BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Immigration Should Be Illegal in the United States

Immigration can cause international problems. In this process, countries get upset with the decreasing of their population. Also, the United States can not support the people, especially with the economy so bad they just can not seem to get a job. Then, they are homeless and starve. They cause more robberies and people to get mugged for survival. Immigration can again cause international problems, which can lead to terrorists attacks, such as September 9, 2001. This is a problem leading to the economy. Also, pressure to congress and President Obama in an attack. This is not the "greatest" time to be attacked. With troops in Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan the U.S. just can not afford to much off an attack back. If we leave Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan they will just say," Oh, it looks as if we won the war over America. Let's take over America!" Before we now it, we are being attacked very often. That is why I think immigration should be illegal in the United States of America. I rest my first case of this debate.
This classy bordello would sing: General relativity and Special relativity is false, fake, and wrong

*burp* thanks mah tigga.The supposed proof of relativityMerceryA hole lot of Cons solovo's are blah blah blah Solovos that aint no one slooshed before. I don't know what he thinks he is showing because his argument has tons of problems like classical physics predicts the same damn veshch my droogs. There can be explained by skazating that there is a certain amount of dust between the Sun and Mercury. No relativity need All his tree argues are baddiwad my vecks. Sure, these veshchs exists but we have no proof spacetime causes these. Deflection of sunlight sucks too. We have never viddy actual light bending only in the pictures. This veck eemyaed Alfred North Whitehead skazat with enough pictures of space light bending will emerge but only its illusionary. Source: Whitehead, Process and Reality Redshifting of light is better explained by dark matter than relativistic physics. http://www.darkenergysurvey.org... REBUTTALS TO THE REBUTTS I dont know if you were drunk or high when writing those rebutts Butt in any case you failed. "Just because something does not look the way it is does not mean it is wrong." Rawwwwwwr General relativity is about the theory. The name general is in the theory but bannana aint about regular nanas init? Btw dont ban your nanny because some nannys are super hot Davochkas. Observe http://content.clearchannel.com...; /> http://i01.i.aliimg.com...; /> Hell even the super nanny is hot SOme of them hav the sexes with you if you hire them Observe: [Link deleted by Mods. We don't accept Porn here on Debate.org.] Hot right? Specially when the wife joins in and well i dont want to spoil it. Phenomenology You clearly have no f*ckin clue on what I was talking about. I dont need quotes. that website shows talks about how relativity f*cks with time .read it. Phenenmonolhoiy is the study of experience and science is based on it aaaaaand relativity f*cks with time and QED f*cks with what science is based on. No verification of spacetime so? those three experiments dont prove spacetime. How does mercery oribiting mean spacetime is bent. How does light around an object prove its bent? HOW? It dont. you cant prove the bending of spacetime is the cause anymore than I can say magic gnomes are the cause. The wrong equation OMG. If relativity fails this eqasuion that means it isnt true LOLOOLOLOL. It isnt slightly off it fails over 300 times in that equasion witcvh is about spacetime. Your tellin me if relativity fails predictions about spacetime it doesnt matter. Do you even science? LOL Con aint shown nuttin.
This classy bordello would sing: General relativity and Special relativity is false, fake, and wrong

I am jedi4 peope, and i have discoverd the theories of reletivity developed by albert godelstien are wrong. Open your your mind and anus for the logic of dawn.Relativity is a bad nameSHOT THRU THE HEART AND YOUR TO BLAME, ALBERT BABY YOU GAVE RELATIVITY A BAD NAME!If general relativity is general then special realtivity is really specific reativity. Yeah the physicies and say all teh laws being teh same in absolute motion is specific but general relativity is still very specific. Observe "General relativity is a theory of gravitation that was developed by Albert Einstein between 1907 and 1915."That aint general, thats realy really specific init?http://en.wikipedia.org...General relativity and special relativity are incoherenrt because they are both specific theories and therefore false and therefore wrong.Relatrivitay ignore phenemolnolgoyMe and my mates formed a phenomenology club. Most of the time we drink a little beer, smoke a little pot, snort a litte cane, read some Husserl then have an orgy. Then we use anti phenomenology books to clean up the fluids. What me an my mates think about after the orgy is amazin. It would blow up the universe if it got out. One of the tings we got to thinking about is reallytivity. Wes says that according to phenomoenorgy time is complex and not in intervels. It is a string of time. Note that Husserl say this experienvce of time is embeded within the scientist. The phenomenology cums first then the science coms. U cannot debate phenomongly because science is embeded within it. Any science that tries to rape phenemonolgy should get the D in the B.Relativghty f*cks with time and f*cks wit the phenenogy of time witch the relativity is based on and QED relativity contradicts itself.http://www.einstein-online.info... No verification of spacetimeTo date there has no ben a verifcation spacetime exists and bend. Som experiments show the curvature of your mom and light. but that dont mean there exists bending. it just mean that is how it do. It dont talk about how the light get there. By curvature is complete speculation and mental masturb8tion.Relativity is inconsitant with established mathIn this equasion http://www.johndcook.com...; />Realativity predits an alcourse sin /P not a sin/l. and preditcs a b^4 not a b^2. There are over 300 errors youd make if relaitivty was used in this equastion AND THIS IS A PROBLEM ABOUT GRAPH SPACETIME!!!!!. Sourcehttp://www.docdroid.net... Realitivy cant stop the fire. It fails harder than a special needs kid in school.It fails like a turkey trying to fly. it fails like this guy trying to pick up a women Realtitvy fails harder than him!
Fast Food in Public Schools

When looking at the issue of fast food operation whitin our school grounds, it is imperative that we have a full analysis on what the topic relates to and exactly how it affects us as students. My opponent clearly did not or perhaps couldn't show a good analysis on the subject at hand. I will serve as an opposing force to this topic using these three contentions. Contention one: obesity obesity is the number one misunderstood topic in the United States. The role of the government is to find every way possible to protect its citizen and not to claim absolute power by telling them what to eat. Everyone is entitled to the freedom to eat whatever they which without government interference. My opponent uses obesity as one of his contentions; however, he failed to realize that just the banishment of fast food whitin our school ground will make absolutely no change. This will just be a waste of money as well as a waste of the United States Resources. Contention Two: relationship I presume that this debate firmly speaks of adolescents, which leads me to my second point. the school and the fast food restaurants both share a very Symbiosis relationship in which the fast food restaurant as well as the school benefits. the school benefits by meeting the needs/ cry for better food whitin the school grounds and the fast food restaurant benefits by asking "EXTRA" money from the adolescents.
Fast Food in Public Schools

I believe that fast food should not be allowed in schools because it effects children's health in negative ways. According to aacap.org, between 16 and 33 percent of children and adolescents in the U.S are obese. If kids become obese outside of school, allowing fast food in schools is ridiculous. Also, public schools are for anyone to get an education, so allowing them to become obese is irresponsible.
social media is not a needed part of life

As I said you will not change anything about people sitting on the computer because you always have youtube LoL DOTA and other games. Computer is time comsuming and not the social media. Deleting social media from existence also means people who gain money from internet and 'new' teenagers to do other things on the computer. A few decades ago people didn't have neither computer nor internet which made them bored so they played outside. You need to get rid of computer to make people social in real life.
social media is not a needed part of life

the fact that people are lazy is encouraged my the dominant presence of social media. I have to disagree when you say that people would sit in their chairs. do remember that there has been a time (just a few decades ago) where the social media frenzy was nonexistent, and people survived. the main complaint of parents today is that children do not go outside anymore and sit on a chair on their electronics all day while the bike rusts in the garage. furthermore, just because one refuses all participation on social media does not mean he/she is anti-social. yes it will be harder to connect with people but it can be done. in fact, not being involved with social media encourages real life social activities because you have all this available time to spend elsewhere and finally have that dinner with your friend that you would plan but never carry out.
social media is not a needed part of life

Yes, social media is like a drug because we have made it into one. But if we were to stop using social media together one day, yes we would have withdrawals, like constantly thinking about it, finding ourselves on the app without even realizing it etc. but we would be ok. social media is not required to survive on a day to day basis. it is true that social media gives us our daly dose of communication, media update, stay in touch with social aspects and even political aspects, but we do not need it.
Did God intend humans to sin.

I will contend again that you will not find one hint in a single verse that God intended or created man to sin. Likewise you will not find a verse that says God created sin. So to successfully prove that God created man to sin one would have to show bible verses showing that God created man to sin. Even if God created sin it still wouldn't follow that that that would be God ultimate purpose for human kindand that's what my opponent has to prove BIBLICALLY. You may ask if God did not create sin than where did it come from? Let's first define what sin is biblically 1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. If the Law (Exodus 20) reflects Gods true nature than The idea of God creating sin would be a contradiction to what scripture says. Did God create sin? Id advise you to read Ezekiel 28. Ezekiel 28:15 - Thou [wast] perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. Now this verse is pretty explicit that God created Lucifer perfect but where was sin found? In God? No but in Lucifer. John 8:44 - Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. Lucifer is the originator of sin. Notice in Genesis 1 Adam and Eve walked and talked with God but not until they listened to satan did they sin. To Just drive home the point even more read James 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:. So to say God created sin would be to say that light and darkness can exist at the same time which is impossible! The bible gives irrefutable evidence of this in 1 John 1:5-6 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. (1 John 1:5, KJV)If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: (1 John 1:6, KJV).. So I confirm through scriptures that God did not intend man to sin, and to add on that God did not create sin.
Did God intend humans to sin.

I will show through scripture the purpose of why God created the human race and why it is illogical and not biblical to say God intended for man to sin. (1.) He created man for His glory: Isaiah 43:7 - [Even] every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him. (2.) To have dominion over all the earth: Genesis 1:26 - And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (3.) God intended us to do good works (this point here destroys your whole argument.) Ephesians 2:10 - For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (4.) To Follow Gods commandments (which is not to sin) Ecclesiastes 12:13 - Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this [is] the whole [duty] of man. 5) We were intended to serve Him 1 Samuel 12:24 - Only fear the LORD, and serve him in truth with all your heart: for consider how great [things] he hath done for you. (6) God wants us to seek Him ONLY if you want: Acts 17:27 - That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:. Now what you have to do is prove biblically that God intended man to sin. Give me scripture not some weak philosophy that doesn't even hold any weight, truth is you won't find any reference for God intending man to sin.
Hot dogs are better with onions

http://www.thehungrymouse.com... Onions on hot dogs work perfectly. People love the crunch and burst of flavour that they add. http://www.npr.org... says "people have been asking for more crisp onions, for the sake of they add crunch and flavour to my hot dog."Dietary guide lines state that everyone should have 2 serves of fruit and 5 serves of veggies each day. So at least you get 1 serve of veggies done for the day.
Hot dogs are better with onions

A hot dog is defined as a frankfurter, especially one served hot in a long, soft roll and topped with various condiments.It says "various condiments" as in onions. What else would you put on your hot dog? With a squirt of tomato sauce and smoking onions, my friend; that is how you make a perfect hot dog.Hot dogs are very common in AFL (Australian Football League), and to have a proper Aussie snagger, you need to have onions. It is a need. You need it for survival, for life. It is like water.... We need onions on our hot dogs.
Speed greater than light is possible.

The burden is upon me to show that when observed from appropriate frame, speed greater than light is possible. The task of Con is to refute any argument or example that I may present.==Definitions==Speed:The rate or a measure of the rate of motion, especially: a. Distance traveled divided by the time of travel. b. The limit of this quotient as the time of travel becomes vanishingly small; the first derivative of distance with respect to time. c. The magnitude of a velocity. [1]Speed of Light: 299792458 m/s [2]==Notes==1. The voters are requested to vote on the basis of arguments presented in debate and not their own knowledge of subject.2. To win this debate, Con must explain where my arguments are wrong. A simple reference to standard textbook will not suffice.3. If my opponent wants to add any constrain, they should post them in the comments section. Once I approve, they can be added in my partner's opening round and will be considered as part of the debate.==Structure of debate==Round 1: Acceptance / DefinitionRound 2: ArgumentsRound 3: Rebuttals + SummaryThanks in advance to my opponent for debating with me.Reference[1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Speed greater than light is possible.

There are many ways for me to show that speed greater than light is possible, especially since my opponent has not added any condition whatsoever. Some of the methods can be found in comments section. However I will go ahead with what I had originally planned. Consider a star 40 lightyears away, straight in front of your nose, as shown in figure 1. To describe the position of this star we need a coordinate frame. We consider the direction in front of you as x-axis. The direction from your legs to head as y-axis and the remaining direction as z-axis. In this frame, the coordinates of the star are (40,0,0) lightyears. The actual figure of 40 lightyear is not important, and some other similar value will also work. . http://www.debate.org... Let us perform an about turn. It is quite possible to turn 180 degrees around y-axis in; let us say 2 seconds. The frame also turns with you. The new situation is shown in figure 2. The new coordinates for the star are (-40,0,0) lightyears. Elementary physics tells us that the displacement in this frame is 80 lightyears. . http://www.debate.org... It takes light 80 years to travel a distance of 80 lightyears. However, in our frame, the bulky and bright star has covered that distance in 2 seconds. The star is clearly travelling much faster than speed of light (defined in the debate as 299792458 m/s). The resolution is affirmed.
Taxes on the affluent should be increased.

First of all this debate has gotten off track but to start off I am sorry for little sources. All my info is from the Mises institute rothsbard Friedman and hayek. Thats two noble prize winners to your one. Second your basic argument is that Depressions are bad They can be prevented Deficiet spending helps this We need taxes for this I have explained that depressions are nessesary. You say they are totally preventable and use post ww2 as a example. Actually while taxes were high spending was super low. America Was the only nation not harmed by the war so we had a huge advantage. Assuming government delays the depression people keep making bad investments. Stimules spending is especially worthless. Why pay people to do projects that are so worthless that no private enterprise will do it. You say that private enterprise made two many risk in 2008 . True but it was because the government was putting to much money in housing. Also because they new they were to big to fail. Let's look at history. You say that a few years is relative. Think about it. Martin burdens presidency was ruined by deppresion. By the year after his departure the marker corrected itself. As for the 1920s it is the fact that his policies were irevelent is the important part. He did nothing and the depression ended. Why is this when now we have huge depressions with huge spending. As for private vs public Bryant park in NY city was a horrible public park until it came under private management. And says law? I argued against your points for a whole argument. All you say is why is it right.
Minecraft is better than tetras

Tetris is one of the GOOD old things, like ration books or children working in factories. Minecraft is one of the bad new things like iPhones or Minecraft.Squares are old shapes, do you hate them? Then I suppose you'd have to hate Minecraft too, because it was released in 2009, which was a pretty rubbish year really and it was a bit of a while ago.Thank you.
There is no stigma surrounding mental health issues in Australia.

The statistics in my previous argument show that the Australian media in fact is promoting a negative image of mental health rather than a positive one. The news is constantly utilising the topic of mental health to entice viewers and these news stories are generally linked to violence. Yes, There are many organisations that are trying to aid mental health sufferers but this does not mean that the stigma does not exist. This leads onto my second argument, Based off reliable surveys conducted by both the Australian government and credited Mental Health organisations, The results show that the Australian public are aware of the stigma surrounding people with mental illnesses. A survey from Relationships Australia showed that three out of four people with a mental illness report that they have experienced stigma. New research which was conducted by the University of Melbourne and in partnership with the renowned Mental Health organisation "Headspace" revealed that 52% of young people aged 12 " 25 that have identified having a mental health problem in the last 12 months would be embarrassed to discuss the problem with anyone, And 49% would be afraid of what others think. Do these statistics not prove that there is an instinctual stigma concerning mental health? These children have possibly been influenced by the media or "social norms" that they feel having a mental illness is embarrassing. We (the Australian public) are constantly and unconsciously stigmatising mental health sufferers everyday by misusing labels. People may casually say that someone is schizophrenic and mean it as if they have a split personality when in reality if you are suffering from schizophrenia, You have trouble managing your thoughts, Feelings and behaviour. By misusing labels and using them in a negative context, We are unconsciously stigmatising mental health sufferers and the statistics prove this.
There is no stigma surrounding mental health issues in Australia.

As media might constantly stigmatising those suffering mental health issues, They could be raising awareness about mental health issues globally. Media has a strong influence in society these days which can inform society about the amount in Australia that have mental health issues. One in five (20%) Australians aged 16-85 experience a mental illness in any year, Which is quite a large amount, But the media can inform those who have mental health issues, Which our community could them help those suffering from mental health. Mental health issues have become a big problem in Australia recently and social stigma does not surround these mental health issues. Those that live in Australia and have mental health issues are helped by family and friends as well as communities which stops the social stigma surrounding mental health issues. The Community Mental Health Australia (CMHA) is a group that helps spread awareness about mental health issues in Australia. They help people affected by mental illness and the public, Private and primary health care services " to ensure the economic, Social and emotional health and well-being of all Australians.