BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
If the world ends in 2012 DDO should all hide in a safe bunker and have one giant legendary sex orgy

Final statements regarding the qualities and characteristics of this society. 1) Gambling is completely legal (Get ready to bet on gladiator fights and the mud wrestling matches) 2) Sex tournaments would be abundant (For when orgies arent enough to keep us all entertained and relieved) 3) Gangs (Membership is determined by length of the mans thing-a-mah-jigger and playfully competes against other gangs) 4) Collection of all the movies in the world (For people in the corner to entertain themselves) 5) Debate.org Hall of Fame walkway (Statues to those who have contributed to DDO's greatness immortalized forever) 6) Oils, lotions, creams, etc is endless (go crazy you sex demons!) 7) The Stadium can seat all of DDO (Usually only sells out when Royal and LDF Mud-Wrestle) 8) Gladiator Uniforms (Classic roman gladiator equipment) 9) Free healthcare for sex injuries (ANYTHING can count as a sex injury though) 10) Facebook still works (Nobody knows how or why, but we still got it) 11) Weed is legal (Anyone who survives the Apocalypse deserves the right to smoke a nice ol' fatty) 12) Alcohol Age is 18 (See reason 11 for reason about why this is) 13) Unlimited Food (breakthrough in preservation technologies right before the Apocalypse hits) 14) Your name is your DDO name (Makes it cooler and more awesome) 15) Ranking System (See who thinks your awesome in the sack and who you need to impress more) 16) Jobs for everyone! (If you dont feel like debating or going on the forums you can earn money) 17) Successful self sustaining economy (We're DDO, of course we would figure it out) 18) No unwanted pregnancies (Condom technology raises efficiency to 100%) 19) Personal score cards (Keep track of whose world you rocked from night to night) 20) Movie Industry (Starring all of us in successful roles :D) 21) eBay (Sell your sex services on eBay and see how high people bid to have only you for one night) 22) Everyone gets their own Wikipedia page (People contribute to your legacy and YOU decide which parts to keep or not) 23) Quota's (Make sure that people put out at least once a week) 24) DDO Jail (For a**holes or people who dont meet their quota's. Also for those who smoke all your weed) 25) Free enhancement clinics (Nobody's gonna judge if you enhance your goods) 26) Stripper poles in every bedroom (If you have a sleep walking condition the pole can be removed for your safety) 27) ESPN (See who did the best after every orgy from day to day, top ten plays would be awesome by the way) 28) Climate Control (Ideal temperature for ideal orgy conditions) 29) Beds with suspension (Increase motion when doing it) 30) Beds with vibrations (Why not?) 31) Machine guns (Go outside and kill any zombies if they are out there) 32) Free sex hot lines (Those phone number hot lines that cost $90 a minute in real life that advertise at 3AM are free now) 33) Concoctions of 5 Hour Energy + Viagra (Might as well show off even after youre done) I hope you got a kick out of this debate, Thanks for reading :D
If the world ends in 2012 DDO should all hide in a safe bunker and have one giant legendary sex orgy

I am sure I will get banned for this debate. Thank you for the first shots. I take it that he didn't say anything about banned members. But let's shove off. P1- Is it a good/safe idea? On DDO there is about 12,624- Females And 24,183 -Males If we all get in a Giant sex Orgy, then what happens to those who are at the bottom of the pile? --Having thousands pounds of fat crushing is, by far, a crap way to go. --Having said that, would that be breeding grounds for disease? --What if you were the lucky bastard who was on top and an underground earthquake comes along and smashes your body to the ground? Is there a chance that some DDO'ers could bring parasites, viruses and other diseases to the underground bunker? Could there be a mass murder a la cabin fever? P2- HEARTLESS, TRAITOROUS LIBIDO! ! In a sense who will get some booty from some of the "smarter" members like Royal or LDF? I think this will lead to personal fights as who will get Royal/LDF. But of course if everyone is in a pile, then wouldn't that mean everyone gets a piece? Well, true. But if you where right on LDF you might attract some unwanted company. LK might get a wee jealous if there's a bench on LDF's back So in the resulting effects would be A war between the least hot and the hot women. The men fight roman gladiators-esque fights. The rise of tensons in the bunker. The least appealing women in a bit of rage. A inpasse of future families P3- Do we really want Izbo to breed with NoNo/Gabby? Well DO YOU! ?! The mere chances of Izbo to impregnate someone is too high. Even more scary what if Izbo does it with NoNo? And if Izbo is in a pile he could impregnate multiple women AT ONCE! As much as I like to move on, I will stop here. OCCUPY DDO! PICK THE BUSTY MIDGET 'HANDBOOK'!
If the world ends in 2012 DDO should all hide in a safe bunker and have one giant legendary sex orgy

The world is suspected to end late this year, and there are some people who say there is a legit chance it will happen because the Mayans predicted it would. The Resolution is if the world ends in 2012 and someone provided the means to sustain DDO members with enough food and supplies to wait out the apocalyptic events brought about in 2012, then DDO should, upon realizing they will be the only ones who survive, proceed on repopulating the world through sex and/or sex orgies. That all didnt fit in the resolution though so I shortened it and threw in that part about the sex orgy to raise people's interest. There would not only be merely one orgy, there would most likely be many orgies or just a large amount of sex between members done to repopulate the world while in a bunker/underground city populated only by fellow DDO'ers who would form their own society while inside the bunker/city Pro: DDO should repopulate the world through erotic acts of reproduction Con: DDO should simply survive and let humanity die out the way God wanted it to Whoever accepts the debate must agree that 1) The world will end in 2012, 2) That DDO'ers will be the only people who survive, 3) That the bunker will have enough food, water, supplies, and weed to sustain themselves indefinately 4) That nobody on DDO has any STD's 5) That Mitt Romney will be the GOP candidate
Steve Young is a Better Quarterback than Joe Montana

I accept your challenge. First I will rebut your argument, and then offer my first arguments. The overall question at hand is who is the better QB Joe Montana and Steve Young. While it is true that Young has a better career QB rating, that is only one way to measure a QB's worth. You state that Young had fewer career interceptions, however Young played in 23 fewer games than Montana did; Montana therefore attempted 1198 more pass attempts than Young. When you figure the numbers out, they each had 2.6% of their passes intercepted. Next you say that Young had more rushing TDs. Rushing is only one of many aspects of scoring in the NFL. When you combine rushing and passing TDs, Young has 275, including his time with the Bucs. Joe Montana had 273 passing TDs alone. When you add his 20 rushing TDs, he has more total touchdowns. Young's career completion percentage is only 1.1% higher than Montana's...it may be better than Montana, but hardly what I call superior. In fact, if we are basing superiority on completion percentage, then Chad Pennington, with his 66% completion average, is better QB than both Montana and Young. I would never say that about Pennington in a real QB debate. My first arguments are: 1. NFL games are played to win. Montana won 73% of the games he started, while Young only won 66% of the games he started. Based on that stat Montana is the better quarterback. 2. How an NFL game is managed and how a quarterback handles the pressure is also a major factor when determining who is a better QB. During his regular season 49er career Montana engineered 27 fourth quarter comebacks and Young only had 13. 3. Montana averaged just over 210 yards per game and Young just under 200 per game. 4. Young was sacked 8% of the time he went back to pass. Montana was only sacked 6% of the time he attempted a pass, to me this means several things: (A) he was able to get the ball out of his hands quicker, (B) he was able to make reads better and more importantly the "hot" read better than Young, and (C) he had better chemistry with his wide receivers during pressure situations. 5. Steve Young lost 39 fumbles for a total of -48 yards, and Montana lost 30 for a total of -27. This shows that Young was more of a detriment to his team than Montana. 6. Montana's combined passing and rushing yards equals 37,619 yards from scrimmage in his 15 years as an NFL player. That is 3486 more yards than Young. For these reasons I believe Joe Montana was a better QB than Steve Young.
Steve Young is a Better Quarterback than Joe Montana

Steve Young is the better quarterback because he has a 96.8 QB Rating (1), whereas Joe Montana only has a 92.3 (2). Steve Young also has fewer career interceptions, more rushing touchdowns, and a higher passing completion rate than Joe Montana. After seeing both players perform in person and on television, it is clear to me that Steve Young is superior in his athletic capabilities, and his quarterbacking skills.
Lebron James is better than Kobe Bryant

Kobe is a dominant player.. he has the mind set of a champion. He was also voted on by the GM's of the teams as the toughest player in the NBA last year. He plays through injuries that most people sit out of games because of. Lebron doesnt do that. if he rolls an ankle he sits out for 3 games. Kobe is just a better player. pure and simple
Lebron James is better than Kobe Bryant

Apparently your just allowed to just ignore almost all of my arguments... "If you want to say Kobe couldnt do it by hmself then you have to say Lebron couldnt either..." A. I never said Kobe couldn't do it by himself, he just hasn't done it yet and his career is almost over B. The whole point of my argument was that Lebron nearly single did it by himself "he had to leave his team AND his hometown to be bale to win.. So sure Kobe had help with Shaq.. but even after Shaq was traded and they werent as good Kobe was loyal to his team and didnt leave. so Kobe has loyalty over lebron" A. how exactly does loyalty equal good player? B. "but even after Shaq was traded and they werent as good" thank you for agreeing with me there was a poll taken among the NBA players in 2010 and Kobe was 1st in the highest basketball IQ in the NBA. He is one of the smartest basketball players to ever play the game! (if not the smartest) A. yes, in 2010, when Lebron was only in his 7th year in the league, while Kobe had double that "he can shoot 3's.. (he holds the record for most 3s in a game in case you want to argue that) he was able to dunk as well as Lebron when he was younger (won the slamdunk competition in 1997 when he was only 17)" A. If you look at the stats from my first argument, you'll notice Lebron is better at rebounding (RPG) B. THE DUNK CONTEST DOESN'T MATTER
Lebron James is better than Kobe Bryant

Kobe Bryant is better the Lebron James... people always try to argue lebron is better but when it comes down to it Kobe always surpasses Lebron. Im not going to argue rings... because Kobe has been in the league since 1996 and Lebron since 2003 so Kobe has had more time. But to say that he has always had help and couldnt do it by himself is crazy... show me another player that has been the only star on his team and took them to the finals and actually won! MJ had Scottie Pippen and Clyde Drexler.. both of which many people still talk about today! If you want to say Kobe couldnt do it by hmself then you have to say Lebron couldnt either... he had to leave his team AND his hometown to be bale to win.. So sure Kobe had help with Shaq.. but even after Shaq was traded and they werent as good Kobe was loyal to his team and didnt leave. so Kobe has loyalty over lebron... there was a poll taken among the NBA players in 2010 and Kobe was 1st in the highest basketball IQ in the NBA. He is one of the smartest basketball players to ever play the game! (if not the smartest) he has one of the best mid-range jumpshots ever... he can shoot 3's.. (he holds the record for most 3s in a game in case you want to argue that) he was able to dunk as well as Lebron when he was younger (won the slamdunk competition in 1997 when he was only 17) so lets hear some debates! Report this Argument
Lebron James is better than Kobe Bryant

YOU STILL DIDN'T RESPOND TO MY STATISTICS! 5" NBA champion (2000"2002, 2009"2010) a. he has been in the league longer, and as I said before, that means Bill Russel is the best player of all time. Most All-Star Game MVP awards won A. This does not matter 11" All-NBA First Team (2002"2004, 2006"2013) 2" All-NBA Second Team (2000"2001) 2" All-NBA Third Team (1999, 2005) A. again been in the league longer AGE TO AGE COMPARISON AT AGE 28 Kobe 3 rings, 0 Finals MVP, 0 MVP Lebron 1 ring, 1 Finals MVP, 3 MVP REGULAR SEASON Points: Kobe 19,296 - Lebron 20,804 Steals: Kobe 1,170 - Lebron 1,306 Blocks: Kobe 467 - Lebron 638 Assists: Kobe 3,561 - Lebron 5,227 Rebounds: Kobe 4,073 - Lebron 5,481 3Pt Made: Kobe 936 - Lebron 1,005 FG%: Kobe 45% - Lebron 49% Games Played: Kobe 784 - Lebron 755 PLAYOFFS Points: Kobe 3,053 - Lebron 3,275 Steals: Kobe 174 - Lebron 195 Blocks: Kobe 94 - Lebron 109 Assists: Kobe 586 - Lebron 772 Rebounds: Kobe 647 - Lebron 998 3Pt Made: Kobe 145 - Lebron 159 FG%: Kobe 44% - Lebron 47% Games Played: Kobe 131 - Lebron 115 (my previous argument)
There exists at least one "god" ie., a creator

I will happily accept Evan_Shad's debate and will be taking the side that a 'god' or 'creator' was not needed to create the Universe. Looking at Pro's introduction, it seems he understands the reasoning behind using proper grammar and spelling in his debates, so I will not bother with talking about that. I will also assume that Pro knows about citing sources, so I will not go into detail about that either. It also appears that Pro is knowledgeable about physics, which is good, for it will mean this debate will be mature and reasonable. Pro goes on to talk about the realm outside time called 'eternity'. Because that is the title he wishes to give that area, I will comply and refer to it as that. As this appears that is all I have to say, I will leave Pro to start us off with the first arguments, for he has stated that he has the burden of proof. I look forward to this educational debate.
There exists at least one "god" ie., a creator

"God" for this debate is the creator of the universe, and only the creator. It need not be omnipotent, omnibenevolent, or omni- anything. It needn't even be the only one. My thesis is exactly that there exists at least one being which is outside of our physical world and which is the creator or co-creator of it. Nothing else.I will point to the existence of time as evidence. We live in a world where the "present" state of things is at least partially dependent on the "past" state of things (I say "partially" in order to not exclude free will). The past is likewise dependent on a past that is even farther back. The state of reality at any moment in time, therefore, is dependent on the state of reality at the previous moment. This is recursive. As a mathematician would say it: If, regardless of x, f(x) = f(x-1), then we can never know the value of f(x). But it does have a value. There is a truth about the state of things in the present. So there must be some x, some time value, such that the state of reality at that time does not depend on its state at a previous time. Therefore time cannot extend infinitely far back. There must be a first moment.At this first moment, the above principle seems to require that reality at that time depends on the moment before, which is impossible since there isn't a previous moment. Therefore the initial state of reality must be determined by something else.I posit the existence of a realm outside time called eternity, where this law of past-causality does not apply. Here, the present is not determined by the past, there is no past. All things exist there must coexist. Then the beings of this realm will not a causal explanation the way our reality does because in eternity there is no past to speak of. Thus, a being of this realm could have created our temporal realm without recursion.As a final note, I have the burden of proof.
There exists at least one "god" ie., a creator

I would like to begin by thanking my opponent for responding so quickly and am glad he now understands the format of debates on this site. I will now begin my rebuttals: "I read the link on M-theory and it seems to be completely irrelevant." It seems that Pro has not read enough about M-theory to know that it is irrelevant. According to space.com: "M-theory posits that multiple universes are created out of nothing, Hawking explained, with many possible histories and many possible states of existence. In only a few of these states would life be possible, and in fewer still could something like humanity exist."[1] Furthermore, according to dummies.com, "our universe is created from the collision of branes. The matter and radiation of our universe comes from the kinetic energy created by the collision of these two branes.[2]" This theory works very well with M-theory. "No, of course God cannot create itself. It can be uncreated, however, because its present existence does not require it to have existed in the past." Nothing can be uncreated, for if it is, it has not been created, therefore not existing. Contingent beings have never been proven. For the universe to simply 'exist' and have no explanation is mysterious and unsatisfying. God simply existing and having no scientific explanation is also mysterious and unsatisfying. However, I have just stated that the Universe does have an explanation. Unfortunately, I do not have any more room to write another argument, for Pro only gave me 2,000 characters instead of 10,000. It seems this is the end of the debate and I ask one thing of the viewers: Vote Con. [1]http://www.space.com... [2]http://www.dummies.com...
There exists at least one "god" ie., a creator

Ah, I was indeed unaware of that. I thank Con for explaining.I read the link on M-theory and it seems to be completely irrelevant. It says essentially that the world is made of vibrating strings and is 11-dimensional. I cannot see what this has to do with the universe being created from nothing.Regarding Con's objection that God cannot create itself; I find that odd about theists too. No, of course God cannot create itself. It can be uncreated, however, because its present existence does not require it to have existed in the past. Anything temporal seems to have this recursion, but I cannot see it troubling an eternal being.For the universe to simply 'exist' and have no explanation is mysterious and unsatisfying. Because in the universe, not everything is logical. You could not have predicted it. The universe is contingent, and there are things in it that do not seem possible given a purely cemetrical beginning and a deterministic evolution process. But in the case of God, if you suppose that there is only one and give it the omni- attributes, it becomes on par with an empty universe (possible world where nothing exists) in terms of simplicity and comprehensibility.
There exists at least one "god" ie., a creator

Introduction It seems that because Pro joined 6 days ago, he is not yet aware of the customs of debate.org. Generally, in a debate, round 1 is for acceptance only and arguments are not given. However, Pro was not aware of this, therefore expecting me to give my arguments in the first round. Because of this misunderstanding, I will give my first arguments in the is round and rebuttals will come in round 3. String Theory "M-theory is an extension of string theory in which 11 dimensions of spacetime are identified as 7 higher-dimensions plus the 4 common dimensions."[1] In M-theory, it becomes clear that the Universe can come out of nowhere and does not need a 'Creator' such as God. One thing I find odd about Theists is that they find it to be quite reasonable for God to be created from nothing, but when told about the Universe being created from nothing, they freak out. If M-Theory is correct, there would be no need for a God because the Universe came into existence on its own. However, if M-Theory is incorrect, there would be no logical explanation for either God or the Universe, meaning the Universe would not have come into existence, meaning we would not be here to debate this very topic. Conclusion Now that round 2 is complete, it is time for round 3. In this round, Pro will state his rebuttals, followed by my rebuttals. I apologize for the misunderstanding and hope he understands for his next debate. I look forward to Pro's rebuttals. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org...
There exists at least one "god" ie., a creator

I already did give my first argument. It was the one about time being recursive and so requiring an eternal being to have created it. Con does not appear to have raised any objections, so I cannot rebut any. With my 1800 remaining characters, then, I shall elaborate on my first argument.Perhaps it is unclear why an eternal creator would not be subject to the same need for causal explanation. Keep in mind that temporal reality is only recursive because of the way it refers to its own past. In an eternal world, there is only one moment, only one version of existence, and so there is no dependence. If nothing changes, nothing needs an explanation.Hmm, I still have 1300 characters. Ah, yes. The big bang, this is a likely objection. I should point out a problem with the big bang creation theory: the big bang is an "explosion". That of course is when matter poofs out with great speed. Poofing out implies space, and speed implies both space and time. Thus, an explosion, by its definition, cannot have created matter, space, or time, for it presupposes all three.