BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
The bishop is superior to the knight.

This resolution is one that has been of much interest to me since first starting Chess, and is as follows: "The bishop is superior to the knight. "Rules and stipulations:1) First round is acceptance only (the following rounds are to be used by each debator as he/she pleases).2) No semantics.3) The burden of proof here is shared. It's not enough to merely refute my claims and show that both pieces may be equally valuable. My opponent must also show why the knight is superior to the bishop.
It is Possible That God Can Exist

The Flying Spaghetti Monster will kill me will his noodly appendages if I say this but there is no God. First of all, notice that there isn't any scientific evidence proving towards a God. EVIDENCE ONE: First of all, "God answers prayers" is human imagination. Back in 2006, they had a study of terminally ill patients and asked half of them to pray, and the other half to not pray. At the end, both groups still died even though half of them prayed. I will post one reason in each debate.. CHEERS, MATE I HOPE YOU RETURN.
The bible has many logical contradictions

Sometimes the Bible doesn't clarify things. It leaves the reader to decipher it himself. When God created evil, he didn't want us to use it. That is correct. But God lets us choose what we want to do. If there wasn't evil, what point would good be? We'd be forced beings. And, I must admit, I shouldn't have used "perfect" in the way I did. That was a mistake on my part. I only meant to imply that things were perfect before the fall of Adam. Maybe it was a man-made argument, but what God wants his people to be robots? If he wants real, genuine love, he isn't going to point a gun to our heads and force us to love him. He's going to let us choose to love him, whether or not he likes that. I like to imagine we humans as just play-things for God. It is incomprehensible to imagine a being without a beginning, so I cannot argue with certainty his being. All I can imagine is that one day, God got bored and lonely, so he created us to love him. I cannot argue with certainty why, or how, for that matter, he created us, as Job has already cried out to him in the book of Job. God never did give him a direct reply; only, "Where were you when I created the heavens?" As I said before, some people read and interpret the Bible differently. I take the book of Job as, "Don't ask God why you're here, be grateful you are and just live. If he didn't want you to be born, he wouldn't let you be born." He created man the way he did, so, as stated, we would love him with our own will. Adam and Eve did know what they did wrong. Why else would they have gasped that they were naked? Why else would they try to hide in the Garden of Eden after they bit the forbidden fruit? God knew that they knew. That is why he punished them. God did need the Tree of Life as an experiment of good will, it is obvious. God let the possessed snake into the Garden to tempt Eve on purpose. He wanted to test their loyalty. He wanted to validate their free will. He wanted to see if they would obey his order, "You can do anything here, except eat from the Tree of Life." After Eve convinced Adam to bite the fruit, they knew what evil was. They knew what God knew. Thus, they realized they were wrong in disobeying God. They weren't unknowledgeable. They did only know good prior to the fruit, yes, but Adam knew that it would be wrong to eat it, because God told them not to. And yet he still gave in to Eve's persistence. He disobeyed God, and he knew it. God would never tempt you with something you didn't have the will to resist. God knows your power, and he tempts it thus, to make it stronger. Adam and Eve were powerful enough to resist the temptation to "be as God," and yet, they still gave in.
The bible has many logical contradictions

First off I apologize if I was unclear and I will try to do a better job of being understandable. Now for your first point if man was perfect how can he make mistakes? That is a complete logical fallacy, it says they were "good" not perfect, and even if it did no perfect person can make mistakes unless they are truly imperfect. I would say by creating evil he was the cause of it being, why would you create something then tell people not to use it? No where does it say in the bible that you must have evil to have free will, plus if he is all powerful then he should be able to give man free will without creating evil since he can do anything. So following your logic any choice not put forth means we don't have free will, but if we have a sinful nature and we all fall short and we can't be perfect how is that giving us free will when all we can and are able to do is sin? Plus free will was a man made argument which the bible itself does not talk of it being the thing that God wants us to have. Here is a link that shows the free will argument is incorrect: http://agnosticreview.com... As far as Gods beginning according to the bible God created all things as I showed in heaven and in earth which would have to include himself and unpleasant things like sin and evil. But if it includes him it contradicts the idea that nothing created God, and if he didn't create himself it contradicts the idea that he created everything. God created fallible man sin and evil as well as making Adam and Eve none knowledgeable then blaming them for being fallible, sinful, doing evil, and not doing right even though he fully knew they didn't know what hey did wrong. But Jesus himself said forgive them for they know not what they do which of course was referring to the people who did him harm, even though since Adam and Eve passed down the knowledge of good and evil so they did know. But Adam and Eve really didn't know but yet he punished them. There was no reason God needed the tree or the snake, there plus making Adam and Eve na"ve and unknowledgeable when it came to morals. How could you expect someone not to do wrong when they don't even know what it is. Putting a problem you know will cause trouble for your na"ve, gullible, and unknowing children but still doing it is not good parenting. Especially when your all powerful and could come up with infinite possibilities to avoid that outcome and maintain free will.
The bible has many logical contradictions

I accept. To start. Man wasn't always imperfect. You are incorrect there. If man were imperfect, God would not have called him "good," as he said in Genesis. Your next argument. You are correct in saying that God created evil. According to the Bible, God created everything. But, although God created evil, that doesn't mean he is the cause of evil. God created evil because it would be contradictory in his promise of free will. He created evil so people could choose evil if they wanted to. If evil didn't exist, then the fall of Adam would have never happened. We would all be in a forced will to love and obey God, and this contradicts God's promise. I must ask you to connect what evil has to do with his own beginning, which according to the Bible he never had? I am a little puzzled on your opening argument, but I hope you and I both understand our points. God indeed does hate when we sin, but that doesn't mean that it is a fault of logic. As a father, if you tell your child not to do something, and that child does it anyways, not respecting your order, how would you feel? God is a creator of common sense. Do this one thing, good. Do this one other thing, bad. It is as simple as West is left of me, and East is right of me. Please clarify yourself a bit better in your next argument.
The bible has many logical contradictions

I will site parts in the bible that show blatant logical fallacies. God created imperfect man then blamed them for being imperfect even though he made them that way plus also makes evil and sin yet hates when we do them. " Colossians 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:" " Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." If you believe the bible then god created everything INCLUDING evil, sin, rape, murder, torcher, molestation, petaphelia, homosexuality, hate, and himself which according to the bible he never had a beginning so therefore he himself contradicts his own word.
The bible has many logical contradictions

I have addressed all points carefully showing with logic and links as well as biblical quotes to prove my point. I have countered the points my opponent has made and since the last two rounds has not been able to respond for what ever reason. So because of that my points still stand. So unless my opponent can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt I'm wrong then my points stay true and accurate. I hope everything goes well for him in the present and future.
The bible has many logical contradictions

No, if God is truly all powerful like the bible said he would be able to not create evil and let us still have free will. And where in the bible does it say the world was perfect? How do you know he doesn't want us to be robots? He obviously wants us to voluntarily do his bidding so he does want us to be doing what he personally wants which I would hardly call that being free. Especially when if we don't we are threatened with eternal hell fire. You may of missed my link that proves we do not have free will here it is in case you missed it: http://agnosticreview.com... As far as the putting a gun to our head he is, if someone said you can freely do as I say or I'll put you in a fiery pit for eternity then I would call that putting a gun to someone's head friend. So basically he risked many many people going to hell so he could have toys? Do you realize how sick that sounds? And if God is all powerful he couldn't of made another way to get love or entertain himself without risking people going to hell for eternity? "Adam and Eve did know what they did wrong. Why else would they have gasped that they were naked? Why else would they try to hide in the Garden of Eden after they bit the forbidden fruit?" Um, because that was AFTER they had knowledge of good and evil, if God didn't want us to touch it then he should of given us knowledge before hand as well as not put the tree there or the snake. Saying its obvious doesn't make it true, and once again God never needed the tree as God being infinitely powerful could of come up with infinitely better ways to do so or else God can't do ALL. No Adam did not know once again they can not know good and evil because it was before they ate the fruit not after. "God would never tempt you with something you didn't have the will to resist. God knows your power, and he tempts it thus, to make it stronger. Adam and Eve were powerful enough to resist the temptation to "be as God," and yet, they still gave in." This story proves that wrong, he tempted them they failed cause it was something they couldn't handle, it"s as simple as that.
The earth is flat

#questionauthority#scienceI do not believe the earth is flat or round, I'm an agnostic when it comes to this issue. This is merely a discussion on an interesting topic.The reason I would argue that the earth may be flat in this debate is that the curvature of the earth should be noticeable from a relatively low altitude, while balloons have been sent to great heights without observing any curvature. Notice, these were balloons with cameras that have not included fish eye lens cameras. Fish eye cameras bend the earth and make it look spherical, these types of cameras are always used in NASA rockets and the ISS.Balloon videoMath behind the curvature of the earth http://mathcentral.uregina.ca...
Touch ID (Iphone)

The most common concern is that law enforcement can compel you to give up your fingerprint. I have found a loophole in the law. Law enforcement can not compel you to give up your passcode. You can give them your fingerprint, but a passcode will still be required to unlock your phone. If they ask you for your passcode, you don't have to give it to them. If your really in a pinch, you can use the wrong finger and after 5 tries, your fingerprint will no longer work. You can do it really quick like in 3 seconds. It doesn't take long to lock out your phone (tap power button), then tap power button really fast; Now your fingerprint wont work and your passcode will be required. I am actually shocked that nobody has ever mentioned this. Even if someone has your fingerprint, they still need your phone to hack into your Touch ID. If your phone is lost or stolen, you can remotely lock and wipe everything off your phone. If your phone is lost or stolen, 99% of the time, they will run to the nearest pawn shop and sell your phone for quick cash. Their is one more reason why I feel that Touch ID is secure; Apple doesn't give in to law enforcement. I'm sure you remember when the FBI tried to get Apple to weaken their encryption and build a backdoor in their IOS. Tim Cook even ignored a court order. The FBI finally gave up and paid a hacker 1 million dollars to get into their phone. In Apples next update, they increase the password length, so now its a lot harder to hack into the IPhone. I admit security is annoying and that's why so many people have weak passwords across multiple accounts; Touch ID is only annoying because Apple sometimes will require a passcode and your fingerprint won't work, but that is what makes Touch ID secure. Sometimes you may even wash your hands, and accidentally lock it out. Please keep in mind this debate only applies to Touch ID on Apple.
Touch ID (Iphone)

I will not argue that people use weak passwords, or that touch id may help those people have more secure passwords, but the topic of this debate is the security of the touch id. There have been numerous stories of people using fake finger prints made from molds that have successfuly broken into the touch id (https://www.cnet.com... , https://techcrunch.com...). But this is not the full extent of the problem, that can happen when being interrogated by police or other agencies who would previously have to get a password from you, but now they can just take your hand and hold it on the scanner, or use a finger print that they already have scanned from you to access the phone without your permission. The security features you mention are valid, however they could cause the user an annoyance and if a user relies on the touch id for too long then they could forget the password and have to reset their phone (happened to my brother). When you use touch id for ALL of your passwords that leaves you exposed if someone is able to make a copy of your fingerprint. You mention the 61% of people using the password and then encourage people to use the touch id for everything which I just found ironic.
Touch ID (Iphone)

I spent a lot of time researching this class action lawsuite you were talking about, and came up empty. I first tried a Google search; I found many links to other class action lawsuits againts Apple, but not the one you were talking about. I even went to the class action lawsuite (classaction.org) website and still couldn't find the lawsuite you were talking about. If you have any more sources (news articles), I'm happy to take a look at it. For argument sake, I'm going to assume that this article is true. Touch ID does not store your finger print or DNA. The only thing Touch ID stores a mathematical representation of your finger print. Your finger print data is encrypted and only available to Enslave. Enslave is isolated from the rest of the chip. Your finger print data is not stored in the cloud, Apps, IOS, or on Apple servers. If Apple doesn't have access to your finger print data, then it's impossible for Apple to comply with the NSA. Getting Apple to comply with the NSA is like getting a VPN provider that doesn't store logs, to produce what they don't have. The only way to hack Touch ID and retrieve their finger print data is to have physical access to the device. The secure enslave also protects your finger print data with strong encryption. Security features of Touch ID 1. Passcode has to be entered ever time the phone reboots. 2. Passcode has to be entered every 48 hours 3. If you want to change Touch ID & Passcode settings a passcode is required 4. When download an app from the Apple Store, a passcode is required. After your first purchase, you may use Touch ID to download additional apps. After 24-48 hours a passcode is required again 5. Touch ID is sensitive, 5 incorrect tries and you have to enter your password again. When you use Touch ID for all your passwords, you can create longer and more complex passwords hassle free. Not only can you use Touch ID to manage all your passwords, password managers also Work with Touch ID, so it's really convenient. I'll be the first to admit, I was notorious for having the weakest passwords. I had the same password for my bank account, email, credit card, etc. All my accounts got hacked. Now that I use Touch ID, I can have a complex password (16-24) random characters for each account. My IPhone password is 12 characters. I also have the setting to wipe phone after 10 failed tries. It would take forever to hack the phone because the counter has to keep being reset. According to a consumer survey: Password Habits, a large amount of users have poor password habits. Over 61% use the same password on multiple websites. Keep in mind, this is just one statistic. http://www.csid.com... If using Touch ID helps you to adopt healthy password habits, then Touch ID would make you more secure; If you returned to your old password habits after getting rid of Touch ID; you should have kept Touch ID because having weaker passwords will be easier for hackers to hack.
Touch ID (Iphone)

It is in fact not secure, apple has already handed over touch id information to the NSA based on "red flags" in your text history. The technology was origninally made by the government and they gave it to apple provided that apple would share access to the information with the fbi, dhs, and NSA. (http://theracketreport.com...) Therefore the touch ID on the iphone is not secure and you are at risk if you use it.
Touch ID (Iphone)

A lot of people are afraid to use the touch ID Iphone because they feel it is insecure. In this debate I will prove that touch ID is secure. i also believe that everyone should be using it. I have studied the technology, so I have a lot of expertise in this area and have studied this technology thoughly. This debate applies to the Iphone only, not the android touch ID. I am awaiting a good challenge.
The Error of Evolution of Creation

so continuing on God is the creator we look at our Dna and see it is complex now many people say its evolution process but never give a real reason why this pattern is seen but to look closely on the design we have to see the reflection of the creator behind his work as we read in Genesis 1:1 it says God created this is thus the breathing out of now we see that a infinite God just created to what is seen today .. the universe earth est. Now man was created in his image not from monkeys because if you look there is no similarity to that yeah scientist say so but who is man . now many will say that you can trust in science becuz it changes and that is their strength but i say that is false and that is their weaknesses when you believe in to somthing you believe because it doesn't change but stays the same as a given fact that when u go to the bible and God creating you trust in him because he made mankind and you and the says he never changes
The Error of Evolution of Creation

Thursday, March 22, 2012 The Error of Evolution Many people and Theologians are believing in a evolution theory, by this process removing any creation Facts but adapting to more a scientific mindset where the creation of man and the universe has spurned into a moment where spontaneously this dot of matter erupted expanding the existence of the universe where time and space began. While some refer to the Big Bang Theory as accurate Evidence of the existence and evidence of the universe.. Not only can evolution be False,but as science always changes. The theories for man`s origin as evolved species of primates or from an amphibious creature evolving through a series of Evolution states. Not only is this wrong but inaccurate to the forming of the Universe and Mankind existence as there is a substantial evidence for the Creation account of mankind from God a ultimate being creating the Existence of all things Atheists will disprove such a account to even prove an erroneous account of man from primates.. please fill free to blog and give opinions for this reason i am writing for a school assignment where ill need to show what evolutionist and Atheists believe names will not be given .. thank you
The Kalam Cosmological Argument Successfully Demonstrates its Conclusion.

Hi, In order to follow logically, we need to adjust the tense of #3 to "has a cause" rather than "had a cause." Otherwise, it would not follow strictly from a linguistic or logical standpoint. Another way to contextualize this debate would be to argue that anything or anyone which is above time or transcendent to time cannot have a cause (at least a spatio-temporal cause). That which is not above time or transcendent to time must have a cause. The universe is not above time or transcendent to time. Therefore, the universe has a cause and anything or anyone transcendent to time is uncaused. As to the phrase, "begins to exist," I would propose something similar but simpler. If human consciousness were present, something or someone would be perceived to exist at one time and not exist at a prior or different time. Thanks for the opportunity to debate this topic.
The Kalam Cosmological Argument Successfully Demonstrates its Conclusion.

Welcome, apologist opponent (most likely). Dr. William Lane Craig (WLC) has defended the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA) as demonstrating its conclusion. Here is the argument. 1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause. 2. The universe began to exist. 3. Therefore, the universe had a cause. [1] We will use WLC's definition of "begins," which he defines as "coming into being". A more rigorous definition of "coming into being" (according to WLC) is as follows. "The kalam cosmological argument uses the phrase "begins to exist." For those who wonder what that means I sometimes use the expression "comes into being" as a synonym. We can explicate this last notion as follows: for any entity e and time t, e comes into being at t if and only if (i) e exists at t, (ii) t is the first time at which e exists, (iii) there is no state of affairs in the actual world in which e exists timelessly, and (iv) e"s existing at t is a tensed fact." [2] Pro may give another definition of "begins to exist" in round 1 which we will use for the debate, or he may use Craig's, but no changing definitions after round 1. Rounds- Pro will argue in rounds 1,2, and 3. Con (me) will argue in rounds 2,3, and 4. In round 4, pro may only summarize points already made by him and give a brief explanation for why he should win each point. I will also give a brief explanation for why I should win each point at the end of round 4. Burden of proof is on pro. Note that I am not asking pro to prove the cause is God. This should make things easier and more fun. Please don't forfeit. It makes me cry on the inside. Good luck! Sources 1- http://www.reasonablefaith.org... 2- http://www.reasonablefaith.org...