BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Epic rap battle of history

Impressive rhyms I will give you thatThank for your rebuttal but I think it is time we settle the scoreYour rap just makes go into the bore, Did the school bell ring? Its time to go to school I'll think I will take you there Because your rap needs some tweaking.It is time to show you who is bossAnd I am speaking. I have the supirior intelligence while your a noob to this siteWhy you running? Are you fleeing from the fight?Isnt it a bore.To just see you rap.Naruto aint just a toy he is a savoir to our villageWhile your a descrace to the public. I am a hero and a fighterWhile your a your rapping piperGo back to the SCHOOLWhere you were forgottenOh wait you cant because you couldnt afford to lose.Quit now noob no one is holding you back.Just to say you aint winning jack.My just flow lets look at you Nothing but a failure to you.Your turn :D
Epic rap battle of history

Wow Wow Wow Very Impressive, A Few Rhymes, But Now It's My Turn Hello Hello Naruto I Can Take Any Foe Yo Level So Low I Burning A Hole On My Sole So Please Stop Running I Am The King Hear Me Sing Your What, A Four Year Old? Trying To Act Like The Big Boys But Still Playing Wit Yo Toys Trying To Be A Ninja This Is Easy To Enjoy Pwning You With This Rhyme Oh, Wait, What's Your Bedtime?
Epic rap battle of history

It is time to rap!!! Naruto styleWhen I am done with you, you'll be left in a ditchYou suck so bad I cant take it seriouslyIs this a joke? Noob vs ProWhen this battle is over you'll be lost in a dune Why should I even try? Your just a noob.You have no fame or Glory or no friends what a shame.Quit now noob or your head will be in painMy rythm flows all day and all nightGive it your best shot. Try and try and you'll never come to part Your turn :D
Give gay's the same rights as straight people.

We are a democracy ask anyone in the world we vote that's a democracy a government of the people and were that. second God is law he is the one who will make the final choice for where you go second unheard of no but what is unheard of is them chasing out columns of Brits and saving countries you activists always call it a chance or a coincidence. third yeah that's not on their mind in combat but in training and occupation yeah its a problem. Plus no one has a problem with heterosexual's because its natural and no one is offended by it many find homosexual's as morally wrong. I'm just saying that it causes problems that could be easily fixed by some people getting counseling to help their mind set because it isn't a conscious choice but its a choice a mental disease.
Give gay's the same rights as straight people.

The United States is a constitutional republic. By definition it is a state in which the head of state and other officials are representatives of the people and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over all of its citizens. That is how America is. Still need more? In a constitutional republic, executive, legislative, and judicial powers are separated into distinct branches(http://www.trumanlibrary.org...), sounds like america doesn't it? God is NOT law, and nor is the bible. I am a storm chaser and future Meteorologist(seriously), tornado's are not unheard of in Washington DC, the last that I can recall was a few days after September 11th(really bad luck) when a series hit the area. That particular tornado in 1814 was just another tornado event, nothing unusual meteorologically. During/after a hurricane hit the area(again, not unheard of). If you want to follow that logic, then I guess we can say god caused 9/11 and since it didn't satusfy him, he put a tornado down a few days after the attack. Hey, the last tornado before that was 1995, that's got to mean something right? Nope, it's just a coincidence. That's it. Finally, the brave men and women go out there knowing they may have to kill bad guys(and civilians may be killed too), but they go out there. I am positive that the last thing on their mind is if a gay is amongst them. Their first concern is protecting themselves and others. Now according to a CBS poll, most troops support the repeal of DADT. Still not enough? A Pew Research Center poll shows most American favor letting gays serve openly in the military. The point is, gay's have just as much of a right to serve openly in the military as a heterosexual person. I'm sure you'll often hear a straight guy bragging about his wife or girlfriend and what they will do when he returns. But god forbid a gay brings up his husband or boyfriend. All hell will break lose, bodies will hit the dirt, and utter chaos will ensue as the chain of command and allies try to restore order...right? Nope. They will likely accept it as if it were just another guy talking about his girl. But oh, I can hear the rumbles beginning now. I can hear you getting all puffed up w/ your righteous indignation and your superior sense of morality, tsk-tsking about how insensitive, absurd, and unrealistic I'm being. SAVE IT! I'm Immune to your moral exhibitionism. Deep down inside you know I'm, right. I've given more than my 2 cent. I've thrown a roll of half dollars at your head, so I don't need to continue any more. My point has been made. It's been fun.
Give gay's the same rights as straight people.

The United States of America is a Republic Democtaratic Capitalism in other words we vote on our choices or we choose people to vote for us and we have a Capitalist economy so yes we are a Democracy. Second God is law he created everything I think we should do what he tells us and yes their is proof God existed in 1814 when the Brits burnt down Washington a freak tornado chased them out saving the country explain that. Third yes its the last thing their thinking about but that's what's sad their desperate and they are corrupted because of it and no it wont screw them for life but its still a major dis advantage. Four its not about not doing your job homosexuality is a very heated topic going against moral beliefs and you don't need soldiers squabbling over something like that when they should be working together it would just make it easier if the person would keep their mouth shut one of the worst things a commander can have is soldiers fighting amongst themselves. http://www.roanoke.com...
Give gay's the same rights as straight people.

Ok, here is the thing: The US is NOT a democracy. It is a Constitutional republic. It's stated in the pledge and in the constitution(just to name a few locations). Next, I don't care if it is a sin or not, god should not influence the law. Besides, there is no reliable or definitive evidence god exist, so... anyway, gay adoption. When a kid is abandoned by their parent, I am 100% sure the last thing they are thinking about is if their new parents are gay or not. They are just happy to be in a home where they will be loved. I would know, I was adopted. There is NO reliable evidence showing if a gay or gay couple adopts a child, that child will be screwed for life. NONE! And discriminating who can adopt a child based off sexuality instead of background and an economic ability to support a child, is stupid and unfair. Finally, even if a gay person opens up in the military, the military personnel are there to protect the US or it's allies. If you can't do your job knowing a gay is in your group, then you shouldn't be in the military because your sensitivity and morality will be an issue that may come up in the future. More on Gay adoption: Evidence that is very reliable shows children put in gay homes are just as likely to be well-adjusted as those raised by straight parents.(http://docfiles.justia.com...) and (https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov...). Still not good enough? Here is more science showing kids in gay homes are ok: http://people.virginia.edu... Now unless you have links to reliable(non-bias) evidence showing I am wrong, then I think it would be best for you to forfeit.
Give gay's the same rights as straight people.

first of all why are those not good reasons we live in a democracy if the people say no that's good enough second of all it is a sin and third of all marriage is sacred and holy when you do it your promising to God to obey his marriage laws the same God that is against homosexuals. second gays adopting kids should be wrong because homosexuals is useless heterosexuals at least add to the population homosexuals don't even do that they just go around being gay making the planet a worse place we should not expose the next generation to this. third I have no problem with gays in the military as long as we don't know about it people seriously don't need to know its not like strait people go around saying hey people I'm strait and brag about it to gays who don't care but the gays do don't ask don't tell.
Give gay's the same rights as straight people.

I am all for giving gay's the SAME rights as straight people. This includes(but not limited to): 1) Allowing gay's to adopt children 2) Letting gay's get married(but let the church choose who they marry in their building) 3) Let gay's serve in the military There is NO legit reason to deprive gays the same rights as straight people. The only reason is you think gay's shouldn't have the same right's as straight people is because you think it's wrong, or it's a sin, or it's nasty, or whatever. Those are not good reason.
Summer is the best season of the year.

So just to get this down, your saying that a season takes place in temperate zones. how ever you want to debate that summer is the best season in North America, excluding Alaska, Canada, and Hawaii. Yet, you forget the fact that besides America, there really is no greater land of temperate zone. So, what you originally meant was "the best season in America (excluding Alaska and Hawaii) is summer". Why would you assume that America and Canada are the only two countries in North America? If so, your geography knowledge is quiet weak if you forgot the other ~20 countries, yet you want to debate their seasons. What do the seasons have to do with geography? Well, seasons are causes of weather, and weather can effect everything from the food supply of the nation to the landscaping of the country. If you want to debate this topic for developing your research skills, I highly suggest that you do your research before starting the debate.
Summer is the best season of the year.

I am sorry for being deficient in defining the definition of a season for this debate. You are clearly right about North America consisting of The Bahamas Barbados Belize Costa Rica Cuba Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Greenland (Kalaallit Nunaat) Grenada Guatemala Haiti Honduras Jamaica Mexico Nicaragua Panama Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago But the definition of season can be defined in many ways. for an example 1. One of four natural divisions of the year spring, summer, autumn, and winter in temperate zones. The definition of a temperate zone would be an area of latitude between a tropic and polar region. This is what I thought you would concur with when i mentioned Alaska and Hawaii because they do not fall under the definition of a temperate zone. So yes, I agree that these countries are located in north America by definition. Can we agree however that the definition of season is defined as a temperate zone? I would like to get back to the premise of this debate that summer is the best season rather then resulting to fallacies. Do you contemplate my inquiry? http://www.thefreedictionary.com...- season definition I am sure i can find many more meeting the criteria of temperate zone.
Summer is the best season of the year.

My opponent states that summer is the best season in the continent of North America, excluding Alaska, Canada, and Hawaii. I presume that my opponent excludes these countries due to the reasoning of being almost pure season the entire year. By this I mean that it is almost either winter or summer all year around. However, he forgets about the following countries: The Bahamas Barbados Belize Costa Rica Cuba Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Greenland (Kalaallit Nunaat) Grenada Guatemala Haiti Honduras Jamaica Mexico Nicaragua Panama Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago All of these countries are in the continent of North America. However, they are also almost pure seasons. For example take The Bahamas. It is almost summer the entire year. Also, Greenland is almost always winter. I say that summer is not the best season due to the fact that this argument will be completely biased for some countries. Sources: http://geography.about.com...
Monster energy drink is the best energy drink

I actually prefer tea and coffee for several reasons. First, the energy you get from tea and coffee is basically the same as in any of these energy drinks, but less. Like you said, energy drinks make you want to run around in circles, but tea and coffee keep you awake and alert. I find this to be useful for studying or any activity where you have to stay in one place. Energy drinks can make you really jittery and you may find it hard to concentrate. Second, tea and coffee is much more affordable, provided you don't go to Starbucks. Either are available anywhere you can find energy drinks, and costs about half the price. Third, when working in an office setting, it is perfectly normal to be seen drinking tea or coffee, but it may be a bit unprofessional to have cans of Monster on your desk. Lastly, the essential ingredient for any energy drink is caffeine. Caffeine, aside from being a stimulant, is also a diuretic. Having too much caffeine in your system will make you need to urinate very, very frequently. Thus, I believe moderation is the key. Tea and coffee give you just enough, whereas energy drinks like Monster may give you *too* much.
Belief in God is reasonable

"Just to be clear, I know you didn't say anything about the christian god, but you did talk about Creationism, a theory that is strictly based on the christian god and teachings."Sorry if I was unclear by mentioning creationism in one of my extended arguments (I actually wasn't aware that the term "creationism" was specific only to the God of the Bible and didn't intend it to be used that way), but in my first opening sentence I said: "By 'God' I mean any supreme being that was the creator of the universe." Not limited to the God of the Bible. I am not really interested in debating the legitimacy of the Bible because there are discrepencies in it that I have trouble believing myself. Since I am not limiting "God" to mean the God of the Bible, none of my arguments presented have been proved invalid.I await your rebuttals to my arguments I have posted in round 1.
Belief in God is reasonable

By "God" I mean any supreme being that was the creator of the universe.In the first round you may present your arguments. This is a debate claiming that belief in God is reasonable. The main opposing argument against creationism is evolution. By pointing out some of the inconsistencies of evolution, belief in God becomes more reasonable. I will use some of these inconsistencies as part of my evidence.Reasonable evidence #1:The first law of thermodynamics states that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. There is matter that exists. Therefore it is reasonable to believe that it was created by a supreme being.Reasonable evidence #2: The second law of thermodynamics states that in a closed system, processes can only increase in disorder. The competing theory against a creator or God is evolution so I will point this out: How could billions of years of mutations resulted in the highly organized energy like human cells (that can self-replicate and repair themselves) if energy is constantly following a down-hill energy gradient?Reasonable evidence #3:"Natural laws" are laws such as gravity, thermodynamics, physics, and so forth that are universal and unchanging in nature. If the world erupted from a chaotic mash, there would be no reason for any order or universal laws of order to exist whatsoever.Reasonable evidence #4:The existence of good and evil. There is no evolutionary purpose for the existence of good and evil. Knowing good and evil is not needed for the survival or propagation of our species.Reasonable evidence #5: The earth has the ideal conditions for human life. The earth contains plenty of water and food, contains a multitude of natural resources that have yet to be depleted, the earth is the perfect distance from the sun, gravitational pull from the moon keeps the ocean from stagnating, the atmosphere is the right mixture of oxygen and nitrogen for us to live, and many more instances that are tailored for human existence.Reasonable evidence #6:Human emotion is another reason to believe that there is a God. The greatest emotion, love, is considered by many to be the meaning of life. If we originated from random processes then emotion would serve no evolutionary purpose. By evolutionary purpose I mean the goal of evolving (even though this makes no sense because evolving would be a purposeless purpose anyway). Reasonable evidence #7: The existence of beauty is another argument for God. What makes something more beautiful than something else? The human mind is universally coded for recognizing things that are beautiful and things of beauty in varying degrees. This means that the pinnacle of beauty must be God. The existence of creativity is another argument that favors God. Anything that does not have a use-value does not have any reason for existing if evolution is true. Any reason at all for recognizing creativity as a "good" thing that enhances our quality of life would not make sense under evolutionary theory.
Belief in God is reasonable

You seem to contradict yourself: "I argued for the existence, of good and evil, not for an objective definition of good and evil." " People intuitively have a sense of what is good and what is evil." If all people have a sense of what is good or evil, then good and evil are objective concepts. Indeed, you talked about the existence of good end evil, but they only exist as concepts, concepts that are interpreted differently by every culture and are therefore subjective. "I am not arguing that alien life doesn't exist. A series of perfect conditions must be met in order for life to exist on a planet. What I'm arguing is that these perfect conditions have been met, which are circumstantial evidence in favor of a God creating earth as inhabitable for humans." My argument was that alien life exists, so the existence of the perfect conditions is not that rare. The universe is so huge that "fine-tuned" planets are not a rarity, so life can easily appear in the universe without God. I just want to note that everything has a reason ONLY is God exists. If there is no God, there is no reason for anything, so it isn't reasonable to argue about the reason of love or laws of nature, when from an atheistic perspective they don't have a reason at all. They only have a reason, or a purpose to exist if they were created by God.
Andrew Luck Should Have Been the Rookie of the Year

Andrew Luck is an awesome quarterback but my pick, RG3 is a way better quarterback. I might be a Philadelphia Eagles fan but I love RG3's offense. First of all RG3's rushing and option ability is better because his rushing at Baylor and during the Washington Redskins season was way faster than Andrew Luck's rushing. Also, RG3 is in national commercials for Subway, while I still didn't see Andrew Luck in any commercials which means that the crowd likes RG3 better. RG3 threw 5 interceptions during the 2012-2013 season while Luck threw 18 interceptions. Yikes! RG3's QB Rating for 2012-2013 is 102.4 while Luck only threw for a rating of 76.5. I understand that Robert Griffin III got injured but he played excellent before his injury! Sources: nfl.com
Andrew Luck Should Have Been the Rookie of the Year

Andrew Luck was not voted Rookie of the Year. His good friend Robert Griffin III was overwhelmingly voted the Rookie of the Year. In this debate I will be arguing in favor of Luck simply because he put a weak team in the playoffs. The Colts were 2-14 in the previous season, and with the great edition of Luck the colts managed an 11-5 record and made the playoffs. The Redskins, whom RG3 plays for, has a much better overall team. All the Redskins needed was a good Quarterback, because they already had a great supporting cast. So I will have two contentions in today's debate. 1. RG3 had a better team. RG3 this season had a decent defense, and a great run game in Alfred Morris who was actually top five in the league in rushing. Luck had neither. Another great example that helps my case is the fact that when RG3 would get hurt, then his backup QB Kirk Cousins would come in and play well, showing RG3 maybe wasn't even the main reason the Redskins did so well. So between stellar rookie running back Alfred Morris, and the decent Redskins defense, clearly RG3 had a better team. Luck had one consistent target in Reggie Wayne, but RG3 had Pierre Garcon, Josh Morgan, and Santana Moss. Clearly you can see RG3 had a better team, showing that Luck had to truly put the Colts on his back, and he excelled. 2. Luck had more yards and a better overall record. Luck actually this season had one more win than RG3, and he broke the Rookie passing yards record. He also led the AFC in rushing touchdowns, yet he wasn't even close to winning the great Rookie of the Year award. Some may say that RG3 takes over games, yet the same thing can be said for Luck after 8 game winning drives this past season. So in conclusion, RG3 deserved the Heisman trophy back in college in my opinion, but clearly Luck should have been awarded the Rookie of the Year award. He had a weak team, and more wins. Not to mention Luck was healthy for every game this season. So for someone to say RG3 deserved the award over Luck is simply jumping on the bandwagon.
Andrew Luck Should Have Been the Rookie of the Year

I would like to begin this last speech by thanking my opponent for the speech he did give. Even though he forfeited his second round I still thank him for accepting the challenge. So the main reason I believe I won this debate is because I gave good sound arguments, and successfully negated my opponent's case. My opponent proved I successfully negated his case because he didn't give a response. So I will leave you with this. Before you say one QB is better than the other, you should look deeper than just popularity, or QB rating. You have to look to other things such as strength of schedule, how good of a team do they play for, and how many wins they have. If you just jump on the bandwagon, then that shows you truly don't know very much about football. I can honestly say that I believe RG3 was voted Rookie of the Year because a lot of the voters simply jumped on the bandwagon, which shows a lack of respect for the game. Thank You
Homework

School is the students job until they graduate, so it is the most important thing in their life. My school day was from 7:30-2, which is 6 and a half hours but there was a lot of down time, 5 minutes between classes, lunch, advisory all taking time away from class. In reality students were learning for about 45 minutes, 6 classes a day so 4 and a half hours. This does not allow enough time for students to learn all the material in the curriculum, which is why teachers almost never finish their curriculum. The last part actually hurts your argument because it shows us once again lowering standards for people. Who cares if the rate went down by 36% if none of those people earned the diploma. They are not going to be properly prepared for college or the real world. If students cannot manage their time wisely enough then they need to remove something from their life. If homework would be removed the school day would have to be extended much further which nobody wants. I hate this limit