridge was teleported from Philadelphia to Norfolk and back again in a matter of minutes. [2] Another aspect of the Philadelphia Experiment was individual time travel. Survivor Al Bielek was a participant in a time travel experiment and was transported to the future. He suffered from brainwash which led him to believe his name was Al Bielek when his real name was Edward Cameron. His brother Duncan Cameron was also sent to the future by jumping off the ship when it was in hyperspace and was sent from 1943 to 1983 in Montauk, NY. [2] [3] The Philadelphia Experiment was conducted in 1943 and the Montauk Project was conducted in 1983. This means that some of the time travelers of the Philadelphia Experiment were transported to 1983 during the Montauk Project. Survivor Stewart Swerdlow was a victim of the Montauk Project who had his psionic abilities boosted, but as a result, suffered from post-traumatic stress disorders. [4] At Montauk, his memory was wiped, but the technology was flawed and his memory slowly returned. [3] Swedlow said it was a horrifying experience, as did many other survivors. Some suffered from side effects of being frozen in time, traveling through hyperspace, and multidimensional travel. When a Deep Freeze (frozen in time) occurred, crew members would turn invisible and would be "stuck" for several days or even months and this lead to madness and insanity. Stewart Swerdlow said that denying the Montauk Project is like denying the Holocaust as only 1% of participants survived. In conclusion, I have demonstrated that time travel, insanity, and teleportation did occur and that the Philadelphia Experiment was not a hoax based on the consistent survivor accounts of the event. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://www.philadelphia-experiment.com... [3] http://www.bielek.com... [4] http://www.crystalinks.com...
Conspiracy I: The Philadelphia Experiments

The proposition on offer is that the events known as the Philadelphia experiments included the disappearance, insanity, time travel, and/or teleporting of the USS Eldridge. ****************************************** Synopsis (http://en.wikipedia.org...) "Supposedly a destroyer escort, the USS Eldridge, was fitted with the required equipment at the naval yards in Philadelphia. Testing began in the summer of 1943, and was successful to a limited degree. One test, on July 22, resulted in the Eldridge being rendered almost completely invisible, with some witnesses reporting a "greenish fog" in its place. However, crew members complained of severe nausea afterwards. At that point, the experiment was altered at the request of the Navy, with the new objective being invisible solely to radar. None of this has been substantiated. The theory continues that the equipment was not properly re-calibrated, but in spite of this the experiment was performed again on October 28. This time, Eldridge not only became entirely invisible, but actually vanished from the area in a flash of blue light and teleported to Norfolk, Virginia over 200 hundred miles away. There it sat for some time in full view of men aboard the ship SS Furuseth, whereupon the Eldridge vanished from their sight and reappeared in Philadelphia at the site it had originally occupied, in an apparent case of accidental teleportation. It was also said that the boat traveled back in time for 10 seconds." ************************************************* Facts supporting the notion that the Philadelphia Experiment did not include the elements above: 1) The logs from the Eldridge during this time period are available on microfilm NRS-1978-26 and do not confirm the above story [1]. 2) The ship was not in Philadelphia at the alleged time of the incident [1]. 3) The ship never made port in Philadelphia in 1943 [1]. 4) Lieutenant Junior Grade William S. Dodge, master of the Andrew Furuseth denies he or his crew saw anything unusual in Norfolk [1]. 5) The Eldridge and the Furuseth were never in Norfolk at the same time [1]. 6) "Bill Van Allen, 84, who was executive officer and then captain of the Eldridge in 1943 and 1944, said he never saw any sign of experiments aboard the ship" [2]. 7) The story of the Eldridge is probably confused with that of the Engstrom, which underwent degaussing and retrofitting in 1943 [3] 8) The supposed green mist of the event is probably simply a case of St. Elmo's Fire (http://en.wikipedia.org...). [1] http://www.history.navy.mil... [2] Philadelphia Inquirer, 26 March 1999 [3] http://www.rense.com... *************************************************** The culmination of these facts supports the conclusion that the Philadelphia Experiments were did not involve teleportation, invisibility, insanity, etc... related to the supposed synopsis of the Philadelphia Experiments. In fact, no records in the Naval Archives actually make mention of a procedure by this name, suggesting that the incident is entirely a hoax. NEGATED.
Near death experiences are scientifically explainable

Most medical institutions worldwide agree that near death experiences or NDEs for short are the hormonal death throes of a persons subconscious when that said person is either close to death or dying. There are also a number of reasons as to why a persons firsthand recollection of an NDE could either be fake or completely unreliable due to the age of the person, their mental health and ulterior motives to lie. Although I do believe that people actually see things during an NDE but I think that what they see has a completely scientific explanation that is not supernatural. Medical professionals do not believe that they exist, not to mention that the caucasian christians who experience NDE's see completely different things then people who live in different non-christian countries see when they have NDE's.