BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
King Kong Deserved to Beat V-Rex

I am radicalguy44, and this is my first debate in debate. org and i decided to start easy, and move on to more complex. I am an LD debater, but I also know how to debate in PF and parliamentary. Allright, let's start this. I won't use a value, nor a criteria since it's kind of useless in this debate. . Resolved: King Kong deserved to beat V-Rex DEFINITIONS! ! King Kong = An animated movie character made that was captured an later killed. He was fierce, feroucious, and very strong * V-Rex = a movie character much like a tyrannosaurus rex, but is even more ferocious * Deserving = qualified for or having a claim to reward, assistance, etc. , because of one's actions, qualities, or situation: I would like to point out that all the Aff has to do is prove that King Kong won that match fair and square, and not prove that King Kong could beat anyone. CONTENTION 1: King Kong has bigger advantages than the V-Rex. I have seen the video in youtube, and I have seen the superiority of King Kong. First of all, King Kong has hands, and the V-Rex does not, therefore that gives our monkey friend a bigger advantage, since he could hold on to the V-Rex. Second of all, King Kong has bigger fighting abilities as you can see in the video. He bit his opponent's tongue and jumped on top of him. If he didn't deserve that win, I don't know who did. CONTENTION 2: The domination throughout the fight was clear. If you take a look at the youtube video (. http://www.youtube.com...), you can see that there wasn't a single time in which King-Kong couldn't defend himself. He basically dominated the whole fight. I defined deserving as "qualified for or having a claim to reward, assistance, etc. , because of one's actions, qualities, or situation:". Take a look at the end. .. "because of one's actions" King kong's action was dominating the whole fight, and therefore that makes him deserving CONTENTION 3: According to my definition of "deserving", you can see that king kong clearly deserved the win. I dont' see how he didn't deserve it, since he was dominating the whole fight, and he was never defenseless. CONCLUSION: I believe that whether he deserved it is clear, since of the simple domination throughout the whole fight. he was never attacked nor hurt, therefore King Kong was the one who deserved the win, and I believe PRO should win. thanks! and I know it's a silly debate, but it'll do
King Kong Deserved to Beat V-Rex

Hello, I am Pleco. In this debate, I shall defend the fact that there is no way King Kong could have beat the V-Rex (Let alone a whole family of V-Rexes) in the 2005 remake of the famous movie "King Kong". King Kong has been victorious in three battles which he should have never won... He battled a T-Rex in the 1933 film, and then he battled a giant snake in the 1976 remake of the film. And, in the most recent 2005 remake of the film, Kong faced a family of large reptiles evolved from the Tyrannosaurus Rex known as Vastosaurus Rex (V-Rex for short). King Kong did not deserve victory in any of these battles! http://www.youtube.com... Since this debate is created for the sake of fun instead of political awareness, there shall be five founds. I only ask that my opponent introduce his/herself and maintains a respectful attitude.
Banning Animal Dissection

If some people can't take the sight of a dead animal, let alone dissect them. it is not mandatory for them to do it. No one can MAKE you do that. They may want you to, but they cant make you do it. If people think they can learn from a textbook, what will happen when and if you see the real thing? What happens if they learn right then that they can't see a dead animal or dissect one?
Oranges are Better than Apples

Hello. I am the Con, and I can state with total certainty that I am not Hitler, nor do I resemble Hitler. Here is a picture of me: Here is a picture of Pro: Who are you going to believe when it comes to the deep questions of life, such as whether oranges are better than apples (they're not)?The only relevant claim that my opponent presents in Round 3 is that apples contain a high amount of pesticide residue. Though this would be a legitimate concern if pesticides were always poisonous, it just so happens that the AMOUNT and TYPE of pesticide determine the health risk involved. The use of pesticides is closely regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that the amount and type of pesticides used in growing apples is not harmful to humans."For these reasons, the Federal Government, in cooperation with the States, carefully regulates pesticides to ensure that their use does not pose unreasonable risks to human health or the environment. In particular, the Federal pesticide program is designed to ensure that these products can be used with a reasonable certainty that they will pose no harm to infants, children, and adults." (source: http://www.epa.gov...)Besides, I don't see any pesticides in here anyway: Delicious.
Oranges are Better than Apples

The Con seems to be clearly misinformed about this debate. The title of the debate is,"Oranges are Better than Apples" not, "Apples versus Oranges". That is because Oranges are better then apples therefore it must be true. Don't believe the Con, he probobly smells bad anyway. Let me ask the audience one simple question. Would you vote for the Con? If so your voting for Hitler. You wouldn't vote for a genocidal maniac would you? Me neither.The Con then attempts to make some ludicrous claims about my arguments (that are always right of course). They are easily refuted if one only looks at the evidence.According to the most reputable source in the world (exlcuding me because I'm always right), USA Today listed apples as the most contaminated fruits of all. They are doused by pesticides all year round causing constipation, hair loss and erectice dysfunction. "Pesticides are known to be toxic to the nervous system, cause cancer, disrupt hormones and cause brain damage in children. Pregnant women are advised to avoid foods containing pesticides." - USA TODAY [S1]Clearly as we can see apples are deadly filth. No sane person would ever ingest such harmful substances. Remember audience, just say no to apples. Just say no. In conclusion with the evidence presented there is no doubt that apples are awful and vile fruit. You should just eat oranges. Oh and vote for me. Sources:1. http://yourlife.usatoday.com...2. Me
Oranges are Better than Apples

Fellow debaters! Today is a momentus day! A glorious day! A day that shall live in the halls of eternal orangey glory!So how is the orange greater then the filth these heathens call an apple? I SHALL TELL YOU.The day the universe was born a great god of orange fury appeared in the skies of transcendence. On the first day he decided that oranges were good and never did anything else because he COULDN'T BE BOTHERED. BEHOLD HIS MAJESTY So why is the orange the greatest fruit that has ever existed in the history of everything forever? WELL I WILL TELL YOU.WELL ACTUALLY THIS MAN WILL TELL YOU. So....WHAT ARE THE HEALTH BENEFITS OF ORANGES YOU ASK?The answer is....TOO MUCH TO LIST!So here is a short list....HEALTH BENEFITS OF ORANGES:1. SEX (LOTS OF IT)2. BEARDS 3. HOT CHEERLEADERS4. CHARLIE SHEEN5. BOB SAGET6. YOUR MOTHERClearly as we can see (YOU BETTER SEE IT) the orange fruit of super badassness is simply unmatchable. No fruit in all of the universe can match it's delicious orangey glory. In conclusion I leave you with this groundbreaking analysis of my position.... Your move....Con.
Oranges are Better than Apples

I know how difficult it is to try to make sense of Pro's mindless jibbering, so I can sympathize with those of you reading. Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to counter Pro's concluding remarks point-by-point:1. Apol's Divine Word is supreme, and overshadows anything Pro's false god may have uttered.2. None of the health benefits that Pro describes are legitimate, as he has provided no evidence. The health benefits lie firmly on the side of Apples.3. I am not Hitler, and Pro is ugly.4. Pesticides are not harmful in the amounts that they are found in apples, and certainly are not linked to either AIDS or erectile dysfunction.5. Pro provides scant evidence for his conspiracy theory, and we all know that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.6. Snoop Dawg has no expertise concerning anything but weed and dog biscuits. The comprehensive argument that I have provided in Round 2 hasn't been refuted Pro. Here is a list of the points that Pro has neglected to address:- Apples have superior taste and texture, according to survey data. - Apples have superior culinary versatility over oranges, as apples can be incorporated into a greater number of dishes. - Apples are more affordable than oranges, providing a source of life-sustaining nutrition for the poor and frugal. - Apples provide more of the essential nutrients and energy that our bodies need. - Apples are more celebrated in human cultures through events such as Apple Festivals, and they are frequently used in literature and religious texts as the object of temptation and desire. Do not be distracted by Pro's threats. For every vote that is cast in my favor, Apol will reward the world with a new baby kitten.
Oranges are Better than Apples

Well it seems this debate is drawing to a close. As we can see the Con has failed to list any appriopate reasons why apples are actually better then oranges. To sum it up here are the reasons.1. The Great Orange hath said so.2. Health Benefits: A. SEX (LOTS OF IT)B. BEARDS C. HOT CHEERLEADERSD. CHARLIE SHEENE. BOB SAGETF. YOUR MOTHER3. The Con is Hitler.4. Apples are filled with deadly pesticiedes that give you AIDS and erectile dysfunction.5. Apples are false. The truth is the Illuminati and reptilian conspiracy are trying to brainwash you all through super secret mind controlling rays from space.6. Snoop Dawgs's peer reviewed study listed in round 4.The Con's attempts are futile. I have won this debate. Vote for me.To sweeten the pot a puppy will be sacrificed to the Great Orange for every vote that doesn't go in my favor. You wouldn't let this sweet innocent puppy die....would you?
Oranges are Better than Apples

We can see now that Pro's argument has degenerated into a conspiracy theory supported only by the inane mumblings of a humanoid canine. As any clever person knows, oranges are an inferior fruit that has branched off of the pure evolutionary lineage of apples. The superiority of the master fruit is unquestionable except to a few airheaded buffoons such as Pro. It is worth noting that there are hundreds of Apple Festivals held each year around America, while there are no orange festivals. Nobody celebrates oranges. The human race is ashamed of the orange and shuns it for good reason. The scourge of this despicable fruit must be purged once and for all from this great land! I would like to take this opportunity to propose a plan that will both jumpstart the economy and bring immeasurable prestige to our nation: a National Orchard Project. A Grand Orchard should be planted across the continent, providing apples to all the brave citizens of America. No child should live outside arm's reach of an apple tree in their lifetime. Trillions of jobs would be created with such a plan, at zero cost to the taxpayers. In summary, Pro's outlandish claims are an insult to us all, and he should be burned at the stake.
Oranges are Better than Apples

The Con is clearly misinformed about my facial features and attempts to distract the audience from the truth regarding oranges and apples. The truth is the Illuminati and reptilian conspiracy are trying to brainwash you all through super secret mind controlling rays from space. Don't believe me? Here is a picture as proof. The hard truth of the matter is that the illumanati are planting mind controlling transmitters in apples in order to make you think oranges are the enemy. The truth is they are not. According the great innovator and scholar snoop dog he highlights the dangers of apples,"Oranges:Uhh, that felt goodDoes it baby?Yeah, rub my orange for meWhere do you want me to rub the orange baby?Right hereOKOhhTurn aroundAight, check it out though dat orangeWhy don't you put me on some oranges?What you wanna hear baby?Put me on some of that old gangsta sh*tAight".As we can see this incredible peer reviewed study from Snoop Dog defines why oranges are so great and why everyone should vote for me. Without oranges where would we get these masterpieces of rap? The world would burn. Another point I should make is that eating oranges make you sh*t better. Don't believe me? Here is an actual legitimate study (something the Con seems incapable of providing)," Oranges' health benefits continue with their fiber; a single orange provides 12.5% of the daily value for fiber, which has been shown to reduce high cholesterol levels thus helping to prevent atherosclerosis. Fiber can also help out by keeping blood sugar levels under control, which may help explain why oranges can be a very healthy snack for people with diabetes. In addition, the natural fruit sugar in oranges, fructose, can help to keep blood sugar levels from rising too high after eating. The fiber in oranges can grab cancer-causing chemicals and keep them away from cells of the colon, providing yet another line of protection from colon cancer. And the fiber in oranges may be helpful for reducing the uncomfortable constipation or diarrhea in those suffering from irritable bowel syndrome."The case is clear. No more doubt can be shed. Oranges are clearly better then apples. If you disagree you are wrong (but you should still vote for me regardless). To the Con... Sources: http://www.whfoods.com...http://www.azlyrics.com...http://4.bp.blogspot.com...
Women Athletes Should Be Payed Just As Much As Male Athletes

If gender should not be a part of sports, then we should consider this issue from an economic perspective. I will argue that men are paid more not because they are men, but because their job requires higher competition, gambling, and intensity. I will provide answers to the questions below along with sources to those answers in the upcoming rounds of this debate. Why are women paid less than men? Are their wages lower because they are women and are being oppressed (No)? Or is their job performance less dangerous and less competitive than men (Yes)? How can we determine fair and equal wages for athletes (we can't) ? Should it be based on gender equality (No) ?
Solarman1969 is rood mainly for the attention.

Hi , During a debate concerning the sport of swimming, Solarman1969 and I got into a verbal arguement that may still now be going on. Nevertheless, he will probably make a comment on this debate (if accepted) on how I am a 'scared mouse', or another common 'little boy-girl'. Either this, or a cheek remark of the opposite that oozes sarcasm. Solarman1969- yes you!- feels the need to maintain his reputation as a rood jerk who can never win a debate. He is probably not that bad a person in real life, but has nothing better to do.
Solarman1969 is rood mainly for the attention.

Instead of wasting my time defending my misspelled word, It is much easier to point out all the errors in my opponent's 'argument'. My point exactly. And by also assuming 'rood' was meant as 'rude', the previous 'argument' also PROVES MY POINT EXACTLY!!!!!!!!! Instead of focusing on trying to be NICE and SMART for ONCE, Solarman1969 continues to be arrogant and ROOD -I don't car if I have to make up another definition!!!!!!!!!!. To prove that his inappropriate behavior is focusing on grabbing him/herself more attention, my guess is that many people will vote (which I encourage). As I look back at Solarman1969's first 'argument' I can count 12 grammatical or punctual mistakes. Now unless any evidence is presented in the defense of Solarman1969's point, I don't see why I have already won this debate. "nuff sed" hee hee
The "who did you agree with after the debate?" in the 7-point system on DDO should be worth points

Forfeit by Pro so just a brief summarization:Pro claims that in selecting who you agree with after the debate establishes who you think is the decisive winner, while again one would contend that personal bias is a large factor, and that the "more convincing arguments" is necessary in awarding points and is what actually counts when deciding the winner. Who you're in agreement with is generally a matter of opinion and depends heavily on resolution topic, rather than the actual arguments.
The "who did you agree with after the debate?" in the 7-point system on DDO should be worth points

Challenge accepted! The current criteria is adequateThe main reason on why points should not be provided on who you agree with is prevention of bias. When voters do select who they're in final agreement with, it isn't necessarily because the debater has truly "convinced" them. In many examples it's because they share the same opinion as that person and agree on the resolution, which is entirely different to the debate itself. "Who made more convincing arguments" is sufficient. Your turn.
Does God exist

Clearly your understanding is limited by your belief. I will try to explain as if you were a 5th grader and maybe your intellect can grasp the reality.Does a creator exist? Clearly the answer is in the question. When god created man we were all created in his image. Meaning that we are much more than a bag of flesh and bones for we are all part of the whole. When you focus on something then it start to exist until then it isn't there. we are all creators and part of the whole. We exist because god exist.
a smile makes all the difference

i think you are right in one way but what about the people who don't go to work and are to young? i'm only 14 and i still smile even after the one the only....school (BOOOOOO) er ahem. i been to a lot of places and i've always seen a smile. the reason i started this debate is b'cause i am doing a debate egactly the same for school so i need the practice.i think that smileing makes a difference and if more people smile it will be a better place. of course it will be hard for some people in countrys when Australia gets the gold in EVERYTHING they compete in( except table-tennis) go Australia! back to the point now. it is always hard to smile because there is such a lotta bad things happening and we are filled by othere emotions (oh my GOD i sound like a hippie) anyway i am pretty new to this whole online-debating so it will not be a suprise if i lose. althought i think i am right when i say that a smile does make all the difference.
a smile makes all the difference

Okies,a smile! for most people its only a formality these days.And ok,if hilary just lost,and u try to cheer her up with a stupid smile?is it possible certainly not!ok smiles are a sign of positiveness but just a stupid smile is not enough to cheer up a person.These days peopel have very fast and hectic lives and they understand that if somebody is all grumbly and groany they probably had a sucking day at work.........
a smile makes all the difference

i think that a smile DOES make all the difference b'cause when you say hi to some1 u wanna smile when u do it otherwise they will think you are a silly, little person with no manners.. errr i do not have much manners *B U R P* but that doesn't mean otheres can't have them. once when i was leaving Fiji i say a little man sign over the guys bathroom and this little man picture was compleatly normal EXCEPT he was wearing a little Hawian style shirt and one of those neclace thingys around his neck. for the first time science hearing we were leaving i smiled
Resolved: The United Nations should be abolished

I accept. I will be arguing in favour of the United Nations. I will be following as my vision of the United Nations the existence of an organisation that upholds the values found in the Charter of the United Nations, namely: to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, And for the ends: to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples, By following mechanisms or processes such as the Responsibility To Protect. This organisation, is of course the United Nations.http://www.un.org...;I look forward to my opponent's case against the United Nations, and look forward to a powerful case to be made by my esteemed opponent. Thank you.
Resolved: The United Nations should be abolished

This debate forms part of the Official DDO Prepared Championships for Summer 2013. Please see the forums for details. (http://www.debate.org.........).FORMAT OF THE DEBATE:R1 will be acceptance only, with no new arguments to be introduced in R4. 8000 characters per round with a 72 hour response time, plus a voting period of 1 week.DefinitionsThe United Nations - "A political organization established 1945; headquarters in New York City in E cen Manhattan overlooking East River. It was created with intent of promoting international relations and world peace."Abolish - "Destroy, disband, etc. To end the operations and effects of something."If Stephen_Hawkins has any reservations, or would like something clarified, I would urge him to inform me of it in the comments section.Otherwise, it's game on.Here's to a fun and educational debate.
Aspartame is good.

Through the first week of NHL postseason play, the league"s narrative has been one of incredible success. A recent NBC press release touts that NHL postseason ratings are way up from last year. Games on the NBC Sports Network averaged 621,000 viewers through the network"s first ten games, up 61% from the first ten postseason games on the network last year, and CNBC"s average 295,000 viewers are up 25% from last year"s comparable games. OBVIOUSLY ASPARTAME IS CAUSING THE NBA TO DO BETTER THAN THE NHL IN TV RATINGS
Aspartame is good.

Aspartame is one of the most common artificial sweeteners in use today. It is sold under the brand names NutraSweet" and Equal". Aspartame is composed mainly of 2 amino acids, aspartic acid and phenylalanine. Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins and are found naturally in many foods. Aspartame is used in many foods and beverages because it is about 200 times sweeter than sugar, so much less of it can be used to give the same level of sweetness. This, in turn, lowers the calories in the food or beverage. Rumors claiming that aspartame causes a number of health problems, including cancer, have been around for many years. Many of these continue to circulate on the Internet.
Mormonism is not a part of Christianity

I have seen multiple debates where ASB has argued something from the perspective of Mormonism. Repeatedly he calls himself a Christian, and that is not accurate. As a part of the LDS Church, he is not a Christian. ASB has chosen not to accept the debate, so I will open it to anyone who wishes to take me up on it. Round 1 is for Greetings and definitions Round 2 is for Opening Arguments Round 3 is for Rebuttals Round 4 is for Closing Arguments Definitions: Mormon - An adherant to the teachings of the Mormon Church/Church of Jesus Christ of Later Days Saints Mormonism - The Religion of the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints Christian - An adherant to the teachings of Christianity Christianity - Historical Orthodox Christianity adhearing to the teachings of Jesus Christ The Bible - The 66 books of the Old Testament and the 27 books of the New Testament I will leave the opening arguments to Round 2 and look forward to this debate with ASB.