BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Where did God come from? A dream, a lie, and an explanation

"Why did you post an argument that's not even yours?" Typical teeny bopper 17 year old question proving once again that you are a teeny bopper and your thinking is at that level and cannot think as an adult. The answer dimwitted dullard snot meat sow is simple is because the article poses a lot of very good ideals that no person who believes in god can legitimately answer thus pinning that iiot, like yourself to the floor and never letting him up for oxygen. Duh. "And besides, your past comments show that your answers have a plethora of misspellings, improper grammar usage," Who cares? I never stated my se habla ingles was very good. But one thing for sure smutty lethargic tinsel mind is that I have my own language in which no one can copy, so I"m proud of it. Now what exactly do you have going for you? Oh let"s ee"s chip off the ole big black blank bumbling blubbering boring boredom which bores a boring bore, namely yourself, nothing but a snoose from a granny fart. Ah yes, The Atheist Republic runs some very good articles every now and then, oh I get it you only pay attention to those websites that are popular. So that means you pay attention to the most corruptible company that this country has ever seen, namely the NRA which is failing and fading fast. Ah yes, you pay attention to Donald Trump, the worst scummiest president of all time who has the lowest rating of any president ---ever---. You only pay attention to popularity which doesn"t matter a damn as compared to quality in which your fricken teeny bopper used con-dumb hourglass with a princess inside to grant you your three dishes, doesn"t get. Oh and btw, according to what? "It's not even in the top 200,000 websites, unlike some other atheist [and Christian] ones)." You? How would you know? What grade of teeny bopper 17 year old concrete parachuting classes that uses a battery powered easy bake oven so you can learn to bake and fry water did yah come up with that one? "Anyway, most of "your" arguments are based on pure speculation, not actual fact." Well Wowzers yah yodeling Buddhist monk, lookie there its time for me to end this glorious debate and declare myself the automatic winner. That"s because YOU nor ANYONE has yet to prove YOUR god"s existence of any kind. NOT EVER. That"s actual fact. If yah don"t like it, too bad, deal with it. Yah just lost. And I can see those sniveling little bloated screaming tears of rotted anger teething away trying to justify a meager truly lost hope. I truly love idiot schmucks like you know 0% of nothing. Bye.
Where did God come from? A dream, a lie, and an explanation

Why did you post an argument that's not even yours? And besides, your past comments show that your answers have a plethora of misspellings, improper grammar usage, and more of the like, so even if you didn't say that this was taken from the Atheist Republic, a website (with a funny front page, I'll give it that) that isn't that reputable (It's not even in the top 200,000 websites, unlike some other atheist [and Christian] ones). Anyway, most of "your" arguments are based on pure speculation, not actual fact. For instance, "you" say that humans were presented with a logical conundrum. There isn't any proof for that. You can't actually prove that this happened without a time machine, which I would like God to drop out of the sky right now, but He has His ways, and it's best if I don't have one. We all know that we've dreamt (if we're awake enough) after the fact, and sometimes DURING the fact, even if we have no prior knowledge that dreams aren't real. Luckily, I haven't had anyone (that I can remember well, anyway) die in my life so far, however, it seems that people do see dreams of dead people, but still can't make head or tail of it. I'll give you that much. Humans are selfish. In "your" last paragraph, "you" say that the Shaman and Ruling class probably recognized the potential. Again, that is pure speculation, but I'll go along with it. Anyway, it doesn't seem likely. Why? Because if there's one con man, there are bound to be more con men. I'm sure that there have been usurpers along the line, so if you can sway a bunch of people the first time, why can't you sway them again? Not because the people thought that the first person, whoever they were, was correct because it's highly likely, that in this highly unlikely event, a person would immediately raise a contradiction, and say that they're a god. So where do I think God (the God of the Christians, Catholics, and to a large extent the Jews and Mormons) come from? I think that he actually, truly, exists, and is betting on a winner- *AHEM*, watching me right now.
Where did God come from? A dream, a lie, and an explanation

Sure, I'll prove my sources. I used Alexa ratings - the ratings that, if you would have bothered to check, show that T.A.R. isn't in the top 200,000 websites. I check my sources, and websites like that (I've learned through experience) aren't websites you can always trust. ***I didn't vote for Trump, and the NRA isn't something that I support at all***. You're inferring things that aren't meant to be inferred. You use a lot of sayings, which account for 26% of your entire... rampage. You do realize that a person who, in your own words, "17 year old ... using a battery powered easy-bake oven to bake and fry water", shouldn't be able to verify his sources and do his research (and realize that you pulled this exact same trick on another, very sane person). Zero percent of nothing is a nonreal answer - something a "17 year old concrete parachuting classes" (whatever that means) shouldn't know about. So you've basically just complimented me there - "I truly love idiot schmucks like you (who have a nonreal amount of knowledge, which .00/0 is, which means you've called my knowledge infinite). Bye." So you're giving up? Be a man (or a woman, or whatever) and don't run away like a coward LIKE YOU DID WITH THE PREVIOUS GUY! If you forfeit, I win. So it's your call.
Celebrity diss contest

Sorry about last round, I'll post 2 celebs' worth if that's ok... Ok, that's ok... ;)http://www.youtube.com...Pewdiepie:Overrated geek, pathological freak,Posting vids of yourself screaming every single week,Your hairstyle needs a tweak, your persona is meek,View count high but less than all the sperm cells you eat.Pink Guy (the alter ego of Filthy Frank):You spasm every video, come up with stupid crap,Put more stupid crap together and call it a rap,Talk about p***y but the only aciton you get's a fap,No wonder you frequently give yourself a slap.http://www.youtube.com...http://www.youtube.com...Reference explained:Pink guy sometimes raps and spometimes has spasm vids, so I dissed both.Disclaimer:I find filthy Frank and his alter ego PInk Giy hilarious. My favourite rap of their is 'kill yourself', which is my third video.Non-Disclaimer:I genuinely think pewdiepie is overrate as f***. :)
Labor unions

I failed last debate so I will do better this time. Basically a re-match. 1. Help pay workers more Raise wages for all workers. Studies show that a large union presence in an industry or region can raise wages even for non-union workers . http://www.americanrightsatwork.org... The union membership rate for public sector workers (36.2 percent) was substantially higher than the rate for private sector workers (6.9 percent). In 2010, among full-time wage and salary workers, union members had median usual weekly earnings of $917, while those who were not represented by unions had median weekly earnings of $717. . http://www.bls.gov... more pay = good no? 2. more leverage unions allow employees to band together to negotiate for better wages and benefits, and to make sure that everyone is being treated fairly by the employer. . http://www.proconlist.com... I believe more pay would be good for the US economy. Because reward = good right? 3. Create jobs Created jobs for hundreds of people and immigrants. . http://www.proconlist.com... Benefit local economic development. In partnerships with employers, community organizations, and local governments, unions have helped revitalize local economies by saving and expanding family-supporting jobs. . http://www.americanrightsatwork.org... 4. raise overall minimum wage Advocate for increases in the minimum wage and push for living wage ordinances. Unions have been instrumental in efforts to increase the federal minimum wage, state minimum wages and in the successful living wage movement which has already resulted in over 150 local living wage laws nationwide. . http://www.americanrightsatwork.org... conclusion: labor unions are good. Also if there is a link under the paragraph then it was copy and pasted.
Labor unions

1) Higher wages higher unemploymentI will use min wage as an example:Economists have studied the job-destroying features of a higher minimum wage. Estimates of the job losses of raising the minimum wage from $4.25 to $5.15 have ranged from 625,000 to 100,000 lost jobs. It is important to recognize that the jobs lost are mainly entry-level jobs. By destroying entry-level jobs, a higher minimum wage harms the lifetime earnings prospects of low-skilled workers. [1]c/p from source. This means that the higher wage increaces unemployment, like the labr unions. Same concept. 2) Never said it out soruced. Also is is from your source:However, unions often offer resistance to new work processes that might increase efficiency, and not just ones that would decrease labour demand. [2]So it makes things slow and costly. Other ways to raise wages (but not for all) may helo ease the system still providing economic stability, which unions re supposed to do but don't. 3) You cinceded this. 4) ok not really. Sorry I think I have won. Vote con. Btw my 6th source from last round is in the comemnts. http://www.house.gov... [1]http://www.economist.com... [2]
Labor unions

1) How do they hurt the economy? It is simple, higher wages = more productivity. union workers are higher quality than you would expect for the job they are doing. . http://www.economist.com... 2) This makes no sense. Higher wages do not always mean outsourcing. Also since it rates more productivity then it would HELP the economy and make a better workforce. 3) I concede this. But once again, I think a better workforce would balance this out. 4) They do not increase taxes, they ask for increases. You are wrong, I have already proven my point.
Labor unions

you have improved, but you really need to debate other people ;) C1: hurt the economy Companies pass on those higher wages to consumers through higher prices, and often they also earn lower profits. Economic research finds that unions benefit their members but hurt consumers generally, and especially workers who are denied job opportunities.[1] The economic detriment is because of increased wages. More wages = higher cost, higher cost = harder to higworkers as you have less money. Unions effectively tax these investments by negotiating higher wages for their members, thus lowering profits. Unionized companies respond to this union tax by reducing investment. Less investment makes unionized companies less competitive. [1] less investment = less economic growth. C2: raise unemployment Faced with such an economically unattractive scenario, corporations will choose to reduce their labor costs by outsourcing work, replacing workers with machines, and/or moving manufacturing facilities to low-labor-cost nations.[2] by the way the economic unattractiveness is partially due to unions [2] C3: raise costs of goods Furthermore, those high union-mandated wages result in increased prices for manufactured goods. It has long been an established fact that as labor costs increase, demand for consumer goods diminishes and the pool of consumers shrinks. [2] There are times when wages need to be raised to be equitable, but the power of the unions is that they can sometimes raise wages and benefits to unrealistically high levels. These levels can be above what the market can sustain, which will cause the manufacturer to raise the costs of items that it produces. [3] The above framework doesn't rule out the theoretical possibility that union agitation leads to wage hikes, which in turn lead to general price hikes [4] C4:RAISE TAXES California's government unions could seek a 43 percent tax increase on wealthy Californians. The Contra Costa Times reported on the action, but missed the magnitude of the tax increase. [5] They call for tax increases. A Nevada labor union leader said his organization is "looking seriously" at launching a ballot initiative to put a tax hike to increase funding for education to the voters, possibly as early as the 2012 general election. [6] Another call =conclusion= my case refutes his arguments. Labor unions hurt the economy. Vote con! sources: http://www.heritage.org... [1] http://stephencabotblog.com... [2] http://www.ehow.com... [3] http://mises.org... [4] http://www.calwatchdog.com... [5]
Donald Trump's Policies Are Just

Thank you con for your arguments, they were very well said. I. Immigration I have to say that the website you are using is talking about legal immigrants who work like any other Americans. Trump talks about illegal immigrants who steal American jobs and leech off American welfare and public systems. Con didn't say last time that he was talking about Trump when talking about Mexicans. Trump was using a hyperbole to the illegal immigrants because illegal immigrants have been known to cause a ruckus. The wall is for stopping them for a safe and economic purpose. I never countered your feasibility because it seemed correct. I only countered that the cost would come back because the immigrants that currently leech off the U.S. wouldn't do so anymore. II. Ban on Muslims Con thinks that "until" means permanent which it does not. Until means for a time that stops eventually and will therefore move on. As for changing his mind, Trump hasn't changed his policies towards Muslims. Con thinks I mentioned ISIS in my statement for radical Islam but ISIS isn't the only ones that show signs of fundamentalism. I made examples of Sharia Law which is in no way secular from actual recognized states and the "Islamic Republic of Iran". You did not make rebuttals towards those arguments. Sorry if you think I was cowardly, I didn't mean it in the way you are implying it. I was taking the important part that you admitted Muslims will conduct more attacks, which means you agree they are responsible for conducting less before. Trump is already seen as a threat by Islamic nations and since we won't bomb the actual governments of these countries, we should barricade ourselves from Muslim immigrants. III. Obamacare I see you made a fallacy to my argument regarding Obamacare. The source is still a source and if the liberals in the comments disagree, boo-hoo. The source still shows statistics and evidence which is a rebuttal to your claims. IV. Global Warning For global warning, if the U.S. slows down their production for the environment while China doesnt do anything, then what is the point? We don't have the capability to slow down without seriously damaging our economy while the Earth still "suffers from GW". V. Foreign Policy Trump may have made some contradictions with Libya but Libya is still under siege from ISIS recruits attacking and merging into the civil war bringing back the Muslim brotherhood. The oil is just another hyperbole. Trump said that about NATO because they were outsourcing their finances for their backup plans in case of a Russian invasion. If they don't contribute for their own well being, the U.S. shouldn't either. Israel has made many promising statements of military buildup and spend more than 2% on their G.D.P. The many more you reference are still only hyperboles and are misguided, at worst. Good luck and thanks for your arguments!
Donald Trump's Policies Are Just

Wow, what a huge argument! I thank Con for giving strong rebuttals.I. Immigration PolicyI have to say that the claim Con is making would not be equivalent to the cost that American families are experiencing due to job loss. It is because of immigrants that the government might be getting money like Con says, but it is the individual who is losing more (http://www.factcheck.org...). As for the cost of a mass deportation strategy, it is best to think of it as a long-term investment. The jobs of deportation would also go to Americans and would eventually help out the economy!I never said Mexicans are rapists and criminals, please don't put words into my mouth. However, you can't deny the job loss that came from Mexicans taking jobs of Americans that my previous 2 sources provided.I also name the wall that Trump has offered to be another investment and that Mexicans will find it much harder to get through, especially since alternative methods to pass are just assumptions. II. Ban On MuslimsYour site does not back up your claim that it is permanent. Trump has said that it was only a temporary ban on Muslims (https://www.washingtonpost.com...). Gee, I'm sure Islam doesn't pose a threat to American values considering that more than 5 nations in the Middle East are Islamic States, including Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen (https://en.wikipedia.org...)! Con also does not make an actual argument regarding my statement as proving a point to ISIS,Con ends his argument with another assertion thinking that it would only infuriate the Middle East from these policies when it shows that the U.S. isn't stupid, and you also admit that 'Muslims will be considered a downright offense in their eyes and they will conduct more of these hideous crimes like mass shootings and bomb blasts to get their message across.'III. ObamacareCon doesn't make many statistical arguments regarding Obamacare other than saying that repealing deserves to be mocked. Obamacare has only taken money from the citizens of the U.S. and giving it to the lazy who refuse to work (http://www.powerlineblog.com...)! Obamacare also forced the uninsured Americans by taking away their rights to be uninsured by substitution of a failed government aspect. The government has no business in healthcare!IV. Global WarmingThe U.S. is only the second biggest polluter of the world. We can't make a difference is China doesn't make a difference. Global Warming is also though to be a liberal scare-tactic to stop government pollution, I thank Con for providing his arguments!
Donald Trump's Policies Are Just

Hi, all! My BOP in this argument is to disprove any belief that Donald Trump's policies is not just!I. Immigration PolicyIn the United States, there is an unreasonable influx of illegal immigrants south of the border that has simply made too much of the American people jobless and pushed the economy towards dependence on manual labour (http://www.fairus.org...). These immigrants are also leeching off the dysfunctional American welfare system that has stolen money out of the wallets of hard-working Americans and placed them in the hands of illegal migrants (http://cis.org...). The policy Trump has of building a wall and toughening immigration reform along with deporting the illegal immigrants can be expected to positively impact the American economy by giving back jobs to American workers and reserving money back to the government. II. Temporary Ban On Muslim EntranceThere has been a series of terrorist strikes all across the globe and Trump is determined to prevent the next one being in the American homeland. The ban on Muslims that Trump has proposed from entering the US is reasonable considering that it was radical Islam that has been responsible for the recent attacks across the Earth (https://en.wikipedia.org...). The ban will prove a point to ISIS and their plans to infiltrate the American nation by showing Trump is willing to take any measures necessary to show his dominance and perseverance over American will against Islamic radicalism (http://nationalinterest.org...). I hope Con makes good arguments in the next round!
Provideoman123 has superior intelligence.

Please understand that I did not wish to accept my opponents opinion as fact (this is supposed to be a debate afterall), in R1 he says "2nd round accepting my opinion as fact" so placing my argument in this round would show something I do not agree to, and which could have been used unfairly against me.By giving my argument first I have given my opponent a chance to counter my argument - something I will not do.Thanks for having this debate. Vote and comment
Provideoman123 has superior intelligence.

Provideoman123 has not won any of the 8 debates he has had.He says "Soldiers are the pride of country. I hope you realize that your countries are pathetic, losers, and your politicians so weak they don't want to declare war on ME!" [1] - so he thinks countries can declare war on him (or he is a country), this isn't what an intelligent person would think.Einstein doesn't claim to have superior intelligence, and he is clever. source:[1] http://www.debate.org...
Quantum Mechanics are a Legit Field of Study

I accept and I am curious on how you plan to refute one of the greatest theory ever devised by mankind here are just a few definitions that we need Quantum Mechanics:the branch of mechanics that deals with the mathematical description of the motion and interaction of subatomic particles, incorporating the concepts of quantization of energy, wave-particle duality, the uncertainty principle, and the correspondence principle. Quantization of energy:Rather than continuous waves, light was coming in packets of energy which can be defined with its frequency and planck constant 'h'. In the atomic world, energies are also quantized. This means it can have only certain values. Wave-particle duality: The exhibition of both wavelike and particle like properties by a single entity. For example, electrons undergo diffraction and can interfere with each other as waves, but they also act as pointlike masses and electric charges. Uncertainty principle: the principle that the momentum and position of a particle cannot both be precisely determined at the same time. The correspondence principle aka Spooky action at distance or SAAD: States that the behavior of systems described by the theory of quantum mechanics (or by the old quantum theory) reproduces classical physics in the limit of large quantum numbers. I'll be using these complex principles and discoveries to explain quantum mechanics
Can alternative energy replace fossil fuels

Hi everybody, I'm Adil Muhammad, Qatar and I'm glad debating this topic. Pro didn't tell us the roles, so I don't know whether the first round is just acceptance. That's why, I'm going to start rebuttal from the first round 1. Pro didn't tell us what is (or what is meant by, in this debate) 'Alternative energy'. 2. Pro said that it costs less money, do fossil fuels cost more or nuclear energy??? 3.Pro has the debate's topic: 'Can' and then starts debating 'Should' Character capacity very short.
Why would anyone "want" to believe in god? Count all the people god wants to murder

Hello, friend. Welcome to round 3. I"m curious as to how you conclude I prefer "dead babies" - compared to what? God doesn"t enjoy to kill anyone, but cannand does deliver perfect justice - being the omniscient Judge, and being the Author of human life, can give it and take it when he pleases, and will always do it justly - he never wrongs anyone. And again, you proclaim this is immoral, when ironically you believe morality is opinion; you believe any sort of killing is a chemical reaction acting on another (which eventually both will cease to exist), a worldview which believes that we are dancing to our DNA and are not even free to murder/not murder (Professor Richard Dawkins puts it). And you seem to use a lot of slippery slope fallacies on top of you as hominems as well - and you manage to squeeze in a baseless assertion with no evidence.