BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
colonization of the moon would fail and not be worth it to humanity

1. I still find moon colonization as over doing it for a single resource unless this thing will shoot so far into the technological future that it will cure aids cancer and make us immortal than not really worth it. 2. I also fail to see the evidence of India as a threat sure they have the weapons but they have no motive to use them and no one on the earth wants to pick a nuke fight with the winners of the cold war. As for China whoopdy dooo they have a smart computer I'll be concerned when it picks up a weapon and starts commanding armies until then its no concern. 3. My point stands that the moon's colonization would be more costly than profitable not just in resources but in human lives no matter what frontier it is people die wether it is Egypt taking the Sahara Rome in Germania and England the Pilgrims coming to America the Pioneers moving west many lives were lost in all of them and this is a new frontier its not building a new city in a far away land its not sailing across the ocean to a new place its leaving our planet for the first time to an unstable are lives will be lost many of them and Humanity dose not have the can do spirit as much anymore we took Earth we colonized every last bit of it with our blood sweet and tears and since Humanity put that flag in that one little piece of unclaimed land our want to explore and to die for knowledge. I don't think the moon a rock flouting around in space is worth the hundreds maybe even thousands of human lives lost in the process of taking it.
colonization of the moon would fail and not be worth it to humanity

1. He3 can be used to help to detect the smuggling of nuclear wepons. He3 is in a low supply and is mainly found in Nuclear wepons. 2. India may not have attacked anyone yet, but there nuclear and biological wepon arsinal is full. China: look at the Chosin Resivor the Chinesses dominated the U.S. and UN forces. Also look at the Chinesses SuperComputer it can do 2.5 tasks a second while U.S. SuperComputer can do .5. U.S. is also in threat of EMPs and the DOD and GBLs can't do much about it. 3. NASA is active and will be going to Mars in 2030 and an astriod in 2025 according to Obama. The threat of an astriod colison is nearly impossible even Apothis won't hit when it makes to passes in the future. NASA is also using the Orion rocket to get to the moon. (Earth's moon or Luna if you prefer.)
colonization of the moon would fail and not be worth it to humanity

I believe that this He3 material would not be worth a colonization because if it simply slows cancer all your doing is buying them time for their unstoppable death so why would people buy it to make their lives a bit longer. Also China and India are no threat to the United States military don't get me wrong the Chinese are strong but the United States has better infantry and commanders Chinese infantry would not stand up to a Marine or Navy Seal or a West point graduate, and India has a no recorded historical of any invasion of another country proving American military might is most likely superior to the Indian forces. As history shows it dose not matter how great your technology and society is if the other guy kills you or at least beats you down. Second China is overflowing with people to the point were they are limiting how many kids they can have which is hurting their farming communities they are to busy juggling their own problems to be a super power. As for over population the UN believes that the earth could hold another three billion people before it peaks. I also don't believe the moon could be a stepping stone to mars because I don't believe that we would even be able to build a major city on the moon given the fact that asteroid's are constantly smacking into it and humanity has very little experience with space travel trying to build a nasa base on a unstable piece of land would be very risky.
colonization of the moon would fail and not be worth it to humanity

I accept. funny this is the policy debate topic, so I have a lot of it even though I run astriod mining. 1. moon has He3 which is rare on Earth. He3 can slow down the cancer (not stop it) 2. Hegemony, the United States needs to keep being a world power and if we don't colonize the moon first China or India will and surpass us as a world power. 3. steping stone to Mars. 4. Earth is overpopulated 5. costs will be worth it and easily paid for. He3 and endorsements can easily pay back the costs and turn into a benefit.
Education develops a person.

It is impossible to think the purpose of education is the development of a person. Here is why, if we look at Paolo Freire"s "Pedagogy of the Oppressed " we notice he mentions the " banking" concept of education. He goes on to say this " Education thus becomes an act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiqu"s and makes the deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize and repeat." Notice there is no mentioning of critical analysis. The ability to analyze has been taken away be a rhetoric pedagogy of teaching thus making the educational method a form of oppression stemming from the title of Freire"s passage. A teacher tells a student " Christopher Columbus discovered America when he sailed the ocean blue in 1492." The student in turn will memorize, recite this deposit given by the teacher (depositor). However, does the student critically analyze why or how did Columbus discover America? Can we even say that he did? I posit if we critically analyze this, we will find, there were indigenous natives already in America which leads to this conclusion, Columbus did not discover America since it had been occupied prior to his voyage. But, we still have children even adults reciting the deposit of information and not actually looking for themselves and truly understanding. Our minds have been confined to the knowledge forced upon us by filters of half truths and this does not develop a person only confines them.
Education develops a person.

Yes, I do believe that the recitation and memorization falls into education. No, I am not changing my argument. Everything has a base to it and must start everywhere, you did not argue what I further brought up during the second round. I also said that once a base is developed then you are able to expand because you have a general idea about the topic. You have to start the develop somewhere, one day you will not just be able to think critically, you have to start from the base and work your way up. I would also like to raise another point of being literate is also the development of a person through education. In Hirsch`s readings it says "The chief function of literacy is to make us masters of this standard instrument of knowledge and communication, thereby enabling us to give and receive complex information orally and in writing over time and space". This means that over time we will be able to develop as a person with what we have learned. Also it says "In modern life we need general knowledge that enables us to deal with new ideas, events, and challenges". This goes back to your Christopher Columbus idea, knowing he sailed the ocean and discovered America in 1492 is general knowledge which develops the person.
Education develops a person.

By compromising with me and saying I am right about the memorization pertaining to the banking pedagogy of education then you must agree that it does not develop a person hence, contradicting your entire argument. And since you do agree with me your idea of reciting and memorization falls with your ideals on education. You then end your argument to say " We start in small phrases to develop a person." Are you now changing your argument to say small phrases are the foundation of our knowledge? So, by saying "Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492" will constitute as education? What can you actually tell me about such a phenomenon without act actually having background information? This is a perfect example of the oppression caused by the banking concept of education. There is no dialogue with teacher-student, no critical think, no monologue within the student to fully comprehend the information being put out. The idea that we start off with small phrases to develop as a person falls along with memorization.
Education develops a person.

Okay okay I see you mentioned towards the end about just because you are memorizing words and phrases does not develop you as a person, this is not true. You are right the act of memorization does fall along the lines of "the banking concept" of education. Well by remembering phrases and reciting them is a base to expanding your education, we all have to start somewhere right? Freire says "Knowledge emerges through invention and re invention, through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry men pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other." I agree with Freire here what he is saying in another words is that trial and error is what makes a person a person, only learn from themselves and not other instructors. But I see a key word in what Freire said which would be "men". Now, in order to develop as a person and become educated we must start somewhere. We all start school at a young age and are taught to memorize simple rhymes to learn the basics. In kindergarten the student may learn your "Christopher Columbus discovered America when he sailed the ocean blue in 1492" which is a very simple idea. This promotes develop of the person at a young age which then can be expanded by opening to other teachers and what they have to say. But what my main point is would you expect a five year old child to expand on the topic of Christopher Columbus going into tremendous detail. We start with small phrases to promote the development of a person.
Education develops a person.

So, you quote me on the Christopher Columbus statement and call it a "vague" topic. Then further say that by Knowing this catchy phrase one can say they are knowledgeable of the subject developing them as a person. This is I find contradicting. Here is why, if so it is a vague phrase and the phrase holds a higher meaning than the words then what exactly do we know aside from the phrase. If you consider reciting a vague phrase knowledge then you are a victim of the banking system of education. You have become the bank in which information has been filtered and deposited, filed and stored away. This does not develop a person in fact it oppresses them. Take a read of this claim by Freire " The truth is, however, that the oppressed are not "marginals", are not men living "outside" society. They have always been "inside"- inside the structure which made them "beings for others."" What is meant by this claim is simply this, the oppressed is not given the opportunity to develop or enhance as beings rather, they are confined by the threshold of their oppressor and used as pawns in society, If you can remember phrases and repeat what is told to you proves good memory which is not education and does not develop anyone. Its thinking for ourselves recognizing words we read and using background information to fully understand and dissect what we are taught. This is what develops a person.
Education develops a person.

Well I would have to disagree with you and say the purpose of education is the development of a person. Well I notice you start off with Freires banking concept of education and quote him onward. But, just because there is no critical analysis the person is still absorbing information creating an education for themselves, right? Going back to what you said "Christopher Columbus discovered America when he sailed the ocean blue in 1492." I do agree with you that this is a very vague topic and there is more to be discovered about the real origin of America. But, having known just this little much of Columbus discovering America in 1492 is enough to educate and create a development of a person. No matter how much knowledge you have you are still developing the person to be something bigger and better, going back to Columbus just because that is a catchy easy to remember phrase kids do learn it quicker doesn"t mean they are not educated, yes of course there is always more to something, but having the basic idea down is always a positive. Memorization is a form of education as well. I know in fact that for English class there were always words we had to remember for a vocabulary test. Now remembering them is as far as we can go there is no analyzing them because they all have simple meanings. Just because I memorized them does this make me not educated because I did not further look into the vocabulary word? In Freire`s Pedagogy of the Oppressed he quotes "Education must begin with the solution of the teacher-student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students." Which in another words in order to begin the education process the student and teacher must create a bond that develops the person.
That th U.S system of Presidential Primaries are contrary to democratic values

My first argument would be that becaause my opponent concedes to my defintions I have already won this round for the following reasons 1)He continues to tal about this "secret ballot" but what he fails to realize is that under my defintion which he concedes to caucuses fall under this and caucuses do not utilize a secret ballot system 2)He uses the example of this website but, this only furthers my point you cannot vote for who you want to win unless you are a member of debate.org. Thus he only strengthens my closed primaries argument because you have to be a member of that party to vote for that party. 3)When he discusses my "contention 1" all he does is restate my point stating that they are elected officials has no relevance to the argument. The fact that they can go againts the majority is what matters and since he concedes to my definition he will lose as well because super delegates votes are worth more than the citizens thus, equality isnt achieved 4) Once again he seems to think he is a very intellegent person but, his arguments hold no water. He states look to your definition but doesnt impact it backm to the topic of the round. Top Two systems violate equality and liberty as i show in my first point. I was hoping for a good debate and we will see if that happens in the next round. Thanks
That th U.S system of Presidential Primaries are contrary to democratic values

first off, i concede the definitions... this is your downfall... everyone over the age of 18 and is a legal citizen of the US is a possible voter. therefore, since the votes are a secret ballot and the people of the US are voters. if we take this web-site as an example, everyone has the right to vote for a person who is the winner. the same goes for the primaries. next: your contention one: the simple fact of the matter is that the super delegates are elected by people. they are senators, governors, and all other types of high ranking, ELECTED officials... thus, i would like to have this dropped from the debate due to the fact that my opponent is misinformed... your contention 2: the fact that the primaries are closed is a good thing because the party MUST elect their own representatives. the people have the right to elect who they want for president because they have that right in the actual presidential election. the open are also good because they offer diversity to the pot. thusly, open or closed, they are a good idea. finally, your contention 3: the top two system doesn't matter due to your own definition. since the top 2 people are elected as the runners, then they are going with the democratic values. therefore, i urge a negative ballot.
Idiot debate: The hatred of atheists.

Thanks to Pro. This is one of the most intellectual debates I've ever been in. Pro says he's refuting my arguments with simple logic. John Irving said “Logic doesn't exist” - John Irving [1]. He's not a philosopher at all, but it's true. Blue Sky Babies do excrete brown solids and yellow liquids, however in the sky they look blue because of potato mechanics and Biebs theorem. [2] Fat It's disputed that Hitler raped cats. Many historians are now claiming that Hitler actually raped evil and was actually doing the Jews a favor [3]. The historical consensus is coming up that yes Hitler was good and only raped evil. Cats can no longer have any affects on potatoes. Since the rise of cat skinned, cats learned not to mess with the potatoes [4]. My arguments stand Sources [1] Irving John. Silly quotes [2] Bieber Justin. Baby. [3] http://www.debate.org... ^ Famous Historian [4] Biologist Hovind Kent. Evolution of Cats.
Idiot debate: The hatred of atheists.

I will rebut my opponents arguments using simple logic. Sky is blueThe problem of the sky still stands because babies only excrete brown solids and yellow liquids[1] which both taste bad. [2] FatHitler opposed my view. He was also a cat rapist. Everybody knows only cat rapists oppose this view. Nit was too. He claimed to do this to try and make cat racism a professional thing.[3] Fact: nit and hitler were the leaders of the holocaust, creating it because a Jewish person found them raping cats. [4] Sources: 1: Sandusky, Jerry, Babies during rape. 2012 2: My taste buds 3: Hitler, adolf, The great trick and why cat rape rules. 1932 4: Hitler, adolf, Why cat rape is good and Jews are bad. 1935
Idiot debate: The hatred of atheists.

Rape Pro gives us the age old blue sky rape problem. This problem was proposed by Hitler in the 1940s and solved by professor Mike Hawk in the 1930s. Dr. Hawk said the reason why the sky is blue is because the atheist eat so many babies. The gas from the babies is excreted by the atheists, accumulating in the atmosphere causing a blue sky effect. Fat Nietzsche is the one genetically modified potatoes to grow above ground. Nietzsche was asked why he did such a thing, he said “I did it for the lulz!” [1]. The atheistic cake consumption and potato correlation doesn't take into account various things 1. Colorless green ideas sleeping furiously. 2. Potatoes that are held and torchered by the US government or by Dan Barker. 3. North Korea raising potatoes for slave labor and much more Con's argument Con makes the following argument ...when people are rejected, they usually feel a bit of anger. They may even feel hatred towards the rejector. People whom hold god close enough have a feel that atheists reject them by rejecting their god- for it is a projection of their version of the perfect being, coming from deep within them. The problem is, he claims that theists project themselves onto the atheist. However humans aren't made of light. How can they project? Projectors cost money, but being a theist doesn't cost money. Atheists would be blinded if projection theory is true! Where would the projector even go? Believe me I've tried to insert projectors in my body, I couldn't do it! It was funny explaining it to the doctor. Sources [1] Nietzsche, Fred. “Sie Ihre Zeit verschwendet, um diese zu übersetzen“ page 123
Idiot debate: The hatred of atheists.

If atheists love to rape, then why is the sky blue? Didn't think of that one did you? And all atheists are fat? Their cake consummation can only be large enough to make them fat if potatoes grew above ground. You may say these things are unrelated, but I have one statement for you; Potatoes are in direct correlation with atheist obesity. Oh, I forgot to mention that if atheists raped, the sky would be black with condemnation.[1] [1]: www.debate.org/Just-Your-Average-Atheist/
Idiot debate: The hatred of atheists.

The position I'm defending is that atheists are hated because we're so fat and love raping.Very religious Americans are more likely to be healthier than atheists [1]. No one likes fat people. I mean Jesus if the entire world was fat we'd pull the Earth down. The sidewalks would be cracked and children would be lost in belly fat. I'm eating a whole cake right now attempting to get heavier because I don't believe in God. RapeAtheism itself makes no moral statements. Meaning it doesn't say rape is wrong, meaning it's saying rape is fine. After I type this I'm going to attempt a rape while eating some cake. On the right of the debate is a video of atheist Dan Barker saying he loves to rape. http://www.youtube.com...[1] http://www.gallup.com...
Idiot debate: The hatred of atheists.

The format is simple; introduction, rebuttal, conclusion. We will be debating idiotically about the subject of why people hate atheists. If you take it seriously, you lose. The stance that will be defended by me in this idiot debate; when people are rejected, they usually feel a bit of anger. They may even feel hatred towards the rejector. People whom hold god close enough have a feel that atheists reject them by rejecting their god- for it is a projection of their version of the perfect being, coming from deep within them.
Anderson "The Spider" Silva is the best pound for pound fighter in the world.

I argue that Anderson "The Spider" Silva has proven himself to be the best pound for pound mixed martial arts fighter in the world. Anderson Silva has recently proven himself to be the most capable mixed martial arts fighter regardless of weight class. For key terms, I define mixed martial arts as any participation in sanctioned events that incorporates the most basic mixed martial arts sanctions that must be present to permit a legally licensed mixed martial arts event in most states in the US. This can include cages and rings, but must include the most basic provisions as to be approved by most state athletic commissions and authorities. The best "pound for pound" indicates the most dominant and proficient against competition in their weight class. I define the best as the individual who wins with the most ease in a significant portion of their fighting events. Silva's fighting record establishes clearly that he is the most dominate fighter pound for pound in all of mixed martial arts. As of November 1st, 2009, Anderson Silva possessed a fight record of 25 wins and 4 losses. Of his 25 wins, only 6 came from decision, with 15 coming by knockout and 4 coming by submission. Silva's last loss was in January of 2006 by way of disqualification; the last fight that Silva lost by force was in 2004. In Silva's last 11 fights, Silva has won by knockout 8 times, and submission twice. Furthermore, Silva has increased his level of competition to the Ultimate Fighting Championship in his previous 10 bouts, cementing him as a dominate force in fighting. As no other can claim the same streak of dominance at this point, Silva is the most dominate fighter pound for pound currently fighting. Silva has also shown that his level of competition is perpetually high, cementing his reputation as the best pound for pound fighter in the world. Many experts agree that Anderson Silva is the number one fighter in the world as well. mmaplayground.com has Silva listed as the best pound for pound fighter in the world. In addition, USA Today has Silva listed at the #5 light heavyweight threat and the #1 middleweight threat. I feel that Anderson Silva has proven his dynamic range as a fighter over a variety of weight classes has cemented him as a threat across the board, regardless of weight class. Anderson Silva's intensity and resolve in the ring has led him to success over multiple opponents across three weight classes in his career. As he stands today Silva has proven himself to be the most dynamic and accommodating fighter pound for pound.