BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
You deserve to burn in hell; the same as me.

Well first off, you didn't answer most of my contentions. This is fine if it was a lack of characters, just making sure everyone knows I said lots of stuff that still needs to be responded to. Because of this, my response will be short as well, since there is not much to respond to. "The punishment for the tiniest infraction against God is death. The infraction itself is an offense to God, and the offender by his infraction has caused a separation between himself and God. This separation is death." Why? You're just making the bare assertion that the punishment for any "separation" at all is death, but this is what we are debating. "The first death is in our bodies. Burning in hell would be the second death and God does not want anybody to suffer there, but He did not want them to be offenders." There's no reason why burning in hell is a necessary result of a minor transgression. "We do not execute the death penalty forminor infractions. God executes the death penalty. Mr. Hematite is held under the death penalty, on death row even though that row is as broader than the face of the planet." Same as above. "The tiniest infraction is punished by God. Hematite deserves the second death the same as me." Right, of course the tiniest transgression is punished. Now explain how exactly you decided that this punishment is necessarily always burning in hell for eternity?
You deserve to burn in hell; the same as me.

First, a kind thank you to Mr. Hematite for accepting this challenge and allowing further explanation of why he deserves to burn in hell forever; the same as I. He deserves some applause for taking up the challenge which had to be posted a second time before anybody would accept it. It is not easy for a person to admit he deserves to burn in hell. It was not easy for me to reach this conclusion regarding myself. My theory is that most people are afraid to admit they deserve to burn in hell because they know that if it is true, they need to seek mercy from God and renounce themselves for breaking God's law. This would also require turning away from the pleasures that are found in rebellion. In these opening comments, Mr. Hematite may find more points he would like to argue against. I do appreciate his systematic and specific approach of bringing argument. I will first post his abbreviated quotes from me, and then repeat the actual quote. I will run out of available characters in this round, so I will answer Mr. Hematite's objections in the order they were posted. Death is separation from God caused... the law does not bring punishment (Hematite) ......the law is good for nothing if breaking the law does not bring punishment. (actual quote) The punishment for the tiniest infraction against God is death. The infraction itself is an offense to God, and the offender by his infraction has caused a separation between himself and God. This separation is death. The first death is in our bodies. Burning in hell would be the second death and God does not want anybody to suffer there, but He did not want them to be offenders. We do not execute the death penalty for minor infractions. God executes the death penalty. Mr. Hematite is held under the death penalty, on death row even though that row is as broader than the face of the planet. The tiniest infraction is punished by God. Hematite deserves the second death the same as me.
You deserve to burn in hell; the same as me.

I assume in this debate we are assuming basic Christian theology and the general truth of the Bible? Given, I think, by how you made your argument.Death is separation from God caused... the law does not bring punishment.Right, we are all lawbreakers at some point. You are correct when you say lawbreakers "deserve" to be punished. What kind of punishment though? You seem to think that eternal and infinite suffering is a just penalty for "the tiniest" lie. I would be horrified if that was the logic humans used. Should we torture to death anyone who breaks the speed limit? There are things such as just and unjust punishments, and it is ludicrous to think that infinite suffering is a just penalty for a finite, minor transgression. God does not want... He created to enjoy.You're honestly telling me that an omniscient and omnipotent entity has to fear "rebellion"?Why would God want to forever go... separted from God forever because of our sin..Well, if God was so adverse to "heartache", I don't know why he would create creatures that had such a capacity for sin.Non sequitur. Why must there be an eternal separation between God and his creatures given his not wanting "heartache"? He could just separate the ones who say his law is good and ones who say his law is bad. You know, like the Bible says. Heaven vs hell and all.Right, God didn't have to create us. He did create us, though. I would think that he wouldn't send to eternal suffering and cause himself "heartache" humans if he bothered to create us in the first place. That probably isn't his intention.Okay, many points in here for rebels to argue... enough to pull them back from death to life.Or maybe you could lose because your arguments aren't as good?
You deserve to burn in hell; the same as me.

Death is separation from God caused by sin. Sin is the breaking of God's law, (the Ten Commandments, if you have ever lied, stolen, even in the tiniest way, you have broken God's law.........sin is an English word, easily defined..........if the law is just, breaking the law is sin.....even if you reject God, you are still a lawbreaker and deserve to be punished by the law......the law is good for nothing if breaking the law does not bring punishment. God does not want His creatures to be imprisoned forever, but He cannot allow rebellion against Him by His creatures to go unpunished..........lest the rebellion spead to all of His creatures and then all would have to be negated (un-created) or confined where God will have no pleasure in the beings He created to enjoy. Why would God want to forever go through the heartache of wathing His creatures causing more and more problems for themselves and those around them by the things they do wrong? There must be an end, a total and unchangable eternal separation between God and those who rebelled against Him or everything God created would be a continuing battle between those who say He is wrong to enforce His law, and His law is bad (restricive, selfish, didctatorial) and those who say His law is good and He is good (protecive, loving, king, righteous, just, perfect, worthy of all praise and all worship from His creatures.) God did not have to create us, He does not have to tolerate our selfish ways forever. We all deserve to burn in hell, separted from God forever because of our sin.. Okay, many points in here for rebels to argue agaisnt. I do expect to lose this debate due to the fact that the vast majority of people will never admit that they deserve to burn in hell forever the same as me.......at least untill they find themselves in the fire with no argument good enough to pull them back from death to life.
You deserve to burn in hell; the same as me.

There's no more argument to present. If Mr Hematite refuses to admit he deserves to burn in hell the same as me, that is his choice.But presenting me with the choice of either side is not debating, it's a question. You need to provide arguments that go beyond various restatements of your HEAVILY religious denominationally biased view.I did answer all of his objections and denials logically in the debate.No, you didn't even remotely respond to all of them, and the ones that you did respond to, you just reasserted your core religious views and made baseless and biased assertions. Almost my entire Round 1 argument was left unanswered, especially my core rebuttals to your initial assertions, such as the fact that infinite suffering cannot be "deserved" by someone who makes a small transgression (punishment fits the crime, this is a basic human justice concept), and the fact that he can just separate the ones who actually DO deny his law and the ones who don't deny his law but just slip up now and then. Hell AND heaven.How can I say "you deserve to burn in hell, the same as me" without preaching? It's a preaching statement at the start, and it's preaching still.Your sentence right after this is what I mean when I say you are just preaching. It is rather ironic you preach right after saying this.God loved us so much He paid for our sins with His own blood and if we trample His blood under our feet saying it was nothing that the Creator died in our place to be our Saviour, then be sure He will be the Judge who sends us away into whatever punishment He sees fit for us and we deserve it."be sure He will be the Judge who sends us away into whatever punishment He sees fit for us and we deserve it." No justification whatsoever, this is your baseless preaching that has corrupted the entire debate. If you can't see that, there is nothing for me to say, you just totally misunderstand the purpose of all debate and argumentation.
You deserve to burn in hell; the same as me.

There's no more argument to present. If Mr Hematite refuses to admit he deserves to burn in hell the same as me, that is his choice. I did answer all of his objections and denials logically in the debate. How can I say "you deserve to burn in hell, the same as me" without preaching? It's a preaching statement at the start, and it's preaching still. God loved us so much He paid for our sins with His own blood and if we trample His blood under our feet saying it was nothing that the Creator died in our place to be our Saviour, then be sure He will be the Judge who sends us away into whatever punishment He sees fit for us and we deserve it.
You have to shove a pineapple up your Bum. what way do you do it? I say leaves first.

With that being said, I must apologize. The question really is, "You have to shove a WHOLE pineapple up your anus". The issue with the leaves going in first is that they are very rigid. If one combines this with the spikes that are pointed towards the leaves of the pineapple, this would make puncturing/laceration of the anal region much easier. With the bottom end of the fruit, you do not get those extra injuries that you would in a leaves-first attempt. In addition, the most difficult part of the pineapple would be going in first, making it progressively more pleasant, comparatively. The angst of knowing that the worse is still yet to come is eliminated entirely.
You have to shove a pineapple up your Bum. what way do you do it? I say leaves first.

Although that is a very clever idea and i will give credit where credit is due, I would like to remind you that the argument is more about the orientation of the pineapple and not so much about the method of insertion. we are here to debate about if leaves first is a safer option or if the base of the fruit is more viable. Although we do agree that it would most likely end in complete destruction of your anus we still have to decide which orientation is the more viable and safer option. Thanks you for your clever option as i had not thought of a liquid injection.
Choose

My opponent says that I haven't provided evidence for the enormous costs of NASA space exploration but I have indeed gave another source which a popular physicist, Michio Kaku commented on the costs and my opponent completely disregarded it. If two sources (even disregarding the wikipedia one the forbes one is very good) aren't enough, I will provide a list which all speak about the enormous costs of NASA space exploration: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com... http://www.space.com... http://www.foxnews.com... http://www.space.com... The last link shows how a mars rover has cost 2.5 billion!! With my previous evidence which was backed by an established physicist, these sources further strengthen my case. A couple of my opponent's sources are from NASA and his whole R2 arrgument is based on the NASA website which is more than likely to be biased than factual. It is also logical to believe that NASA has cost a lot rather than help the economy. The costs of the technology required to travel to space is anything but low. During my opponent's last replies and arguments in R3 he listed various proofs of the benefits that the NASA space program has done. Without a doubt NASA has done good but not space exploration wise which is what this debate is about. THIS DEBATE IS ONLY ABOUT THE JUSTIFICATION OF SPACE EXPLORATION. It doesn't matter about their inventions and scientific patents. It also doesn't matter (because of the nature of this debate) that they revolutionized computer industry etc etc. This debate is about space exploration only therefore the lists he provided are false. The evidence my opponent provided for the eventual collapse the earth seems valid. I disagree with my opponent that space exploration is the only thing which can save us. Many scientists (category as grand scale space exploration) talk about type 1 and type 2 civilization and that in order to become masters of this galaxy and beyond we must use different fuel sources other than fossil fuels which is what a type 1 civilization uses. Th is is the types of civilizations once again backed by an authentic and popular physicist Michio Kaku. Before we can even think about grand scale space exploration in order to save the Humans from these cataclysmic events which is predicted in my opponent's source that it is in the near future whereas grand scale space exploration will take millions if not impossible as I stated why before (spacecraft speed of light in R2 etc).As I said in the other round, we cannot afford to pour our efforts into space exploration because there are vast issues plaguing the world today. We must address these issues then we can talk about space travel but not before. http://www.angelfire.com...
Is swimming a sport

Okay your first comment doesn't make any sense. Just because you CAN swim doesn't mean you know what competitive swimming really is. I could easily say that, since I can throw and catch a football, football is officially easy. You have to know how to run the ball, all the plays and stuff. Like in swim, knowing how to swim is the first step of hundreds. You said yourself you only took LESSONS for a week. First, I actually am not surprised you think swim is easy. You took lessons. The difference between swim lessons and swim practice is like the difference between apples and oranges. Both fruits, but otherwise completely different. They're both swimming, but practice is actually challenging, while learning how to swim is trying to stay above the surface and not drown. And for a week?? You think you know the full difficulty of a sport that you learned how to do for a WEEK? Try swimming on a team for years and we'll see if you change your mind. Your second argument just further proves that you have never swam. If you had been a on team, you would know that there are swim meets every other weekend. There's even a pro league! (The Arena Pro Series). Have you ever watched the olympics? If you have, there's a 95% chance you've seen swimming. Those happen every other week from age 6 to college. And, while is is surely less popular than football and basketball, that does not effect the fact that it is a sport. There is literally no reason that swimming COMPETITIVLY is not a sport.
Is swimming a sport

I have seen some other debates about wheather or not swimming was a sport or not, and I wanted to clear things up. Obviously swimming is a sport. There are some people who say it isn't because it's not competitive. The definition of competitive is competing with others towards the same goal. Just because nobody is physically trying to stop you from finishing your race, doesn't mean it isn't competitive. Second, some ignorant people think that it requires no mental or physical strength of any kind. In my opinion, and the opinion of anyone who has ever swam competitively, swimming is one of, if not THE hardest sport both mentally and physically. It is 98% mental. Unlike in basketbal, or football you don't have a team who can back you up. When you screw up, you only have yourself to blame. If your team loses, it can be hard to know who's fault it is. In swim, you either win or you don't. Physically, well, just look it up. You will find that swim is incredibly hard. Or you could go to a practice, but make sure there's a lifeguard standing by for when you really see how hard these practices are. Take your soccer, football, basketball, or whatever practice and then multiply the resistance in the air by two. After that, hold you breath the whole time. And right after, you get to do push-up, sit-ups, and burped for up to an additional two hours. Also, keep In mind that there is no off season. All year long, inside in the winter, outside in the summer. If after all this, you still don't believe me, PLEASE go to a mid-season swim practice and see for yourself.
Minecraft is the best game

And the other thing, why is minecraft the best game? What makes it great? Mind you nothing outside of the core game itself (mods, other players, youtube playthroughs), there isn't anything to make it the best. Some may say the game is endless entertainment, but endless entertainment can't rely on gameplay updates and mods and multiplayer to keep it fresh. Gameplay updates keep coming because mojang needs an audience, but that's not the core game. That's a new thing added. Mods aren't even from mojang so yeah, and multiplayer is just an extension of single-player. The fun is only in the fact that there's other players. A good "endless entertainment game" can keep a player occupied for what seems like forever with stuff to do. Case in point, anything Bethesda produces. Their games are huge, and if you play them for reasonable hours then they last you a while. If you're playing a game for more than 3 hours a day, then the problem isn't that a game doesn't include enough content to keep you entertained for long enough, it's that you're simply playing video games for way longer than is A: nessecary, and B: healthy. Video games are just entertainment, to some people they are more and I get that. Movies are my personal passion, but regardless I don't usually spend more than 3 hours watching movies (unless I have marathons with my friends). There is no reason for someone to play video games for longer than 3 hours.And before everyone goes off on me for being anti video game by saying too much is unhealthy, i'm not anti-video games. I think video games are fantastic. But like with movies, tv, even sports, there's only so much the human body and mind can handle before it needs a break. Physically, video games can cause carpal tunnel (I've had it happen a couple times) but can also cause muscle issues and in very rare (but not rare enough to be ignored) cases, organ issues. Psychologically, they can make a person really anti-social, or make them go a little nutty. I'm not saying video games are to blame for school shootings, but here's the thing, if someone shot a couple students at his school, and he also sat for hours and hours on end in front of a screen, it's probably a little more than a coincidence. I'm not saying it was the cause, not at all, but I'm saying it didn't help.Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be anti-video game. More than 3 hours is too much though. And there's a whole plethy of games that can entertain for months as long as you play them the right amount. Minecraft isn't as good as these games, and is just bland.
Minecraft is the best game

"More awards than staff"Awards aren't exactly a message of quality, most award shows are political in order to help sustain popular entertainment mediums. For example, ever wonder why Argo won best picture? The story was popular amonsgt Americans and the film was known as an American hero story, so the film itself became huge. Thus it won best picture over the more deserving Django Unchained, which was known as slightly racist and almost insensetive to some people."Lots of mods"Mods are also not a classification fo quality, that's content created by someone who wasn't the company. If we're going to talk about the quality of the game we talk about the base game, no mods."Not a lot of noobs"The skill level of other players isn't a quality of the game itself but of the online community. Again, we're talking about minecraft."The graphics aren't bad, theyre just in 16 bit"I am saying that because it's in 16 bit, because that's the truth. I don't mind it and think it's a cool style I'm just saying technically speaking the graphics are bad."Yotubers like skydoesminecraft"Youtubers playing minecraft isn't a quality of minecraft, it's the youtuber. We're talking about minecraft."Minecraft is better than call of duty"That's a matter of opinion, I was saying I'd much rather have immediate fun than have to wait a long time building a castle to have fun. "Kid influenced to bring a gun to school"Okay i don't know where that came from. I never said anything like that, like at all. You might be confused I was talking about run & gun technique in video games that kids use all the time, and it takes away from the experience of hitman. I'm firmly against the beleif that school shooting are caused by video games.But more to the point, most of my arguments have been that we're debating if Minecraft is the best game. Yet you keep bringing up things outside of the game as quality. A logical explenation could be that Minecraft itself just isn't the best game and requires other people who aren't Mojang staff to make it better. That's not a sign of quality, that's the opposite of a sign of quality actually.
Minecraft is the best game

Minecraft is not a bad game reasons why 1.It has more awards then staff and get many prizes t even start with 2. Many mods which lets the user play and install many games they would like into minecraft like naruto mods and one piece mods and stuff like tiger mod 3.There are not a lot of noobs 4.The graphics are not bad you all are just saying that cause its in 16 bit 5. On youtube it has many suscribers currently Skydoesminecraft has the most out of all so all does likes are from minecraft fans so that means minecraft is popular 6.Minecraft is better then call of duty 7. Just because you people think a kid was influenced to bring a gun to school does not mean minecraft is a bad game so stop placing blame on the best game