azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

Hey... You use your whole body in soccer and Cristiano Ronaldo jumps higher than Lebron James too and he's a soccer player. Also have you heard of headers? Then there's like 70+ points scored a game in basketball for each team so is it really that hard to score? Whilst in soccer the max most teams can score in a game is 15. I also recommend you watch the video below.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

NO WAY SO WRONG BRO TOOK IT WAY TO FARR WITH LEBRON MY HOMIE
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

ok, so if you're gonna compare lebron with the best soccer player in the world, i'll compare him with the best n the world, micheal jordan, his jump is 116.8cm, whereas ronaldo's is only 71. :)
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

basketball is so much more creative. in soccer you can barely do tricks. only jukes. i dont think you can get our ankles crossed in soccer. i also think you need more concentration in basketball because you use your head, arms and feet. in soccer its mostly just on the footwork. and in basketball, theres a alot of help defense. so if your center (the closest player to the rim) needs help, other teamates can help. not like in soccer when it sucks for the goalie because he doesnt have help. when he's all alone its one-on-one
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

You are not only using your feet in soccer,so get your facts straight.You are using your ENTIRE body even if you arent a goalkeeper.Speaking about goalkeepers,goalkeeping is the hardest role in soccer.What do you mean he doesnt help? He plays as a major role in the defence
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

Watch this video.. You obviously don't understand soccer. There's also more stradegy and tactics in soccer and they're not like, "Hey you're power forward" and most people don't know their roles in basketball anyway so they just run around. Also in a formation like a 4--3-3 that 4 at the bottom in the defense line and that's 4/5 players which nearly makes up a whole basketball team. There's also a goalkeeper.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

basketball because all soccer does and kick a ball and a much bigger stadium were a ball can just fly off in space but basketball its an covered space were it will not leave da stadium so basketball for me just because im 13 doesnt mean i can argue jeez.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

I'm 12 an I can argue.... Also there's spare balls in all matches and it's much more than kicking a ball. You juke, break ankles, and act cool.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

Basketball is a work out it pushes you hard in your legs and arms soccer is mostly focused in on the legs
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

Goalies.... They use everything... There's also throw ins and if you've seen Bale he loves to dribble the ball before he does corners.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

Basketball is better because1) It even has a sports brand(AND1) Have u seen any soccer brands? No? That's what I thought too2) More breaks means more energy to play longer. Play(or run) 45 straight minutes of soccer and you'll need an oxygen tank at halftime.3) You don't need to be tall. Spud Webb, Mugsy Bogues, Nate Robinson, Mo Williams are shorter than 6 ft.So yeah. Basketball is better.BTW if you do find a soccer brand tell me. I'm waiting ;)
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

Soccer is better. 1.Soccer is more challenging than basketball because using your feet is much more complicated and difficult than using your hands. Soccer is requires you to be more fit because on average, basketball players have to run 2.72 miles and soccer players have to run on average of 7 miles per game2. Also, there are many soccer brands, Nike.Puma.Under Armour.Diadora.KwikGoal.Pugg.Reusch.and CR7
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

Yeah I know how Soccer is much more Popular and stuff but one thing people that play Soccer is that if you even want to dribble as fast a soccer player then you need to know how to palm a Ball and if you can't don't even bother to Dunk or Stuff like that and Basketball you have to have a lot of strategy as you can still lose even with the best players and then for Soccer Neymar wasn't in the team cause he got injured then Brazil lost to Germany so you see my point and anyhow Basketball has more serious injuries like you can literally smash your on to the floor if you accidentally fail a Dunk or a Layup and then in Football fail to save a ball then just fall onto the ground and might not even bang your head and then after that you might even fail to kick and then just trip.Those are like minor injuries I fall down and like bang my head everyday on the floor and Football players Just Fail so If you have proof you don't need to palm a ball to dribble easier or find some knowledge saying that Soccer is harder than Basketball Cause you haven't even tried Basketball and also you Soccer fans are saying have you tried Soccer yes I have,I played for 2 Years and got bored of it cause there's no really that advance skill that you need to get 100 cuts and bruises to do and you also have to remember that Soccer players fall onto Grass which is much softer than Wood Planks so there If you have proof then try and Counter this long Speech!
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

I think basketball better because you can have fun with your friends while your watching it
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

It is really fun to watch because you can have with your family
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

Basketball is good because u can shoot the ball in soccer u have to kick it
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

I like basketball because it is fun to watch and it is not about winning its about having fun
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

basketball because its not about wining its about having fun
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

basketball beacause its about having fun its about wining
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

basketball is better 🌓🌓🌓🌓🌓🌓jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj fuck
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

basketball is better because you can break peoples ankles, and cross people up. basketball you use math to find out how much you have to through to make it in the net. soccer is for people on the other continents such as Europe, Asia, and Turkey
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

You can break ankles in soccer too by chopping, rainbowing, rouletting, signaturing (Ronaldo's), etc.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

Basketball just dose not take as long to make some points and in soccer it could take an hour to make a point
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

I would go with Basketball because theirs a lot of good players on their. Soccer is not that many people that good their only Messi and Ronaldo. In basketball theirs Kobe, Curry, O'neil, Micheal Jordan and more I don't like soccer that much and look at this clip of messi
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

i play basketball and it is fun and awsome and it is not about wining is about having fun
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

I play basketball and it is awesome and fun try it and u will see
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

I play it and it is fun and awesome so sign up because it is fun it not about wining it's about having fun
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

I play basketball and u do more running than soccer so try it out its really fun
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

First of all, Basketball is the 3rd most watched in the U.S, when Soccer isn't even in the top 10. That proves that Basketball is way more interesting to watch. People may say that Basketball players are wimps because they play indoors, but it is way better than having to wait for good weather before you can play Soccer. Also, there are Basketball courts out side too so we are not afraid of the weather or wimpy of the weather. People may say that there is such things as indoor soccer so you don't have to wait until good weather but that means you are a wimp for playing indoors too. This debate is going on in my school and I am not afraid to prove my point. Basketball is better than Soccer.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

Basketball is more watched in the US. Soccer is number 1 watched in the world.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

THANK YOU!!! I FUCKING LOVE YOU FOR SAYING THAT.. YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE THAT UNDERSTANDS
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Soccer

it doesnt prove that basketball is better to whatch it just means that people keep replaying videos.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

bruhh who cares that soccer is more popular globaly?? NBA players make more money than soccer players https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2017/06/07/the-worlds-highest-paid-athletes-2017-behind-the-numbers/#7e7a790066ad Check the numbers pussy boy .... 32 to 9 damn thass pretty hard..And why the NBA players are paid better than soccer players if "Soccer is no1 globally"???Cuz USA is the best country in the world and even the 3rd sport in the USA is better than no1 of the rest of the world Plus NBA teams are more valuble than soccer teams ....all 30 teams of the NBA are over 750$ millions....only 14 soccer teams are more valuble than 750$ millions....c mon dude nobody cares bout soccer NBA is more valuble and people are watching more basketball than soccer in the USA u were wrong bout that...stop it dumbass u lost!!!
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

basketball develops speed and hand eye coordination. I also feel like it is more of a team effort, and you can get a lot closer to your friends by playing it.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

Basketball is way better! There are ally-oops, slam dunks, three pointers, buzzer beaters, etc. It is very fun to play.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

as far as playing the game goes basketball is better because there are no offensive and defensive positions and you have less players in the field, meaning you get the ball more. Soccer also is so much of a team sport, that if there is one bad player they can lose you the game with one mistake, and one goal, where in basketball, bad players can just not get the ball and if they mess up there isnt a huge consequence. Just as a sport to play, basketball is better.
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

soccer is bad it restricts hand movement which is used in hand eye coordination and it is lame. In basketball it is cool to see great shots
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

Basketball better!!! There are 32 bbal plyrs in top 100 highest paid athlets and there are only 9 from soccer. Who cares that soccer is more popular globaly if the players don t make that much money??? The NBA teams are also way more valuble than soccer teams. All 30 teams of the NBA are over 750$ millions , only 14 soccer teams globaly are over 750$ millions....c mon now everybody who argues that soccer its better just look at the numbers plsss.... ...Football better than both soccer and bbal btw !!!
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

basketball is better than soccer because soccer is just people flopping basketball is a sport that takes longer to master than soccer
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

Soccer is such a bitchy sport! You don't need skill! The most skill less sport! The coach is a whole hell more useless than in basketball! All the fucking coaches in soccer do is watch a game on the sidelines for fucking free!
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

SOCCER SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ITS BORING AND YOU STAND THERE FOR NO REASON AND NO POINT IN YOUR LIFEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

dgdgdgftfd,fdkmncs ldoxsozoxsdshysuawogdsjfdokflflgfnjdhydhydhdhydhydhfd
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

basket ball is better because everyone likes basketball, but nipoles like soccer
Debate: What's better: soccer or basketball?
Side: Basketball

BASKETBALL WAY BETTER IT'S MUCH MOORE ENTERTAINING THAN SOCCER. SOCCER IS JUST RUN AROUND THE FIELD LIKE BULLS BUT BASKETBALL IS BETTER IN FACT SO PEOPLE WHO LIKE SOCCER I'M A HATER!!!
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

Nothing tangible, I'm afraid.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

Then does logic fall into that category? ;)
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

What category? Of being tangible? The thing about logic is, it doesn't have to be tangible it leads to tangible conclusions. For instance, logical people know fire is hot. Any test will confirm this. What test, logic, or proof confirms God?
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

That is begging the question then. If the tangible backs logic, then if the tangible is gone, then logic is no more.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

You try to twist words to work to your favor but you're not actually saying anything, and I see that now. This is usually the moment when people give up.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

I'm not twisting words. I'm using what is called logic.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

You're literally saying nothing at all. I mean you make paradoxes when you have nothing left to say. I can't even give an example because I would never think of that as an arguing tactic.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

Logic is not used very often as an arguing tactic, I know.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

Are you a child? Honestly. What you just did, in disputing my last comment (stay focused)was make a typically childish "I know you are but what am I" argument. Do you see that? Do you want me to quote our exact arguments?
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

I want you to rebut my argument with logic instead of saying that I am twisting your words. Words follow deductively so you can accept logic or not. However, do not say this: "You try to twist words to work to your favor but you're not actually saying anything, and I see that now. This is usually the moment when people give up."
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

There is no logic to refute you with, when you're making paradoxical arguments. Saying things like, "The clouds are the clouds because they can be and can not be the clouds" It's, for lack of a better word, Gobbledy gook. The very statement I'd like some clarifications on if it's not total nonsense is this: "That is begging the question then. If the tangible backs logic, then if the tangible is gone, then logic is no more."
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

Logic is not physical. If it is backed in the physical, then when the physical is no more, then so too is logic. If logic is gone, while the physical is gone, then that means the physical is real and not real at the same time. Therefore, logic necessarily must follow in the abstract. Therefore, to say that logic leads to tangible conclusions is a logical fallacy.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

Logic is not physical.Logic is an idea, obviously it's not physical it has ties to people by physical means. Things can only be logical if they have physical ties. If it is backed in the physical, then when the physical is no more, then so too is logic.I agree.If logic is gone, while the physical is gone, then that means the physical is real and not real at the same time.No, that means the physical is real. If logic is gone and the physical is gone, that means there is no physical so there is no logical.Therefore, logic necessarily must follow in the abstract.That is false, you are saying that to justify God being logical.Therefore, to say that logic leads to tangible conclusions is a logical fallacy.Indeed, yet I said tangible solutions lead to logical conclusions. There is a difference. Logic does not exist without physical proof. There is no getting around it.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

Logic is an idea, obviously it's not physical it has ties to people by physical means. Things can only be logical if they have physical ties.That makes no sense. Thins can only be logical if they have physical ties?No, that means the physical is real. If logic is gone and the physical is gone, that means there is no physical so there is no logical.You don't understand.... if logic is no more, then that means there is nothing to say that A=~A. That means that the logical is illogical. You are using circular reasoning.That is false, you are saying that to justify God being logical.God is logical. However, that is still a red herring.Indeed, yet I said tangible solutions lead to logical conclusions. There is a difference. Logic does not exist without physical proof. There is no getting around it.If logic only exists with physical proof, then what is every atom in the world doubled? Assume that every atom in the world is X. Under that premise, you could not tell me the answer to my simple question.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

That makes no sense. Thins can only be logical if they have physical ties?Yes! Because Logic can be explained, yet nothing we never experienced can be explained. You can't explain a miracle, you know why? Because it's illogical.You don't understand.... if logic is no more, then that means there is nothing to say that A=~A. That means that the logical is illogical. You are using circular reasoning.Circular reasoning is to say "Because God can exists, he must exist". Though whether that is circular or not, that same Logic applied to a creature no one has met, can be applied to the fairy tales no one has met. Meaning God is the same as a fairy tale.If logic only exists with physical proof, then what is every atom in the world doubled? Assume that every atom in the world is X. Under that premise, you could not tell me the answer to my simple question.Logic does require physical proof. We don't know logically that atoms exist, we know we are made up of something. The answer they got to logically was atoms because they have used microscopes to see just how small our parts are made of. Starting with whole objects, down to tissue, down to cells, down to atoms. The possibility of doubling all of them would only be logical if their was a set number already.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

The possibility of doubling all of them would only be logical if their was a set number already.That is a red herring because it is irrelevant if you know the number. Let us say that everything that "is" that is physical can be counted up into variable X. Double it. That is my challenge to you. Until you can admit to me that it is simply 2X, then you're illogical or stubborn.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

Well if all atoms we know are X then double X is 2X, Now how is that relevant to God being the same or different than any fairy tale?
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

The argument I responded to, which started this debate, was about putting God and fairy tales into the same category because they are intangible. I said that logic would then be put into the same category, which I have now proven to be so, using logic of course.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

WTF? Logic is the main effective tool in presenting arguments...did you actually just say that ?
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

no you do not, you obviously do not understand the concept of reference frame.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

I do respect your beliefs, so I won't say much against them. Instead, I'm going to level with you: I do believe in a number of things, but I can't prove any of them, so instead of insisting that I'm right, I silently hope that despite all of the evidence weighed against it, that I might just be right anyways. It's a different, much less arrogant kind of faith. Probably a bit more dreary, too, but it's a little more logical.You should try a dose of doubt with your belief. Really helps you separate truth from faith.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

If you actually understand the ontological argument can you make a debate about it please?
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

19/20 of the people, including Christians (which means that I will not get much, if any, support), who I have presented this argument to haven't understood it, even though the majority of philosophers agree with the logic, though not necessarily that God is possible. The only thing I'm going to get from it is mockery from people here. I wanted to argue it, which is why I presented the Dawkins one first. I presented the most illogical form of the ontological argument that anyone has ever come up with, which the majority of atheists on here agreed with it; then when I present the actually logical argument of it, people think it is illogical. Thus, the rant about how illogical people on this website are. If you want an ontological argument debate, then be my guest! hahaHowever, what you are commenting, because it is about logic, seems to me that you want the transcendental argument for God?
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

I don't see it. Both can be believed, both have no proof, then both can be just as easily disbelieved when you become educated, or logical.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: This...

sighI will make this easy for you.Fairytales are folk tales meant merely to entertain or to provide moral lessons for growing children. God on the other hand is a character made to assist people in their time of need and to maintain order among the society during dark times.
Debate: What's the difference between God and a common fairy tale?
Side: Nothing

Fairytales are folk tales meant merely to entertain or to provide moral lessons for growing children.God is meant to entertain some people, and he definitely exists to teach a lesson. No difference there.God on the other hand is a character made to assist people in their time of need and to maintain order among the society during dark times.In dark times, people often huddle together and tell stories, that in the good times, can become fairy tales. No difference there.Nice try though.