BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The Pixar theory

Closing statements: The BoP is on the Instigator. If the BoP is to be shifted before the debate starts it must be clearly stated and agreed between the two parties. If my opponent did so I wouldn't have taken the debate, but that aside, what exactly did my opponent think they were defending? If I was on the attack, what was I attacking? The question was "Is the Pixar theory true? ". The truth is that my opponent was on the attack and I was trying to defend. My opponent, who attacked the Pixar theory, tried to poke holes in various parts of the theory to make it all fall apart. The point of the Pixar theory, the core of it, is that all the Pixar creations are connected together in a Pixar Universe. This is like talking about the theory of gravity. We know it exists but we just don't have all the facts to put the whole puzzle together. Science keeps working on it and little changes are made over time. I have shown various parts of the puzzle for the Pixar Universe. I have shown that the Pixar creations are connected, be it intentional or unintentional. Does the theory of Pixar exist? Yes. Is it perfect? No. My opponent should also make use of the "spell checking button", which is free of charge to use.
The Pixar theory

My opponent accuses me of shifting the burden of proof, but this is ridiculous. The affirmative has the burden of proof, not the instigator. This was the reason that he was given the first round to argue in favor of the theory. The resolution is a true/false statement, and if the person claiming it's true fails to prove so then it cannot be assumed to be true.Vote neg: It's extremely clear that the Pixar theory is untenable and requires mental gymnastics to accept as my examples show. My oponents responses to them are extremely weak. Pro argues that Easter Eggs must prove that all of the movies happen in the same Universe. Occam's Razor: The simplest solution is almost always the correct one. What's the more parsimonious explanation for, as my opponent brought up, a carving of Sully to appear in Brave: The animators thought it was fun to include little Easter Eggs or, as the theory contends, because the Witch from Brave was actually Boo from Monsters Inc who went back in time to try and find Sully using the power of wood.Pro shoots himself in the foot--I said I wouldn't make the "Pixar said the theory is not true" argument but since my opponent decided to bring it up, Pixar saying that the theory is analogous to 9/11 conspiracy theories pretty much proves the resolution is wrong. Pro makes no explanation for sentient, contemporary looking vehicles in Cars existing in the distant future as the theory contends. Pro also fails to satisfactorily explain why there are no mentions of super humans in *any* of the other Pixar movies. The existence of superhero's would lead to an enormously different society and we would see traces of that if not actual heros in the rest of the movies. Andy has no superhero toys--of course my opinion of Buzz and Woody being lame is just an opinion but it's safe to assume that any kid would rather play with models of things real than a fake Cowboy from a TV show. In Toy Story 2, the Prospector remarks that Sputnik was what ruined it for Old West style toys because in the Pixar Universe as in the real world kids would rather play with toys modeling actual exciting events than a dopey cowboy. Andy would have had some superhero toys. The other movies would have made some reference to superhero's actually existing. Pro never responds to the trailer existing in a Bugs Life despite there being no way such a structure could remain intact for centuries, let alone have a working lamp.Pro's only response to The Good Dinosaur is extremely weak, we don't know much about the movie but we know enough to know that humans and dinosaurs livedd concurrently. If all of the Pixar movies were in the same universe we would see some indication of that.This round is a clear Con win.
The Pixar theory

Definition 1 A Pixar movie, short film, game, toy or book will be defined as a Pixar creation, which has formally been released for the entertainment of the public. Definition 2 Any songs, characters, dialog, visual reference, etc. which can be found in a Pixar creation is defined as a Pixar object. Definition 3 The Pixar Universe is made up of Pixar creations with connections to other Pixar creations through what is referred to as "Easter Egg(s)". Definition 4 An "Easter Egg(s)" is defined as a hidden homage/reference to another creation or object (not limited to Pixar creations or objects) but can also include persons, places or things from the viewers reality. Point 1 Pixar creations have a starting point (Knick Knack & Geri's Game) with no Easter Egg(s) as they had no predecessor. Point 2 As Pixar's number of creations increased, so did the number of Easter Egg(s). Point 3 Easter Egg(s) began to overlap and arc between creations as teams within Pixar left the company or worked on other projects. These Easter Egg(s) left by previous teams, influence future teams, to form transparent connections. Point 4 At some point, the Easter Egg(s) started to take on the form of a greater, more encompassing story. This started out innocently but later became more deliberate. Point 5 As fans and followers of Pixar creations connected the dots, they created a more detailed story for the arcs, which may or may not have influenced the creators. Point 6 While Pixar does not confirm this theory it remains to be seen if they will "feed the fire" with future Pixar creations.
The Pixar theory

Resolved: The Pixar Theory is likely Correct. The Pixar theory is the argument that all of the Pixar movies actually take place in the same universe. It's argued for here: . http://jonnegroni.com... Pixar has basically disconfirmed that the theory is true, but for the fun of the debate I'm not going to make that argument. We're going to look at the Pixar theory without that knowledge.
This Square is Yellow

I am a little terrified of this debate, but I feel like I have nothing to lose. YOLO. PLAIN SIGHT The square provided is clearly visible as a shade of yellow, as long as you are not color blind. When compared to the color wheel and the worldwide list of colors, it can clearly be found in the section marked as "yellow" The yellow shown is that yellow because the wave length of the light is just right for this shade. I feel like this is an interesting start, may the games begin.
This Square is Yellow

My position is that this square below is not yellow. Pro will accept and argue that the square is indeed yellow. To make it clear for my opponent, this image was taken from Wikipedia:https://commons.wikimedia.org...This is not a semantic argument where I will argue that the square is some hue in the yellow family like "canary", "dandelion","lemon", or "dehydration urine".3 rounds, 4,000 characters (because I have no desire to engage in a metaphysical debate about the existence of light, reality, or religion). No need for polite acceptance and waiting to round 2. You may jump right in, if you wish. Rebut what you want, when you want. I'm flexible.
This Square is Yellow

You have chosen to take my words and use them. What you did not do is write the full statements. You tried to make me appear to agree with everything you said. HERE is the reality that I wrote out: "You can clearly see, as you said, that the yellow is created through the illumination of red and green. However the human mind can only see the yellow" "So I agree it is fair to say that it is made of red and green, but when your mind makes an assumption, it is true to oneself. If you believe your mind then the answer is simple: yellow. If you believe in digging into the facts until you reach the smallest scale, then it is not yellow." "With that being said, when the light directly goes to our eyes with all of these tiny little red and green waves, they are so jam packed that they can be seen in the same area, creating a wonderful yellow. Therefore a yellow is what is truly recieved by our eyes." This is what I could quote you on for all the rounds, if I wanted to act like you: "the square is indeed yellow" "I'm lying to you." "A pure "yellow" image is constructed" "this is actually a true statement" Therfore you have admitted that the sqaure is yellow and I could "claim victory" This was a debate unlike any other I've seen. I have had to argue against many true facts, and try to find chinks in the armor of my opponent. I have spoken of perception, and ones belief in themselves. I feel like I have done everything I could and would like to personally thank you for this debate. Good luck, and live long and prosper.*shows spock sign*
This Square is Yellow

I knew you had something up your sleeve when you posted such a decieving argument, but I still have some fighting spirit so here we go. I was searching for any evidence to use against you, and I stumbled across a very interesting bit of information. https://www.google.com... ^I do not know how to add images to ddo, so please direct your attention to the first IMAGE^ You can clearly see, as you said, that the yellow is created through the illumination of red and green. However the human mind can only see the yellow, as if mixing the colors on an artists plate. So I agree it is fair to say that it is made of red and green, but when your mind makes an assumption, it is true to oneself. If you believe your mind then the answer is simple: yellow. If you believe in digging into the facts until you reach the smallest scale, then it is not yellow. With that being said, when the light directly goes to our eyes with all of these tiny little red and green waves, they are so jam packed that they can be seen in the same area, creating a wonderful yellow. Therefore a yellow is what is truly recieved by our eyes. "The sun's light contains all the colors of the rainbow (red orange yellow green blue indigo) but the color that is reflected most to your eye is the green. The part of an atom or molecule that "reflects" the light is the electrons on the outside of the atom" Green is mostly made from blue and YELLOW, the screeen and the atoms inside of the device were created from atoms and therefore contain Yellow. In this way I am arguing that the square is in fact yellow, and not just green and red.
This Square is Yellow

About me My hobby is 3-d digital art, renderings, and I've dabbled in animation. You know, Pixar-y stuff. I have to work with virtual material images, bump maps, displacement maps, specularity maps, ambient occlusion, HDRI environments, virtual lighting, render engines, compositing effects, and post-processing in software like Photoshop and GIMP. Those are fancy words that describe an illusion. Fakery. Trickeration. I need to fool you, the viewer. I need you to believe and object has depth, mass, velocity, physics. I need you to think you're looking at a photograph or at least you're willing to suspend disbelief. I need you to believe in the world I've created. Basically, I'm lying to you. The Medium A medium refers to the material used to create a work of art. A painter can use yellow paint on a canvas. A Mark Rothko painting titled "Yellow and Blue" sold for $46.5 million. [1] If I were to argue that his painting was not yellow, I'd be wrong. You are staring at my medium. My doorway to you is a flat rectangle. That flat rectangle is a very simple plane of tiny bits that respond to electrical impulses. These impulses move far too quickly for the human eye to see. The impulses flicker across that plane usually between 60-240 times per second. This medium is very restrictive, yet computing power and illusion help make it incredibly powerful. It's all based on a simple premise: the pixel. The Pixel A pixel, when displayed by a monitor, is a set of three little elements that respond to electrical impulses. One transmits red light. One transmits green light. One transmits blue light. Commonly referrred to as RGB. [2] [3] I don't care if you're using a phone, tablet, monitor, or flat-screen to read this. It is physically impossible for any of the red, green, and blue pixels to transmit yellow light. [4] The Image The image displayed on your screen contains an array of data. Yes, we all know that computer data is ones and zeros. Let's move beyond that a little. Image files contain a two-dimensional array of three data numbers. Each data number represents the intensity of that electrical impulse on a red, green, or blue pixel. The range of that intensity is based on binary numbers (1s and 0s) with 2^8, or 256, levels of intensity. "Yellow" A pure "yellow" image is constructed by illuminating red, green, and blue elements of a pixel. In this case, the red and green elements are glowing with full intensity. The blue elements have the day off. You are looking at a red-green square in the first argument. Your monitor prevents anything else. Pro offers that observation is sufficient evidence. I counter that illusion occurs here to simulate the effect of other media. Pro offers that the frequency/wavelength produced is in the yellow spectrum. I counter that red and green frequencies are produced and no frequency/wavelength is emitted in the yellow range of the spectrum. [1] http://news.bitofnews.com...[2] http://whatis.techtarget.com...[3] https://upload.wikimedia.org...[4] https://en.wikipedia.org...
Steroids should be legalized in sports.

First of all, steroids gives one the ability to be stronger, it doesn't automatically make on stronger, it heals muscles after workouts quicker, letting you work out more--work harder. You say sports is a judge of someone's athletic prowess, and that is how much they practice and how much of an affinity one has for the sport. So, amount of time practiced is actually increased with steroids as I mentioned before. Also, steroids show the affinity of players-- it shows how they would take risks to succeed in something they love. Yes, steroids are harmful to the user's body, that is known, but are smoking and alcohol outlawed? Also, athletes know the risks of taking steroids, and that is their choice, we can't go making choices for them, they need to make their own decisions. In addition, stepping on any professional sports field is screwing up your body. In football and hockey, players crush each other, leaving brain and other injuries. In baseball, players put nearly 100 pounds of stress on their arms each time they throw. Every time someone plays pro sports, they are "screwing up their body" as you said. Players know this, but still take those risks, just like they should be allowed to for steroids. Steroids will make sports even more entertaining then they are now. Fans absolutely love records being broken and athletes playing at a higher and higher level. This is what players can achieve with steroids. If they don't want to risk their health in the future by taking steroids, then maybe they aren't cut out for an industry where it is all about doing everything to succeed. It is definitely going to make fans more appreciative of different sporting events.
Steroids should be legalized in sports.

I guess you are giving me BoP then? That seems quite ridiculous to me, to be honest, since changing a basis rule of sports would give you BoP I would think, but I'll go with it. I will provide a simple argument for now.Sports are supposed to be a judge of someone's athletic prowess. That is, how much they practice and how much of an affinity they have for the sport. If external enhancements like steroids are allowed, this falls apart. What's the point, then? People will just try to use the newest and best drugs, and competitions would have little meaning beyond who screwed up their body more to win. That is obviously not the point of sports.
Students in Grades K-12 should NOT receive any work during the holidays

Thank you Con for your well-though arguments. I will now attempt to refute Con's reasons as to why students should be given work during the holidays. o I find nothing wrong with con's statement that learning should not stop after school. However, most of the work given to students during the break is not usually mentally stimulating. The type of work given to students during holidays is almost always busywork (I know this from personal experience). Students would consider it a chore and quickly run through it without actually thinking about it or revising it. Therefore, students learn little to no material with this work and no already-learned concepts are reinforced either. It is a waste of time for the students and the teachers who must mark it when the students come back. o Also, how do we address the issue of students who go on vacations during holidays and have no time to do their homework? Do we penalize them for taking some well-needed time off? Do we force them to do math problems on the beach? No, we cannot do any of these things. We also cannot tell these students to not go on vacation because that would be too great a restriction. o If a student has, say, 100 math problems to do, there is a good chance that they will leave them until the end of the break. By that time, at least a month and a half will have passed and they will have forgotten most of the things they learned during the year; the same concepts needed to do their math work. They will be completely lost without those concepts and unable to complete their assigned work. This would leave them with low self-esteem and feelings of hopelessness and embarrassment as they enter the school year. o Also in the case of summer vacation: high school students will most likely have finished at least 2-3 exams (more than that if they are in a non-semestered school) and the LAST thing they need after all that hard work and stress is more work. o As for giving the students light reading, I believe that this is a good idea carried out in a bad manner. Most students would find the task of reading books over the summer dreadful. What's worse is that most teachers would expect students to hand in a book report or book log at the beginning of the new year. Most students would find these books boring and would neglect to read them. Then would they be penalized for not reading them which is not a good way to start off the school year. Even the most die hard bookworms would find some of these books boring. Besides, why would any (pre)teen want to read Charles Dickens when they could borrow a copy of their favourite trendy novel at the public library, and that too without any restrictions? Therefore, I believe that although learning should not be restricted to school hours, (home)work does not belong in the holidays.
Students in Grades K-12 should NOT receive any work during the holidays

Thank you for posting this argument Solid.Snake. Lets have a good, clean debate. I believe that students should be given schoolwork during the holidays/break/etc. In my opinion, learning should definitely be an all around the calendar experience, but at a reasonable cost. Schools should assign work during the school year regardless of holidays or winter breaks. But when school is technically out during Summer, homework should be very light. Possibly a few books or short assignments. This is essential because many students can lose half of what they learned over the school year during the Summer. This means that students are playing catch up for half of the school year the following year just to recap on what they learned from the previous year. Also, holiday breaks are widely regarded as giving break to students who can be stressed or having a meltdown. But studies have been done that actually show that reading or doing light work can relieve stress. Those two are great examples of work that is given over a holiday break. Cases to stress in students have been frequently traced back to extra-curricular activities such as sports. Students in after school activities may start to find the littlest work the hardest thing to do because of the stress that can occur. On the other hand, a student who is given the same work may find it much easier to do. Overall, I believe that if school work is not given during a break, the student can begin to lose what they learned and therefore time is wasted trying to learn that back. If the school work is not attempted to be recapped or learned again, grades may begin to slip and turn into Ds and Fs. That is my first round debate and I'd like to see what my opponent has to counter that. Good luck! www.suite101.com
Animal testing should be banned

Animal testing should be banned, first reason is that animal testing is cruel process, also there consuptions of natural exists. And it is too risky to trust these experements, because the organizms and body structures of animals are different than people's, so when person get drug which have been made by animal testing, there can be bad consequences, as ill people. The government should ban animal testing, because they could find alternatives, because nowadays there are modern technologies which could make better and trustable drugs.
The Democratic leadership is more capable of winning the War on Terror than the Republican leaders

"Senator Biden's ideas sound great... IN THEORY! Just like socialism, it sounds great but can it work?" It's not like socialism. There's a reason why he holds leadership positions and the international community respects him. And yes, it can work. Why would it not? Both myself and Les Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, agree that it will work. "The surge is WORKING we are making huge progress in Iraq" I agreed that the surge is working. However, it is not a long-term solution, it is only a short-term one. Once there is a reduction of American presence, then the sectarian violence will once again begin to increase. Their cultures have clashed for over 1200 years, one troop surge won't stop it forever. The political solution posed by Biden gives Iraq a chance to rebuild itself permanently and help prepare the country for the inevitable withdrawal. Even if American forces stay for twenty years, unless a political solution is implemented then as soon as American presence begins to recede the violence will once again increase. The troop surge is merely a band-aid to reduce the bleeding. Joe Biden's plan is the stitches needed to patch up the wound. "Also senator Biden has no military experience" As I previously stated, this is unnecessary for modern politics. Biden has equal military experience to Bush, the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, and much much more political experience. I will refrain that I agree with you that the troop surge is working, but it is a temporary fix. President Bush set the following 6 benchmarks for the success of the surge: 1. Let the Iraqis lead; The surge has failed to remotely accomplish this. 2. Help Iraqis protect the population; This is causation with US presence so long as the Iraqi's aren't self-sufficient. 3. Isolate extremists; The US has been victorious thus far here. 4. Create space for political progress; US has done this, but hasn't set the standards for the course of political progress. 5. Diversify political and economic efforts; The troop surge accomplishes this but does not keep it this way. 6. Situate the strategy in a regional approach. This essentially calls for further strategy following the surge. [http://www.whitehouse.gov...]. McCain's goals and aspirations are short-term so long as he continues to support the surge without looking past it. Therefore, Joe Biden is superior. As always, jake, thanks for the debate. -The Colonel
The Democratic leadership is more capable of winning the War on Terror than the Republican leaders

"For this debate, my opponent should present a case supporting a politician from the Republican party whose ideas and leadership are better than what Joe Biden can offer. Although Joe Biden has withdrawn his Presidential bid, his appointment as a Vice Presidential nominee or Secretary of State would restore legitimacy to American foreign policy" As I stated, to win this debate, you must present a candidate or politician who is more qualified to lead American foreign policy than Joe Biden.