BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Christianity is Probably False

Contention 1: Scientific Error The bible seems to teach the out dated Geocentric model. Joshua 10:12-13 12 Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. 13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. Many of tired to get around this by stating Joshua only said it appeared that way. However this is wrong for many reasons. First, Joshua asked God to stop the sun, not the earth. If we were speaking in an appearance manor we don't ask for the said appearance. Second, Habakkuk 3:11 states "The sun and moon stood still in their habitation: at the light of thine arrows they went, and at the shining of thy glittering spear." Clearly showing the belief that the sun itself stopped rotation. Some have also tried to get around this by pointing out that the sun does rotate around the milky way. This is true, however it wouldn't have any affect on the earth's day, because if the sun moved or not, it still creates curvature in spacetime. Stating that both the sun and earth stopped would be wishful thinking, speculating with no scriptural support. Alternatively one could say that Geocentrism is true. However this is shown wrong by many observable effects. *Stellar parallax [1] *Basic Gravity [2] *Stellar aberration [3] We also know the Earth rotates by the effects it produces. Like, * Coriolis effect [4] * Foucault's pendulum [5] Contention 2: Historical Error There is a historical contradiction in Luke and Matthew. Historian Richard Carrier presented it like so “The Gospel of Luke claims (2.1-2) that Jesus was born during a census that we know from the historian Josephus took place after Herod the Great died, and after his successor, Archelaus, was deposed. But Matthew claims (2.1-3) that Jesus was born when Herod the Great was still alive--possibly two years before he died (2:7-16). Other elements of their stories also contradict each other. Since Josephus precisely dates the census to 6 A.D. and Herod's death to 4 B.C., and the sequence is indisputable, Luke and Matthew contradict each other.” [6] Carrier concludes “...this becomes an irreconcilable contradiction after an examination of all the relevant facts.” The resolution is affirmed. Now to Con for his arguments. [1] http://abyss.uoregon.edu... [2] Curtis Wilson, "The Newtonian achievement in astronomy", pages 233–274 [3] http://mathpages.com... [4] http://abyss.uoregon.edu... [5] http://www.animations.physics.unsw.edu.au... [6] Carrier, Richard. "The Date of the Nativity in Luke (6th ed., 2011)." The Date of the Nativity in Luke. Infidels.org. <http://infidels.org...>.
Christianity is Probably False

Chest and I have agreed to debate the topic "Christianity is Probably False" Chest will be defending and attempting to show the literal and absolute truth of the Bible and I will be attempting to demonstrate Christianity's falsehood and respond to Chest's arguments in favor of its truthfulness. Christianity: The monotheistic religion based on the life and oral teachings of Jesus and the Bible. Probably: almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell. False: not according with truth or fact; incorrect. Debate format is the typical Lincoln-Douglas format. R1: Acceptance R2: My opening arguments followed by Con's opening arguments (No rebuttals by Con) R3: Rebuttals to opening arguments R4: Defense of your original arguments. Since these debates tend to get long, you must limit yourself to a maximum of 3 contentions. This should be enough space for arguments and source lists. If there is not enough space to list sources, you may post them in an external link or in the comments. Rules: No forfeits No insults No semantics 72 Hours to Post Argument 10,000 Characters Max 10 Day Voting Period 3 contentions max Follow the format.
Christianity is Probably False

Thank you n7. I will not give my rebuttals. Rebuttal to Contention 1: First, in his opening argument he seems to have confused several things. Namely that we are not debating whether the Bible is false, or the Old Testament is false, or if the Bible's science is false. We are debating whether Christianity is false. Therefore, his first contention is invalidated. To review, our debate was on, “...The monotheistic religion based on the life and oral teachings of Jesus and the Bible.”[1] Indeed, he did mention the Bible, but not in the sense which his arguments coming from. Christianity is based mostly on the New Testament; the book of Joshua is a Old Testament historical narrative. Good reading, great truths, but not the basis of the Christian faith. I will overlook these errors and rebut the contention, but keep them in mind. I contend that the Bible never, “taught” the Geocentric model; neither was the Geocentric model, “out dated” at the time this book was written. Joshua was written thousands of years ago, (approximately 1300-1400 B.C.)[2] As I stated earlier, Joshua is a historical narrative; that means it was written only as the events took place, and as the writer understood them. Joshua did not know that the earth rotated around the sun, neither did the writer of the book. They wrote as they understood at the time. Random point, but n7 said, “Many of tired...” Minus grammar/spelling I would say. This contention is refuted. Rebuttal to Contention 2: Augustus issued multiple censuses and taxations throughout his reign, there were also many more local censuses and taxations at the local level. Therefore it is quite probable that Herod was alive during one of them. Luke did not claim that Quirinius was a “governor” in the formal sense, but rather as one with authority. A “hegemon”(ruling officer/procurator) rather than a “legatus”(governor). The census Josephus talked about may have happened later. Matthew is right, Luke is right, Josephus is right.[3] See the reference for further details. This contention is refuted. [1] http://www.debate.org... [2a] http://www.gotquestions.org... [2b] http://christianity.about.com... [3] http://www.comereason.org...
Too much technology

Are you sure you don't mean the internet? Cars are technology. They are a pretty important part of our lifes. Lights are techonolgy. Furnaces are technology. "BUT I meant that everybody who are using the smartphones and facebook(social websites in main) are not being connected to the whole world. " So without social websites they will be connected to the whole world (other countries) more than if they didn't have those websites? I don't think this makes sense. "They don't feel time while sitting in a computer club or playing PS or X-box. " It is their choise. In real life you can take drugs and get addicted and get far more worse things. The people who actually do that are not so much anyways. Everything has a bad side. But I find that the internet does more good than harm. "For example, when friends meeting to chill out together they don't talk much to each other because of the internet in their smartphones - that is also big problem. " I don't think this is true. You are probably talking about rare cases. Give more sources in your arguments. The human life on earth wasn't going to be so good without technology. I don't see a reason why technology does more harm than good.
Too much technology

Alright, I got it. I'm sorry for being late) and also if I didn't make the message understandable. I'm talking about everything what is connected to technology. So your point is that you think the video games, which actually makes people lazier, do absolutely opposite thing and makes us smarter. In some context I do agree with you, where you said that internet helps to learn something new BUT I meant that everybody who are using the smartphones and facebook(social websites in main) are not being connected to the whole world. They don't feel time while sitting in a computer club or playing PS or X-box. Your argument about disabled children which are growing up in mental way is good, but what about other people who hasn't got any problems? Yes, they are getting more and more dependent, and I'm not talking about the games. For example, when friends meeting to chill out together they don't talk much to each other because of the internet in their smartphones - that is also big problem.
Too much technology

I will try to prove my point that technology is a really important thing in our lifes. I am not sure if my opponent meant the Internet or technology in general but I will give some arguments. "For example, most of us has iPhones, iPads, smartphones and so on, and everyone (I am not an exception) loses their time on social websites and on different kind of games, which makes everybody think and do things like a zobie. " Actually video games help people. Certain games can help people that have a problem with their brain. Strategic games can improve strategic thinking and brain agility. There are a lot of games that can actually educate you. I am not a huge gamer but I know that those exist. I think "Skyrim" and "Assassin's creed" can educate you but I am not sure. But most of the games can make you smarter. People that use the Internet helps them learn English. There are some people who perfectly know English just from the Internet ( My English sucks but I wouldn't know English that good if I didn't use the Internet ) There are a lot of website ( like this ) that can help you to improve your social skills and educate you. You can shop much easier. I hate social website too but today's society needs those websites to communicate with friends really easy. For an example if you have a friend or a family member in another country he/she can chat with you every day, see the pictures that you posted and connect you both more than if technology didn't exist. Technology, for an example robots help the production of products. Technology helps science ( explore space, experiments etc) If you had a sad day you could watch a comedy or a parody. This can cheer you up. If you are a lonely person you can find Internet friends and have fun with them. The Internet can connect you easily with people that are like you and have no friends. Technology is important for the business and advertising. Also the technology is important for a business to be efficient. You can read books. It is harder for the government to spread propaganda because you can get informed about the events on the Internet. For an example youtube chanels. If people get informed it is harder for countries to get into war because people stand against that. There are a lot of other stuff I could point but I don't think it is needed. The good things that come with technology are much more than the bad things. Sources: . http://www.nbcnews.com... . http://www.theguardian.com... . http://blog.deepbluesky.com... . http://www.ask.com...
Too much technology

In our century the technology takes a huge place, if at the time when that "tech" industry was just at the beginning point all people weren't depend on it as it happens now. For example, most of us has iPhones, iPads, smartphones and so on, and everyone (I am not an exception) loses their time on social websites and on different kind of games, which makes everybody think and do things like a zobie. Yes, Those really cool and innovative things, makes everyone think in one direction and lose time on useless things. So I think one of the biggest current problems is technology.
(Tourney #22) Cats are the greatest animal known to man.

Anyway, I affirm the resolution, "Cats are the greatest animal known to man. " First, I'd like to define some key terms that will be important in this round. •A ‘cat' does not simply mean a domestic cat, but any animal in the felidae (feline) family. •I'd like to define animal as any organism in the kingdom animala besides homo sapiens. With that out of the way, I will move onto my points as to why cats are the greatest animal known to man. 1. Cats are independent and can take care of themselves. Cats can groom themselves, hunt for themselves, and even open doors and windows. (. http://en.wikipedia.org...) 2. Cats are very smart. (. http://en.wikipedia.org...) Cats can communicate with one another, learn tricks, reach hard to reach things, use the toilet, and can even predict death (. http://www.dailymail.co.uk...) and Presidential caucauses (. http://youtube.com...) 3. Cats have amazing physical abilities. Domestic cats can jump 3X their height, the cheetah can run at the fastest speed of any animal, and some can let out booming roars. Cats like lions and tigers can also kill furiously and have been known to kill or attack humans. 4. Domestic cats are cute, cuddly, and graceful. Good luck cuddling with a dog and not getting slobbered on, or a bird and chocking it to death, or a snake and not getting bitten. 5. Cats are subject to ‘LOLCATZ', which is extreme hilarity. 6. Cats are very similar to humans, even more so than dogs. Also, they have several quirks and things that make them unique and more lovable. (. http://www.xmission.com...) Thank you, I look forward to my opponent's response.
God exists and Creationism Vs. Evolution

http://www.patheos.com... There's your source about incorruptibles. Look, I went into this debate expecting creationism versus evolution, which I was well prepared for. Once he said that he accepted evolution, I thought maybe we were going to discuss human evolution, so I described a graph found in one of my sources to begin that debate. But no, this man had drawn me into this debate using Creationism versus evolution as a guise for "Here's a bunch of 'miracles'. Try to debunk them." I despise this. I loath that deception. I walked in talking science and he starts talking about aliens and Neanderthals and ancient humans and Marian apparitions. This is the same man that believes everyone but Catholics are going to hell. He calls himself wealthy and says he'll offer 7 grand to anyone who can prove him wrong. Ladies and gentlemen, believe what you want about what I could not debunk, (by the way, I was relying on quick internet searches. It is obvious most people don't even take the time to attempt to debunk these wild claims.) But anywho, I must say that this was a most manipulative and deceptive trick to get me to discuss 'miracles'. I close this debate by declaring his claims unfounded and fanatical views of Catholicism. Have a good day.
God exists and Creationism Vs. Evolution

Hey if you can't watch asian pop music and not think the apocalypse is imminent...hell that just gave me an epileptic seizure http://www.youtube.com... So my last miraculous exposition will be on the incorruptibility of holy relics: http://en.wikipedia.org... 1300 year old blood that was examined by a professor in anatomy and pathological histology as well as chemistry and clinical microscopy and it was determined that the blood is still fresh after 1.3 millennia and that no preservatives were used. I also encourage looking into the incorruptible corpses of saints http://www.protestanterrors.com... Some of which were even put into conditions that would cause rapid decay but failed to do so.
God exists and Creationism Vs. Evolution

The Aeta People: http://en.wikipedia.org... Wiki has references to the studies of their claims; these people reach full adult age at 12 years old and are sure to die when they are 27, they can't possibly be related to civilized man who adults at 18 and peak ages at 120. About communism, China was a satellite of the Soviet for quite some time; and for knowing the end of times, the bible doesn't actually say that we can't know the time of the 2nd coming, just that we won't know when the universe fades away: Matthew 24 35Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. 36"But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Now about Fatima, of course 100 years later people will explain away 70,000 eye-witnesses; we see the same with Holocaust Denial. I won't defend or attack any claims; but as far as video of the event it did happen again in 2011 before a crowd in the Ivory Coast: (To see properly in the 'Original Video' you may need to tilt your laptop screen to dim sun brightness) http://www.youtube.com... http://www.worldstarhiphop.com... Malachy's Predictions are obviously an old document, can't find anyone refuting them. So, my next exposition will be the Miraculous Image of Guadalupe (Declared the most prodigal miracle of human history) http://www.youtube.com... i. Miraculously Received in 1531AD ii. No undersketching or underdrawing iii. Material disintegrates in 30 years but hasn't after 500 years iv. Attempts to make copies have failed v. Survived acids and fire vi. Maps Stellar Constellations Unknown Until Late 20th Century In The Position They Were Aligned That Day In 1531AD vii. Eyes of Image Demonstrate Purkinje-Sanson Law And Contain Microscopic Images viii. Image Changes Color At Distances ix. Image Maintains Constant Temperature Regardless Of Room Temperature
God exists and Creationism Vs. Evolution

Concerning Malachy's predictions, I have but one thing to say: Rome will not be destroyed at the end of this reign. The end of times is not upon us. Furthermore, if you would like to say Russia is the Red Dragon, than you are wrong. China would be more of a Red Dragon. On top of this, the lord says that no one will know the day or time and that it will come without warning. On the appearance of Mary at Fatima is very very strange. But the sun dancing in the sky? You know how noticeable that would have been all over the world? That would have sent out so many solar flares it might have destroyed the Earth! That's impossible and there is a reason the visions at Fatima stopped. We invented something called the Video camera. Since then there have been no miracles. http://angels.about.com... Here is an excellent source debunking the whole claim. http://www.miraclesceptic.com... Finally, I do not know how those people above describe ancient humans... Your extraordinary claim that ancient humans walk among us is unfounded and according to the current understanding of today, completely false. You would think that biologists and evolution skeptics would have descended on any of this information that you have presented about such humans. It appears, because you provide no sources leading to a more authoritative voice, that you have come to these strange conclusions yourself. You would be far more credible if you could provide sources. All of the claims that you have made so far are baseless and unfounded in any science. Even the video that you gave me was very questionable indeed! Where was that document for a thousand years? How do we know that it was written by the saint? And why would anyone hide such a document in "secret archives of the vatican?" Also, for documents to be lost in such a small building that made such predictions is strange indeed. If they had been lost and recovered anywhere else than the vatican it might get some credibility. But it is a totally unbelievable document. It makes as bout as much sense as the endless rumors of Christ's return that constantly prove false. I guess we will see about that documents validity in our lifetime, eh? Because while he supports feeding the hungry, as any man should, I do not see him rushing food to the Africans that are starving. I do not see him doing anything any other pope has not already done. So I challenge you now, what are your sources? Does anyone but you claim that all those famous dictators were neanderthals? Or that those people in the Philippines are ancient humans? I just want to read something about it other than a man who I know nothing about besides that he is a Devout Catholic.
God exists and Creationism Vs. Evolution

Found is the most primitive "human" known to man, the Philippine Aborigine: average life-span 16 years and die of old age at 27: http://en.wikipedia.org... So yes there are primitive un-evolved humans, but I find there is miraculous evidence in the creation account of civilized man and his interaction with. We'll look at 2 clearly fulfilled prophesies: 1: St. Malachy's Prophesy of the Popes - http://www.youtube.com... In the 12th Century St. Malachy wrote a list of 112 short Latin phrases describing in succession each Pope. All of which were accurate; but the most profoundly shocking #110 John Paul II he describes as being "Of the Solar Eclipse": John Paul II was born on a solar eclipse and died during a solar eclipse. If my math still works there is a 0.000067555% of that occurring [ 3 eclipses annually / 365 days = 0.008219178(^2) =0.000067555 ] By any means we can just say Malachy knew. 2: Revelation 12 matches perfectly with modern events, beginning with a rundown of the most relevant passages: A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. 4 Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. 17 Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring"those who keep God"s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus. October 18th 1917 Virgin Mary clothed in the Sun appears at Fatima to 70,000 witnesses including Authors of the Atheist Newspaper "O Seculo" who concede it was a miracle. October 25th 1917 Bolshevik Revolution (Red Dragon comes at the Heel of the Woman - Genesis 3:15) i. Red Dragon had 7 crowned heads (Soviet Union had 7 Unchecked Dictators [Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, Gorbachev] ii. Red Dragon wiped out 1/3rd of the stars from heaven (Soviet Union conquered 1/3rd of the earth) iii. Soviet Union wages war against God's People murdering an estimated 40,000,000 Catholics.