BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Sharingan(Pro) vs Byakugan(Con)

"That isn't true. if that was the case Neji and Hinata would deactivate their Byakugan when they engage in close combat. Hyuga Fighters use their Byakugan with the Gentle Fist which is a kekkei genkai technique so a Sharingan user cannot copy this attack style."No, the Byakugan would not deactivate, Uchiha can use Genjutsu to finish the hyuga and kill him while under genjutsu."And Byakugan member's aren't so susceptible to Genjustu;"you forgot the Izanami Whilst under the effects of the technique, the target stands motionlessly as the loop of events continually replays inside their mind. Each time a loop is repeated, any physical damage incurred is reset as it were before the start of the loop, although the remains of severed appendages do not disappear. The illusion of the user and anyone they were fighting alongside also have any damage reset as well such as the blindness that comes with Izanami. Despite being able to become consciously aware of their situation and act differently, the victim is unable to significantly alter or escape from the inevitable progression of these events. However, because this technique was created to reprimand and save the users of Izanagi, the victim is able to escape the infinite loop if they can acknowledge the real results of their actions and in doing so, accept their fate. In the anime, it's shown that there is no other way to undo this technique even by someone who has complete control over their chakra. The illusion of the caster also seems to be sentient as the illusionary Itachi was shown to be shaking his head when Kabuto futilely tried to undo the technique without accepting his fate first."This an Byakugan user can avoid, As stated above a genjustu can be connected through eye contact. But a Byakugan user has X-ray vision to counter and this is how. Ao is a ninja who managed to obtain an Byakugan eye which is protected by an eye patch so we do not see it. even though it is covered he still uses it by using it's X-ray vision, therefore a byakugan user can merely close his eyes and still be able to fight at 100% and wont be effected by Genjustu"The Uchiha only needs to fight physically and completely put Hyuga under Izanami as shown from Itachi vs Kabuto as Kabuto was covering his eyes to avoid Genjutsu, even tho the Izanami caught him. "Plus Byakugan user's can also predict if an opponent will use a ninjustu, for example if an enemy ninja was going to use a justu that shoots fire out of their mouth such as Sasuke Phoenix fire flower, the Byakugan user will see chakra flow into the opponets mouth and be able to plan accordinly"Although I agree that Byakugan users are truly strong, unfortunately the ultimate dojustsu of the Sharingan which is the Izanami(& Izanagi) can trap them in endless loop, even if they are closing their eyes.
Sharingan(Pro) vs Byakugan(Con)

. The user is given the ability to see through solid objects and other things intended to hinder sight. It allows the user to avoid ambushes and not be hindered by smoke screens and can tell the difference between clones and the original." These 2 points only help when the Hyuga member is spying on people, or watching them from a distance, but of course the Uchiha is going to fight the Hyuga in close combat." "and since Hyuga can be to Genjustu, and also the Sharingan can copy the attacks of a Hyuga but that is not case vice versa." That isn't true. if that was the case Neji and Hinata would deactivate their Byakugan when they engage in close combat. Hyuga Fighters use their Byakugan with the Gentle Fist which is a kekkei genkai technique so a Sharingan user cannot copy this attack style. "Because the chakra pathway system is invisible to the naked eye, the Byakugan is required for this style to be used effectively. Since the Byakugan is unique to the Hyuga clan, it has become their signature style of combat." And Byakugan member's aren't so susceptible to Genjustu; "the Byakugan's ability to see chakra and its flow allows the user to detect chakra sealed barriers as well as determine when genjustu is being used" "The Sharingan's final commonly-used ability is capable of inducing a unique brand of hypnosis that involves suggesting actions and thoughts to the opponent through genjustu cast by simple eye contact between both parties.[8]" This an Byakugan user can avoid, As stated above a genjustu can be connected through eye contact. But a Byakugan user has X-ray vision to counter and this is how. Ao is a ninja who managed to obtain an Byakugan eye which is protected by an eye patch so we do not see it. even though it is covered he still uses it by using it's X-ray vision, therefore a byakugan user can merely close his eyes and still be able to fight at 100% and wont be effected by Genjustu Plus Byakugan user's can also predict if an opponent will use a ninjustu, for example if an enemy ninja was going to use a justu that shoots fire out of their mouth such as Sasuke Phoenix fire flower, the Byakugan user will see chakra flow into the opponets mouth and be able to plan accordinly http://naruto.wikia.com... http://naruto.wikia.com...
Sharingan(Pro) vs Byakugan(Con)

! :) For Round 1 I'll show the basic abilities of the Byakugan (Literally meaning White Eye) 1. People who are born or have this ability are automatically given an immense field of vision. Upon activation it is an automatic 50 metre vision which can be made to be longer with Neji going up to 800 metre's 2. The user is given the ability to see through solid objects and other things intended to hinder sight. It allows the user to avoid ambushes and not be hindered by smoke screens and can tell the difference between clones and the original. 3. This ability allows the user to see chakra flow in immense detail, seeing the pathways and the internal organs. With this they use their Taijustu; the Gentle Fist. With this they can stop Chakra flow immobilizing enemy ninja and opponents and and impossible to block or raise resistance since you cannot train your internal organs to get stronger With these abilities Hyuga ninjas are extremely deadly in combat being able to see through genjustu and being devastating in close quarters combat and being able to compensate in long-range combat with their extended vision. More specific abilities of the Byakugan is the ultimate defence Eight Trigrams Palms Revolving Heaven. Where the user sends chakra out of every tenketsu in their body and spins rapidly to block and parry all attacks and the size and power can be adjusted to match the situation. It is the Ultimate defence as Tenten mentioned it was more effective than Gaara's Sand. Byakugan also has a variety of attacks such as the; Eight Trigrams Mountain Crusher: which sends a large amount of chakra out of the user palms sending opponents flying causing damage. Eight Trigrams Thirty-Two Palms: A Gentle Fist style attack which shuts down 32 tenketsu in the opponents body disabling the ability to use chakra and move Eight Trigrams Sixty-Four Palms: Double and faster the 32 palms strikes Eight Trigrams One Hundred Twenty-Eight Palms: Twice as fast the 64 palm and launches twice the amount of strikes. . http://naruto.wikia.com...
Sharingan(Pro) vs Byakugan(Con)

In this debate I will show that the Sharingan is stronger than the Byakugan.Mangekyou Sharingan not included.Definitions:Sharingan: Kekkei genkai found usually on Uchiha clan members, others got the eye by taking it from a Uchiha clan member(i.e.Kakashi).Byakugan: Kekkei genkai found naturally on the Hyuga clan members, others got the eye by taking it from a Hyuga clan member(i.e.Ao).Kekkei genkai: "a technique limited to inheritance by blood" or "Bloodline Limit"[1][1]http://naruto.wikia.com...
In order for any American to vote, they must first pass a test on each candidate.

The problem is that the American masses as a whole refuse to apply themselves mentally. Most people who don't know what they're voting for don't care enough to vote, so they're not really a problem. The problem that we have is that the voting population as a whole is stupid. We need smarter voters, not just voters who can have an opinion. If we continue to let stupid people vote we will eventually have a idiotic and emotionally driven mobocracy. The only times that people who didn't knowing what they were voting for might have been a problem were during the Lincoln, Kennedy, and Obama election. Lincoln, because there were most likely southerners who only voted to protect slavery and didn't know another ounce of information about him. Kennedy, because he was Catholic, and i'm sure the many Catholics voted for him without knowing anything else about him. Lastly, Obama, because he's black and there were tons of black people, hispanics, and asians who voted for him for that reason. People will always go for change, and will vote blindly every time change is up for an election, this will happen even with intelligent people. But, we can protect our regular elections from stupidity and wrecklessness by requiring voters to take exams that test general knowledge, logistical skill, reasoning, AND information surrounding the election (which would include the candidates).
In order for any American to vote, they must first pass a test on each candidate.

You missed the point. They need to pass a test ON EACH CANDIDATE. No, they should not be tested on intelligence. If you're stupid but can pass a test on what each candidate stands for, then you should be allowed to vote, because both stupid and smart people are allowed to have an opinion. The problem is that most people (or at least, many people) don't even know what they are voting for. If they can't pass a test on what each candidate stands for then why should they have a vote? What are they voting for? Nothing! All this does is falsely skew the votes.
In order for any American to vote, they must first pass a test on each candidate.

A random test? No. A test of intelligence? Yes. The masses are generally...well, stupid, and this is why I personally dislike democracy. In order to quell the stupidity of the masses a little, there should be a test in place that measures logistical skill and reasoning, general intelligence, and test information surrounding the election. If you score below a certain level, you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Voting should be a privilege, not a right. American's feel so entitled, so special, and so smart, that they're actually becoming ignorant, unhealthy, and unmotivated, and those huge flaws in Americans needn't be affecting/downgrading our government and our overall international image.
Muhammed is Not Predicted in the Bible.

I couldn't stop laughing when you said I can't see the contradictions in my own book considering I've answered all the supposed contradictions you've posted with ease:) You want to see some errors in your book well here you go honey. - Surah 17:1 says that Allah took Muhammed to the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem, but we know for a fact that Islamic Armies took Jerusalem and butchered it in 637( The Crusades were a counterattack to this), but the mosque was completed in 705. The problem is that Muhammed died in 632. Surah 20:92-95 says that there were Samaritans at mount Sinai. Now the problem with this is that Assyria conquered the Nothern Kingdom who brought in Foreigners who then intermarried with the lower class Jews who were allowed to stay. Their offspring a were called Samaritans based on the land which they lived called Samaria. The golden calf incident mentioned in this chapter took place at Mt. Sinai in 1446 BC which was 700 years before the first Samaritan was born. These are just 2 examples, but I've got dozens more if your interested. As for the whole Abraham married his sister thing well I'll admit that I don't study the OT much, but I'll remind you that marrying relatives was allowable until the Law of Moses. Muslims would agree that many things were allowed until the law and this is one of them. If you can show me one bible verse BEFORE ABRAHAM that it was wrong then I'll listen, but until then your statement is moot. I also find it funny how you say it was okay for Cain to marry his sister because nobody else was available. So by your own standing you say it was always a sin but for Cain you say it was a necessary sin to commit........ Ok then. It also seems you really butchered Deuteronomy 23:2. You said that David was the tenth when he was actually the 9th of Judah and Perez( Gen 38:24-30, Ruth 4:18,) and was therefore allowed in the assembly. Solomon wasn't a bastard child!!! The bastard child was the one who was born to the wife of Uriah and David who died. God then forgave David and allowed him to marry her. That is when Solomon was born and he wasn't a illegitimate child. "That's why Christians commit immoralities nowadays"- Wow. Christians are some of the most moral people in the world I'll let you know. And people who beat there own wives and blow themselves up for Allah are moral? Lets be serious, either Allah wanted terrorism or he was to stupid to realize that his religion would turn so bloody. :) honestly though don't judge is for immoralities when Islam is at the lowest point :) Julia we know for a Historical Fact that the Gospel of Barnabas is relatively modern. Please stop kidding yourself. Even the Muslim scholars admit this :) As for these gospels cast aside you do realize that the Bible itself says that people were making false manuscripts and gospels at its time. Thankfully God preserved his words through the Textus Receptus and told us he would. It goes the same with Islam when the Caliphs burned all the Qurans that didn't agree with theirs. Back to you Julia
Muhammed is Not Predicted in the Bible.

Well Julia, I'm going to have to disagree with you on a few points you made. Also I just want to say sorry if I didn't represent your beliefs with enough respect. First off you mentioned how some Christians quote verses in the Quran to suit our own needs, but isn't that exactly what your doing? I don't want to call you a hypocrite but it sounds like a double standard if you ask me. To say that Muhammed is prophesied in the Bible, but denying the prophecies that the Messiah would HAVE to be killed and ressurected and denying the Deity of The Lord seems a bit sketchy to me. And yes I actually have researched why Muhammed killed and brutally tortured people and the simple reason is that they didn't agree with him. Take for example the Meccan caravans that were plundered by the Muslims. Did the innocent woman and children in them deserve that? I'd also like to go over the Quryza Massacre quickly. It seems that before the slaughter, Muhammed had already banished the peaceful Qaynuqa and Nadir tribes. Early Muslim sources conclude that he expelled the Nadir tribe over a feared assassination( Talk about corporal punishment.) Soon after the Battle of the Trench, Muhammed was taking a bath and claimed to have a vision from the "angel" Gabriel giving him the authority he wanted to butcher the Jews. When they had captured all the Jews, Muhammed denied the plee for mercy and abided by the decision of his friend Sad Bin Muadh. All men and boys were then beheaded and many of te women were taken as sex slaves for lots of the men. Now we can ask ourselves one question...... Did Jesus ever tell us to do this? You also seemed to assume that I believed the Woman in Revelation was Mary. I along with almost all Biblical scholars agree that she is Israel, which scripture seems to support much more considering Jesus had to come from this woman. It would be pretty stupid to say Jesus came out of Islam but that's just my opinion. I also don't understand how you can quote from Revelation where it's the number one book where Jesus is worshiped, and it's main theme is the Jesus returning as Almighty God/ King of Kings and LORD of Lords. And I'm sorry about the whole Paran in Sinai thing, I was a bit sleepy when I checked google maps :) But I will have to say that Paran is in the path of where the Israelites went and considering this verse talks about God not Muhammed. In conclusion I'll turn it over to you, but I would love it if you would watch some of the videos by Nabeel Qureshi, and also a video on Louder with Crowder called Muhammed vs Jesus( Be careful about this one cause it's pretty anti muslim) Thanks Julia
Muhammed is Not Predicted in the Bible.

I'd like to start out with the first verse you mentioned which was Mathew 7:15-20 I believe. This verse does indeed say how to recognize false prophets, but the thing you need to remember is that Muhammed seems to fit this criteria. Lets just say that the historical Muhammed wasn't the most reasonable man. We know from Islamic scholars of the time that he beheaded 600-800 Jews at Medina, ordered the assassinations of famous poets, named his own weapons, brutally tortured criminals, and commited many other atrocities. So we can see that he was producing plenty of thorns of thistles from his tree, which in my opinion, kind of disqualifies him from the prophethood. The next verses you mentioned was Deut. 33:1-2. Now the problem of your interpretation is that you seem to fail to realize that this verse is talking about The Lord God and not Muhammed. Another thing we need to realize is that when it says ten thousands of saints in the Hebrew, this does not mean 10,000 but a large myriad going beyond just 10,000. And where is Paran? Well Paran and Seir are both near Egypt in the Sinai Peninsula. Paran itself is in north eastern Sinai and nowhere near Mecca! The last verses you mentioned were Revelation 12:1-4. These verses clearly say that this Woman gave birth to the Messiah who was Jesus. Now there are really only 2 options for who she could be. One is Mary and the other is Israel. To find out which one it is we just have to cross reference this with the identical picture in Genesis 37:9-11. These verses show Joseph having this same vision concerning Israel! Most Biblical scholars agree that this will be Israel who will flee to the wilderness, perhaps Petra, to survive. My sources for these arguments are Answering Muslims. com and also Nabeel Qureshi. Thanks so much for all the great arguments you put forth and I'll be awaiting your reply Julia.
Muhammed is Not Predicted in the Bible.

Hello Julia Salaam Alaikum( Please tell me if I got that wrong) I was directed to your profile a little bit ago and I realized that your the first Shiite Muslim I've ever met in my life. I really don't want to let this oppurtunity go by, so I was wondering if you'd be able to have this quick debate with me. I'm a Christian and I'll be arguing that Muhammed is not mentioned in the Bible and I hoped you would be willing to argue as con. We've got 5 rounds to get through with 72 hours to argue. My rules are pretty simple. First off, all quotations from the Quran and Bible will obviously be in English. The second rule is that we respect each others beliefs and keep this debate calm. I hope your able to debate with me and as is the custom of Ladies first you can lay down your arguments as soon as you want and I'll try to respond. Thanks and may the best argument win!
Humans Have Souls

Firstly, I would like to point out that I have not been running a semantics argument. Secondly, even if you agree with Con and say that I have, Con has already conceded that there are no round rules or rules to the debate as is evidently stated in R1. So if you think that I've been running a semantics argument. There is no reason for you to vote me down. It doesn't matter if it says: 'By Robert Lanza' because that is clearly false as I demonstrated in the previous round by proving that to be an illegitimate source. My opponent drops my evidence showing that Robert Lanza has NEVER written an internet article on his work, so I will reiterate what I said previously. Either this source is quoting Robert Lanza or the source is FAKE. I extend this argument because it was DROPPED. Just because something says that it was written by somebody, this does not make it instantly a truism. My opponent continues to assert that there is no evidence for Lanza's biocentrism idea however he fails to stated many things. a) what experimental evidence is requiredb) what his alternative view is c) how experimental evidence is even possible for that theory Let me start off by saying that there is minimal experimental evidence for many of the theories in regards to the Earth's and universe's origin. The Big Bang lacks experimental evidence however we have evidence that it is true based on the fact that we can see that glaxies are moving away from us and are red shifting as a result [1]. Lanza does provide evidence. Maybe not experimental evidence but the same could be said for many theories including the Big Bang. Since my opponent has provided NO alternative view, the only view that you can buy here is mine. Even if you think that it lacks evidence, my opponent provides no alternative. When you are presented with one option. There is nothing else you can choose other than that option and in this case it is clearly Dr.Robert Lanza's theory. What experimental evidence could we possibly have to prove that our souls are going to other galaxies. Yes, we have evidence which I have emphasized through quotations regarding Lanza's work. I can't conduct an experiment with a mini soul and figures and a model of the galaxy. That is simply impossible and that is a truism since we do not have access to experimental and miniture souls to conduct this experiment. My source does NOT agree that the soul is contingent on the physical. That is said by my opponent's source which is FAKE. I have met my burden in this debate. The resolution is affimed. Vote pro. [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk...;
Humans Have Souls

First off, I agree with Pro that neither of us should be penalized for addressing/refuting any arguments from this debate, in any round, because when I instigated this debate I made it very clear that there were no round rules; this is the only thing with which I agree. There is something slightly bigger though. Pro has been very dishonest, and shows no regard for definitions in this debate by running semantics the whole time. Geez, I thought I was being obnoxious by putting so many definitions in the first round, yet they were still ignored. To conclude: 1. Pro used Robert Lanza's biocentrism idea to prove that consciousness is the soul. However, Lanza wrote an article, which clearly says "By Robert Lanza," asserting that: "Consciousness cannot exist without a living, biological creature to embody its perceptive powers of creation." https://theamericanscholar.org... Pro's dishonest characterization of my source as illegitimate, can be disproven by ANYONE going and checking my source...Robert Lanza wrote this article! 2. My rejection of Robert Lanza is not contingent on what others say. So, my Forbes source is not what should be regarded as a refute to Robert Lanza...the fact that there is NO EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE for Lanza's biocentrism idea has been supported by Pro and Lanza's lack of evidence...I doubt Pro will actually provide this evidence of a soul last round too. So I'm saying, that the biocentrism approach has no new information about consciousness, and it relies on ignoring recent advances in understanding consciousness from a scientific perspective. 3. No soul has been demonstrated in this debate, because by definition the soul is immaterial. Pro's main source agrees that consciousness is contingent on the physical, so consciousness has not been demonstrated to be immaterial, thus Pro has not met their burden. I reject the resolution based on such.