BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Sonic OC Rap Battle

Please you think you scare me Caine? You proved my point you clearly don't have a brain. Robotnik informed me you have a weak point on you right arm. I will easily cause you downright harm. All you do is run away and phase through walls. I can blaze you to a crisp for days. The only thing my mouth can do easy is make losers like you go queasy. You think that your knives can hurt me My super hot tonfas will make you want to flee. I wont need to suicide to kill a weakling like you I will melt you till you quite literally turn to goo. I am an expert at disintegration I bet that will just trigger your aggravation. You are a failure in everyone's eyes. To sonic and friends for Caine I truly apologize. Caine don't give yourself to much credit You cant even cut me I think its pathetic. I out maneuver you in the air with my jet packs you can hardly call this battle fair. You seem to have a big mouth But I can easily send you flying to the south. You seem to be quite cocky but I will blow you up just like Nagasaki.
Sonic OC Rap Battle

Melt me? Please. I actually laughed at that joke I can live through black holes most that would make is smoke I can walk through places nobody else can tread if you tried the same thing you'd get ripped to shreds An upgrade you say? More like a downfall For when I'm through with you it's you and Robuttnik's curtain call Phasing is nothin just a click of a button you think magma'll do something you got a mouth that needs shuttin Even if you manage to hit me then you'll really see all I'll get is pi$$y you'll get beat 'til your pants are sh*tty let's see your pain resistance fend off a knife to the gut then we'll get the blessing of your mouth permanently shut Even if you finally activate your suicide the only single outcome would be your own self caused demise But I see that you'll never fully get it so I'll send you to a place you'd very much fit in You'll be in a place you'd fit into well full of magma and despair that place is Hell
Sonic OC Rap Battle

As promised, I have reinstigated this debate. Same premise as before, which I will take from the previous one: A little different from what I normally do. Basically, it's an ordinary rap battle, but we pretend to be our imaginary Sonic character (wow I'm such a geek XD). A couple of rules: -Before you rap, you need to post a short bio on your character's abilities and such. -No forfeiting. -My opponent can choose to either rap right away or use the first round as acceptance. Keep in mind that if you rap straight away, you don't rap on the final section, to make it fair. -No characters that have no weaknesses, godly powers, etc.( They can have powers, just not too op.) -No trolling (but i honestly don't know how you'd be able to do that) Let the nerd games begin!
Black Holes Exist

Black holes don't exist, because they are not black. Why are you so racist to this Universe I love? What did my cosmic valentine do to you for her to be vilified by your precarious insults towards her? Is it because she always shine's in the dark, while you masturbate in a corner instead? Is it because she chose to revolve around the sun and not you? Is it because her minions that scout out barflings (her term for earthlings) like you tend to take a nice ol' warm liquid shot on your head and your lovely car that you prefer over her cosmic motor? My universe is talking to me, she says that the holes are not black - you can close your eyes and the whole world is black, but is it really black? Or is your vision black? So really what you're trying to say is "black vision blocking space phenomenon exists". If you have something to say about it, talk to the cosmic queen, I'll be here retailing what she says for you, since I am the archetypal messenger after all.
Black Holes Exist

Firstly, I would like to state that the observational evidence for the existence of black holes is vast. I will outline just some of the evidence for the existence of black holes. It should be noted that it is essentially a consensus within the astronomical community that black holes do exist, and thus con, in arguing against the existence of black holes, must be going against scientific consensus. X-Ray Emission Although we cannot observe black holes directly, the existence of black holes can be inferred from X-ray emission. The region around supermassive black holes (known as its accretion disk) emits X-rays. Take the example of Cygnus X-1. Cygnus X-1 is an X-ray binary system in the constellation Cygnus. We believe that Cygnus X-1 consists of a black hole and a companion star. The black hole sucks matter from the companion star (a blue supergiant); that gas being sucked from the companion star swirls around the black hole's accretion disk, and is heated up to several millions of degrees, and is emitted from the disk as radiation in the form of X-rays. Cygnus X-1 is only one black hole candidate. We have indirectly detected many black holes through X-ray emission, including supermassive black holes at the center of most large galaxies, such as the black hole at the center of the spiral galaxy M81. Gravitational Lensing The effect of gravitational lensing (that light should bend in a gravitational field) was a prediction of the General Theory of Relativity. In fact, we can use gravitational lensing to detect the existence of black holes. We should expect that light rays that pass near a black hole should be bent, distorting the starfield. The effect of light rays being bent by the gravity of massive objects should be able to help us detect the existence of black holes in the future. Supermassive Black Hole at the Center of our Galaxy Yet more evidence for the existence of black holes is that there appears to be a supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. This black hole is 4 million solar masses, and approximately 27,000 light years from Earth. One piece of evidence that there is this supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy is the orbital velocities of stars around the galactic center. Most stars take a long time to make one orbit. Our own Sun, for example, takes about 250 million years to orbit the galaxy. On the other hand, there is a star near the galactic center with a 16-day orbit. The simplest explanation for this is that the speed at which these stars are orbiting the center is due to the gravitational pull of a massive object - a black hole. Links: http://hubblesite.org... http://www.cfa.harvard.edu...
Unborn Babies Are Alive and Human

Unborn babies are usually alive, but stillbirths and miscarriages are an unfalsifiable counter to your entire resolution. So to be fair I'd say you generally are correct in terms of it being alive but not in it being human.An unborn baby is termed a fetus (though I prefer the foetus spelling).I shall now define fetus and human to create a clear distinction.Fetus[1]: An unborn or unhatched offspring of a mammal, in particular, an unborn human more than eight weeks after conception.Human[2]: A human being, especially a person as distinguished from an animal or (in science fiction) an alien species. Both physically and mentally.A fetus looks nothing like a human until it has become an embryo (where it begins to have the shape of a human as such, although up to 23 weeks it does look rather alien like). When it is finally 9 months old and ready to be born, it still is not a human mentally. It has no concept of what a human is, if you raised it among wolves, it would grow to be one, think like one and probably even try its best to move like one. It would probably even grow to attempt sex with wolves if it could. AN unborn baby is not human. It is turned into one by society and upbringing, after all why do so many psychopaths end up that way due to growing up in extremely rough homes and neighbourhoods? Because as babies grow they are shaped into what we see as human. Women shave their legs and armpits too look like human women and not chimpanzees, men try their best to work at a six pac and getting rich because that's what they are told humans do. An unborn baby is yet to learn of what makes us such a rich and diverse species, of philosophy of society of civilisation, of table manners, of clothes and of what existing even is. Whilst it is unborn is it inhuman in every sense of the word other than it's string of DNA. It doesn't think for itself, doesn't comprehend language, can't tell an ugly human from a hot one, doesn't know what species it belongs to, doesn't know what gender it is and doesn't think anyone exists other than itself in that black dome that is the uterus.In conclusion, an unborn baby isn't always alive since miscarriages and stillbirths occur. Also it is not fully human if we take into account that part of distinguishing a human is our ability to speak, to interact with other humans and exist as a society. An unborn baby experiences only very basic processes of the body and mind and is thus not more intelligent or distinguishable from a human than a toad.Thus, I disagree with the resolution.Sources:[1] http://oxforddictionaries.com... [2] https://www.google.co.uk...
Unborn Babies Are Alive and Human

I"d say one of the biggest arguments regarding abortion is whether or not the baby is not alive, and is just part of the mother"s body, or is alive and is its own person. To understand and make a decision about this, you have to know about it. First off"what makes a person separate from another? What makes us unique? What makes us ourselves rather than someone else? Some people claim that because a baby in his/her early stages is dependent on the mother, then he/she is not a separate human. However, this claim is erroneous. It should not matter whether or not one is dependent on another human to determine if said person is human. It would be like claiming someone on life support isn"t human because they depend on machines to live and cannot survive on their own. Unborn babies are human because it"s in their DNA. A human"s DNA is different than, say, a dog"s. That"s what makes us human, and not any other kind of animal. Now, it is a fact that from the moment of conception, a human embryo is just that"a human. It is in his/her DNA. Also coded into said baby"s DNA is the color of eyes, skin, hair, and other traits. At conception, we have a human"nothing else but that. So we have determined that a baby, at any stage, is a human baby. Now, on to the next matter"is that human baby alive? Let me ask you this. Can a human be a human, but be neither dead nor alive? Pro-aborts think that unborn babies are not alive. So are they dead? No, because they would have had to be alive in the first place, right? So, by establishing that unborn children are human, we have established that they are alive as well. Unborn babies are human. They have distinct DNA that is their own, not their mother"s. From conception, they go on to form arms, legs, organs, etc. (A baby"s heart is beating 21 days after conception!) All humans have a right to life.
Homework should be banned or at least shortened.

Everyone's heard the saying "practice makes perfect." The statement itself has a lot of truth. You want to learn how to do something, you have to practice. You don't hear something once, and the remember it. You must learn, comprehend, then apply what you learned. School is mandatory to pass, and to pass your classes you must do the work and pass your test. However if you take away the mandatory homework, how many kids are going to choose to practice it on their own? The answer is: not many. Requiring kids to do homework allows them to complete it so they understand what one is learning. How should we expect them to pass the test if they can't pass the homework? In life, we always have to learn new things. Learning is inevitable. It is easy to be told how to do something, but if you never practice doing what you have been taugh how do you know if you can actually apply what you learn. Consider this: I tell you you need to build a beautiful house for a client, but you don't know how to build an average house at that. What are you going to do? Probably asked someone who knows how to build a house (or in school terms a teacher.) However you can't stop there, you have to take what you have learned and try to build this beautiful house. But you run into a problem, you have never built and average house much less a beautiful one. So you decide to build a small house for practice, then you continue until you confident in your house building skills. Then you are prepared to build this beautiful house. Just like in school the teacher teaches you, you practice with the homework, and after enough practice you are ready for the test. Even though it make take up valuable time, learning to do daily activities with you homework helps built task managing. You learn how to manipulate your schedule to accomplish what you need to. It builds your ability to plan. None the less, homework is effective way of learning. I found this study interesting: "Duke University researchers have reviewed more than 60 research studies on homework between 1987 and 2003 and concluded that homework does have a positive effect on student achievement." Source: https://today.duke.edu... Like it or not it is effective, and taking it away would require a change in the entire system. How do you propose to do that? Thank you for this opportunity to debate with you!
Evolution is not supported with scientific evidence (2)

I am a Young Earth Creationist and believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. I believe that God created everything about 6,000 years ago and that there was a massive, worldwide flood about 4,400 years ago. I will be arguing that evolution has not been proven scientifically and any evidence used to support it is either flawed, irrelevant, or could be reasonably explained from a Creation viewpoint. Since the theory of evolution is taught in schools as science, and Creation is presented as religious, the burden of proof is on con to show beyond reasonable doubt that evolution can and did happen.Science - Knowledge gained from observation, experimentation, and demonstration (Can be proven).Religion - The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods (Can't be proven).Evidence - The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.Round 1 - Acceptance, Con explains how evolution supposedly happens and provides evidence that it has happened in the past.Rounds 2 and 3 - Pro attempts to refute or explain Con's evidence, Con attempts to defend evidence (No new evidence added).If Con has any problems or questions about the definitions or debate structure, he can say so in the comments.
Evolution is not supported with scientific evidence (2)

Evolution is no longer a contention among scientist. the reason is because there is an enormous amount of evidence for it. There is so much evidence for evolution, that it is the foundation for different branches of science. for example, Biology, Medical science, anthropology, archeology. Some examples for evolution are. Organisms are similar to each other, but not exactly the same. Similar organisms have differences that help them adapt to their environments. The more similar the organisms the more genetic information they share. Embryos of many different kinds of animals: mammals, birds, reptiles, fish, etc. look very similar and it is often difficult to tell them apart. Many traits of one type of animal appear in the embryo of another type of animal. For example, fish embryos and human embryos both have gill slits. In fish they develop into gills, but in humans they disappear before birth. Another proof of evolution is evolutionary throwbacks. This is when some organisms are born with characteristics that only there ancestors had. One example of evolutionary an throwback is when some people are born with tails. Tail used to be a characters that our evolutionary ancestors had when they were still dwelling in trees millions of years ago. The scientific name for this is atavism.
4th DDO Census Debate: Trump v Clinton

Before I go into my conclusion and the key voting issues on this debate, I will show a political cartoon to lighten the mood a bit. Throughout this debate, one thing has remained constant. The failures of Donald Trump and how he's toxic in for this country. My opponent has brought we have to realize how much of a failure and how much damage he is going to cause to our nation. He doesn't even know what issues he believes in on many issues. In this debate the key issue that you should be voting on is the one with the greatest impact and that it Trump's dangerous immigration policy. We can see that it will cost America $1 trillion of our GDP, that will wreck our economy. This is a huge issue that occurs and my opponent has dropped it. We can also see that illegal immigrants pay their fair share in taxes and unlike what Trump says, Mexico is sending some great people as they have a great deal of important high skilled people. We can see that if we do this we'd lose $2 trillion just by ennacting this and nearly $700 billion each year. This entire argument was dropped, and since it has the most important and worst negative impact, this should be reason enough to vote for me off of this argument alone. We can see that unlike Trump, Hillary is quite quallified with introducing a multitude of bills and has helped out in a ton of places. Trump has been shown to have a multitude of bankrupticies and his Trump University issue that he's being sued for that scam. My opponent targets Hillary on a multitude of things, but we have to realize that a lot of these things she's proven otherwise or these things are applicable to Bill. We also have to remember that Trump has flip flopped on several issues throughout the debate. Trump has only written 7 issues in stone to Hillary's 35. Hillary has been open and transparent vs. Trump and his hidden agenda. Trump doesn't really support our country as he thanked the Orlando shooter and patted himself on the back on this issue just hours after it happened. How can we trust a guy like this. We've looked at Trump's tariff plan and seen the issues involved hear on how much it will cost Americans. This is another huge impact that my opponent has dropped. We will lose 78% of our exports to our greatest trade partners. You want to talk jobs, Trump kills more than he will create. We also can see that prices will rise by 30% while the average American will lose 53% of their income. Here is another impact that this debate that my opponent drops. It will significantly harm our country and destroys way more than Trump claims to save.
4th DDO Census Debate: Trump v Clinton

Throughout this debate, there has been a pretty clear pattern: while I give solid, affirmative points in favor of Trump, my opponent mostly ignores whatever positive qualities of his candidate in favor of attacking Trump. He didn't begin truly giving affirmative reasons for Hillary until I pointed this problem out. As much as he wants to say, his focus in this debate was not constructive, and in abscence of a compelling case for Hillary, it's impossible to call her better than Trump. As I said - Trump can be a bad person with bad policies. But that means absolutely nothing if you don't prove Hillary isn't better. I would also like to note the massive numbers of arguments my opponent never even touched this debate. These include:*The massive benefits of Trump's tax plan (notice he never gave a Hillary tax plan). *The destructive harm of trade deals like NAFTA and TPP that the Clintons either negotiated directly or supported. *Hillary being more liberal than Obama, as liberal as Elizabeth Warren and only marginally less liberal than avowed socialist Bernie Sanders. *Hillary would continue the disastrous war policies of the last 13 years, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths. *Most of her scandals*The massive economic harms of her $12 dollar minimum wage policy. *Clinton's support of sanctuary cities, which resulted in the murder of Kate Steinly. *No Hillary press conferences in 180 days. My oppponent also outright dropped his abortion argument (where I noted Hillary's defense of late-term abortion was outside the scope of Roe v. Wade and public opinion), one of only three constructive arguments he made in the first round. In other words, a third of his case for Hillary was thoroughly refuted to the point he never mentioned it again. The themes here are obvious: Hillary just isn't defensible. She's a corrupt politician who has had more scandals than you can count on your fingers and toes, and is also a partisan hack who would institute a radical agenda. Because of this, it is necessary to attack any opponent first and then say "Well, we know she's bad but maybe he's worse", which is a terrible way to argue. In contrast, as I established early, Trump is a unifier. He will work with both sides to bring the best outcome for the American worker. He'll bring jobs back from countries that have stolen them. He'll protect the American worker and legal immigrants from people who violate the law. He'll protect your right to keep and bear arms. He'll appoint judges like Antonin Scalia. He'll avoid our current situation of endless war brough on by both parties. But above all, he'll Make America Great Again.
4th DDO Census Debate: Trump v Clinton

The Resolution:The US Should Elect Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton.Summary:The the US Presidential Elections closing near, the nomimations are becoming clear. Donald Trump against Hillary Clinton... Both members equally as loved by their parties as they are hated by their parties. It's easy to see why this would be the biggest debate of 2016.Rules:- No wars (source wars or definition wars, etc...)- No kritiking.- No Conduct or S&G votes.- Proper formatting must be used (and consistent.)The winner shall receive a choice between a $25 gift card to Amazon or Walmart.Pro side is represented by TN05, and advised by Thett3. Con side is represented by Lannan, and advised by bsh1.Definitions:- US: United States- Elect: Choose (someone) to become President by voting.
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is Sound

To conclude and to summarize my objections to the KCA and the defense therein, I'd like to lay out in essence the problems with the 2 premises and the conclusin driven from it: that everything began to exist is a baseless claim which the defense has thus far not been able to support given the clear distinction between the "type" that is "evidenced" (which I've pointed out hardly counts as a "beginning"), as well as the fact that his argument against actual infinities fails to stand to scrutiny given their clear and wide use in both physics and mathematics- that the claim that the universe began to exist is similarly without evidential support and the defense of it is based on misinterpretation of valid works of science to buttress the point followed by a conclusion that ultimately results in a complete achilles heel of its own argument ending in an illogical as well as unevidenced conclusion that not only has not been demonstrated to be true but CANNOT be demonstrated as true.
Debate.org make it easier for me to vote on opinions.

"I want to vote on opinions, but Debate.org says I have to complete three debates before I can use the opinion section... I think this is kind of frustrating because I am not into these debates I just want to go to the opinion section and vote."It is very frustrating, but very easy. All you have to do is verify your account and complete debates. It is there to make sure you don't use shadow accounts to win debates, and to prove you are experienced at debating and won't vote opinionated.