azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

Can you qoute it again?Sorry, I wrote "Can you prove me wrong?" and you wrote "can you prove im wrong". You are right I didn't quote you word for word because you wrote something that wasn't a word.Science and History says otherwiseNope. Science says they don't currently have an explanation for Guadalupe. You are claiming that science says Guadalupe was created by God. Clearly science agrees with me and not you. History probably isn't on your side either.Nope, you do not doubt. You deny.Only around psychos like you who claim they believe in 50/50, but are lying. It is actually doubt.Dont hang a bait. Just admit your faults and let go. Its easyI will admit my faults: I have not studied on M Theory, so that you actually have a shot at presenting something. I stick with a outdated model that shows you are wrong instead of updating my methods to something that shows you are completely wrong. That was easy.In what way?I repeated it for you. All the article says is that random individuals were involved and it is not actually part of the religion.Why do you have to pretend that you read it?Seeing as I have shown that I at least read one sentence, why do you keep pretending that you read it?"It is funny how I am losing"-CartmanWhat I actually said : It is funny how I am losing yet you have not provided one bit of argument to combat my statements.That was after you claimed I lost. So, yeah, still didn't admit I was losing. How do you feel about cheaters, are they winners?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

Sorry, I wrote "Can you prove me wrong?" and you wrote "can you prove im wrong". You are right I didn't quote you word for word because you wrote something that wasn't a word.Those are questions that you left unanswered. Can you answer them now?Science says they don't currently have an explanation for Guadalupe. Exactly how it supports itHistory probably isn't on your side either.DoneOnly around psychos like you who claim they believe in 50/50, but are lying. It is actually doubt.Oh the ironyI will admit my faults: I have not studied on M Theory,Thankyou.I repeated it for you. All the article says is that random individuals were involved and it is not actually part of the religion.You still havent read the article. Please stop fooling yourselfSeeing as I have shown that I at least read one sentence, why do you keep pretending that you read it?"I at least read one sentence" LOLWhat I actually said : It is funny how I am losing yet you have not provided one bit of argument to combat my statements.It made no difference. You still accepted the fall..Friendly Tip: Please stop embarrassing yourself.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

Those are questions that you left unanswered. Can you answer them now?No, one of those, the one with proper English, is a question I left for you. The one that you wrote with bad English is left unanswered because like you admitted, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. It is completely outrageous that you can play both those cards. You actually want to make unsupported claims and have people prove you wrong, and you want to be able to tell people that if they make an unsupported claim that they must prove it to you. And, you claim that I am not open to learning.Exactly how it supports itNo, I will speak slowly so you can understand. You. Say. God. Created. Guadalupe... Science. Says. It. Does. Not. Have. An. Explanation. Yet... Those. Are. Different... Therefore. You. Are. Wrong.DoneThat "history" article says you are wrong just like I have told you 3 times. You have failed to show how it makes you right because all you do is reference the entire thing and don't counter my argument. Since I have actually read it and claim that it says something that supports me and you have not countered it at all, it clearly does not support you.Oh the ironyI don't think you actually understand what the word irony means.You still havent read the article. Please stop fooling yourselfThe fact that I was able to tell you that it is an article about random people, and you fail to demonstrate that you have any knowledge on it means that I have read it and you have not."I at least read one sentence" LOLMy point is that since you have shown no knowledge at all of what the article says, me reading one sentence means I read 1 more sentence than you did. I actually did read more than that, I just like to give the minimum required to beat you.It made no difference. You still accepted the fall.You don't understand the written language, and you accuse me of not reading something. That's awesome.Friendly Tip: Please stop embarrassing yourself.Friendly Tip: Don't let anyone you know read your posts in this argument, they will lock you up because you are crazy.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

No, one of those, the one with proper English, is a question I left for you. sighIf you cant answer them, then just say so.No, I will speak slowly so you can understand. You. Say. God. Created. Guadalupe... Science. Says. It. Does. Not. Have. An. Explanation. Yet... Those. Are. Different... Therefore. You. Are. Wrong.Which brings us back to the question: "What makes you think everything can be explained the way you wanted to?"That "history" article says you are wrong just like I have told you 3 times.It cast real historical people, in exact timelines, with physical evidences of their existence. What are you saying again?The fact that I was able to tell you that it is an article about random people, and you fail to demonstrate that you have any knowledge on it means that I have read it and you have not.My point is that since you have shown no knowledge at all of what the article says, me reading one sentence means I read 1 more sentence than you did. I actually did read more than that, I just like to give the minimum required to beat you.You don't understand the written language, and you accuse me of not reading something. That's awesome.sigh Please dont hang a bait. If you wont read it, then just let go.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

If you cant answer them, then just say so.It doesn't matter if I can or can't you said it was ok that I don't have to. I asked you the same question. Can you answer my open question?Which brings us back to the question: "What makes you think everything can be explained the way you wanted to?"No, you claimed that science supports you, and it doesn't. Therefore you are wrong and should admit it. Only then can we discuss whether it can be explained.It cast real historical people, in exact timelines, with physical evidences of their existence. What are you saying again?It talks about random people hallucinating, what is so great about that?Please dont hang a bait. If you wont read it, then just let go.Even now that you have finally posted something about the article, it is still meaningless. I still can't tell if you read anything.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

It doesn't matter if I can or can't you said it was ok that I don't have to. I asked you the same question. Can you answer my open question?You cant answer a question with another question.No, you claimed that science supports you, and it doesn't. Therefore you are wrong and should admit it. Only then can we discuss whether it can be explained.It supported me, because its inexplainable. Just as what you wish to have as a proof of God. Problem with that?It talks about random people hallucinating, what is so great about that?sighIts called hallucination when it is seen by one. But what do you call it when there has been a crowd who saw the same thing? Give up, your excuse wont sellEven now that you have finally posted something about the article, it is still meaningless. I still can't tell if you read anything.Whatever
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

You cant answer a question with another question.I didn't. I told you that you said it was ok for me to not answer. Then I asked you a question to move the conversation along.It supported me, because its inexplainable.In the loosest possible way I guess.Its called hallucination when it is seen by one. But what do you call it when there has been a crowd who saw the same thing? Give up, your excuse wont sellThey probably didn't see the same thing. Doesn't the article say they saw different things?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

Sorry, but I were called for a team project. And since our topic went off the rails and became a nothing more than trash talks, I see no more reason to continue this.I would like to take my leave now. If you will excuse me.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

I fail to see the trash talk. I am looking at my post and it sounds a lot like your posts. Are you saying that you trash talk instead of debate?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

I just realized that I am very disappointed in your response. You asked for evidence that we have discovered better ways to explain the world, and I pointed out to you that there have been so many things that idiots in the past have attributed to God that is now explained. Your only response is to bring up random worthless occurrences that prove God is ineffectual. Why are you so convinced that there is a God who has almost no power?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

I asked for evidences that he does not exist. Yet the best thing that everyone can provide is to explain how everything came to exist. I fail to see how that provides anything on the argument
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

Here is how it works. God was responsible for 100% of everything that happened in the world. Then, someone figured out how something worked. So, what God was responsible for fell to 99%. What are we at now, 5%? There has been a massive shift. People who actually want an explanation for things can only conclude that God does not exist because everything that used to be explained by God is now not. Seeing this trend would indicate to most that eventually everything will be explained. You are of the opinion that explanations don't get rid of God. Strangely enough, you also think God is the biggest possible jerk ever. I don't understand how you can live like that just like you don't understand how explaining God is not doing things leads to the conclusion that God is not there. Hope that helps.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

Here is how it works. God was responsible for 100% of everything that happened in the world. Then, someone figured out how something worked.You are of the opinion that explanations don't get rid of God.But it isnt an opinion. It is the truth.Explanations contributes nothing to the question of God's existence. It is just another example of Human's narcism who takes themselves on the same level just because they know how to do it. Unless you can prove it otherwiseStrangely enough, you also think God is the biggest possible jerk ever.Dont tell me you disagree.I don't understand how you can live like that just like you don't understand how explaining God is not doing things leads to the conclusion that God is not there. Im not the type who takes pleasure from fooling myself. That is how I can live my life peacefully without any need for worshipGod exists but we are better off without him. Wont you agree?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

But it isnt an opinion. It is the truth.Only for the case of God, weird. Everything else works the opposite of the way you think it does for God.Explanations contributes nothing to the question of God's existence. It is just another example of Human's narcism who takes themselves on the same level just because they know how to do it. Hehe, that's funny. You do realize that most people think that God invented everything for humans. It is narcism to believe that there is an all powerful being and it created you in His image, right?Dont tell me you disagree.I do. I think that an all benevolent being is not a jerk.Im not the type who takes pleasure from fooling myself. That is how I can live my life peacefully without any need for worshipSo you don't worship Him, well, at least that's normal.God exists but we are better off without him. Wont you agree?Obviously not. I think He doesn't exist and we would be better off with Him.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

Hehe, that's funny. You do realize that most people think that God invented everything for humans. It is narcism to believe that there is an all powerful being and it created you in His image, right?You do realized that you changed the topic, right? I was aiming to show that it is plain arrogant to claim ourselves high just because we can understand the processAnd yet you are now pressing the finger towards God and his narcisistic behavior. Please dont add topics that has no connection with anythingI do. I think that an all benevolent being is not a jerk.So you don't worship Him, well, at least that's normal.Obviously not. I think He doesn't exist and we would be better off with Him.Are we going back to the topic of God's existance? But you already admitted my victory, right?"Your only accomplishment for God is Guadalupe, a worthless achievement that does not better mankind at all."Bitter as it maybe, you already admitted the existence of the supernatural. I see no point in repeating the arguments.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

You do realized that you changed the topic, right? I was aiming to show that it is plain arrogant to claim ourselves high just because we can understand the processAnd yet you are now pressing the finger towards God and his narcisistic behavior. Please dont add topics that has no connection with anythingYou changed the topic first. And, you have your whole philosophy backwards. Theists are the arrogant narcissists who think God does everything for them, and Atheists think they can explain how the universe works.Are we going back to the topic of God's existance? But you already admitted my victory, right?"Your only accomplishment for God is Guadalupe, a worthless achievement that does not better mankind at all."Bitter as it maybe, you already admitted the existence of the supernatural. I see no point in repeating the arguments.You said the only explanation for Guadalupe was God. Now you are saying it is anything supernatural. And, you are saying that God is the thing that created the universe. So, I may not be able to explain Guadalupe, but I still claim that that is not God.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

Theists are the arrogant narcissists who think God does everything for them, and Atheists think they can explain how the universe works.There is no narcissism in showing admiration for the works that you never created. But there is arrogance in believing yourself high and mighty just because you have learned a few things that made simple things complicatedYou said the only explanation for Guadalupe was God. Now you are saying it is anything supernatural. And, you are saying that God is the thing that created the universe. So, I may not be able to explain Guadalupe, but I still claim that that is not God.sighI fail to remember anything where I claimed Guadalupe as God, but I do said that it is an evidence of his existence.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

There is no narcissism in showing admiration for the works that you never created.You just described science, awesome.But there is arrogance in believing yourself high and mighty just because you have learned a few things that made simple things complicatedYou just described religion, great.I fail to remember anything where I claimed Guadalupe as God, but I do said that it is an evidence of his existence.Stop fucking sighing and learn to fucking read. You are the only person to mention Guadalupe as God first off, and I didn't even say anything like that just now. I said you claimed that God is the only thing that could have created Guadalupe. But, you also say that Guadalupe just shows that something supernatural exists and you can't just jump to say oh, that must mean that this God also created the universe. You can't make that call. There is no link to Guadalupe and the universe.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

It's true that no matter what is determined about the origins of the universe, it cannot be proven that the whole thing didn't start with some entity (an entity that somehow overcomes the problem of infinite regression) holding a magic wand and uttering the word presto.What are the odds of this entity existing?it's impossible to say, but I'd say the odds of such a thing existing are similar to the odds of dragons, fairries, or Russel's teapot existing.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

What are the odds of this entity existing?Same odds as how everything came from nothing, I guess
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

It's more complicated than that (I'm certainly no expert), but it would seem the odds of a magical being born of human imagination, capable of zapping everything into existence coming from nothing would be lower.It's like saying, nobody knows the origin of the universe, and it couldn't have come from nothing, so clearly a made up magical being which somehow can come from nothing existing is just as likely as it not existing.Seems like a failure of logic.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

Question: Under this logic, are you saying that as long as it can be explained, God does not exist?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

Can you point out exactly when he claimed God didn't exist as,a fact? Do it honestly don't make shit up. I'm betting this will be a challenge for you!
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

He didn't, why do you ask?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

I quote you word by word " Question: Under this logic, are you saying that as long as it can be explained, God does not exist?". That is why.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

He said: "It's like saying, nobody knows the origin of the universe, and it couldn't have come from nothing, so clearly a made up magical being which somehow can come from nothing existing is just as likely as it not existing."So I asked him what makes him think that God can be disproven by making simple things complicated
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

Nobody has any explanation of how the universe began other than something came from nothing. Your idea is that God created everything. Which means that God came from nothing to create everything, so we have the same problem no matter what, congratulations.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

We already have actually. And its called the "M Theory"We have already found the answers for our origins, and yet, it still failed to disprove God.As for God's origin, every theologist agree that he is an infinite. He has no beginning nor end. I am not a theologist though, so I cannot entertain you in this subject
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

How could God possibly fit into M Theory?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

You were saying that we dont know the origins of the universe. I gave you the latest theory about itBut in the end, despite knowing how everything began, the religious debates never died. I wonder why
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

So, God doesn't work with M Theory? Ok, so there is a different theory that requires no God and yet you cling to God, good luck with that.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

There is no such thing as Theory that supports God. THere is only proof of his existenceAnd proof he has given
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

There is no such thing as Theory that supports God.Ok, dummy, how can you bring up M Theory if it has nothing to do with God?THere is only proof of his existenceThere is no proof, so awesome.And proof he has givenHe claims that his brain doesn't work, and you find that to be a credible witness. Strangely enough, his imagination center was awake when he started coming up with his hallucination story, right?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

Ok, dummy, how can you bring up M Theory if it has nothing to do with God?Dont push yourself too hard if you cant understand.He claims that his brain doesn't work, and you find that to be a credible witness. Strangely enough, his imagination center was awake when he started coming up with his hallucination story, right?Read this wiki)He recieved the same criticism from fellow doctors from which he replied:"If you would have asked me before my coma, How much will someone who is in coma for a week with a severe bacterial meningitis -- so severe that the sugar level ... around my brain, normally around 60-80 and in a bad meningitis maybe down to 20; in my case it went down to 1 -- to me, that's just one piece of evidence of how severe this was. If you'd ask me how much would that patient remember, I'd say nothing," he said. "They wouldn't remember a single thing. ...The severity of the meningitis would have prevented dreams, hallucinations, confabulations, because those things all require a fairly coordinated amount of cortex."In order to disprove this, he hired 9 of his colleges and fellow doctors . All of them failed to give any valid explaination.May I hear your opinion?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

Dont push yourself too hard if you cant understand.I can't understand because an idiot brought up something that disproves God as an example to prove God.In order to disprove this, he hired 9 of his colleges and fellow doctors . All of them failed to give any valid explaination.May I hear your opinion?How was his blood sugar when he wrote down his "memories"? I imagine pretty good. So, perhaps he "remembered" after his brain recovered. I won't read your stupid link on a guy who doesn't believe himself.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

How was his blood sugar when he wrote down his "memories"? I imagine pretty good. So, perhaps he "remembered" after his brain recovered.Yep, he remembered everything that happened in his dream and wrote it down. Which shouldnt have happened because his brain was dead and incapable of a dream.So....what is your explanation?
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: False

Yep, he remembered Not necessarily true. His imagination was fully functioning when he wrote down his "memories".Which shouldnt have happened because his brain was dead and incapable of a dream.He didn't do anything when his brain was dead, so his claim of memories is false.So....what is your explanation?I was trying to say that he made it all up and his brain has convinced him that it is memories.
Debate: Atheism and Theism have equal chances of being true
Side: True

Not necessarily true. His imagination was fully functioning when he wrote down his "memories".He didn't do anything when his brain was dead, so his claim of memories is false.I was trying to say that he made it all up and his brain has convinced him that it is memories.Oh, you meant he is a fraud isnt it? Well, your not alone. Plenty of people says the same thing just search for itHowever under that reason, I ask if you can you provide me a reason why he had to destroy his career as a doctor and gain the disgust of his fellow scientist for a single lie?