azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

"I'm not a car jacking homie like you :)"Yeah. Ukr? But it's better so, than to be a brain freezer.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

You just got owned ....................................,, again
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

You're very skilled with diversions, focus on the subject.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Am sorry what was the question again?……………………………
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Hey give him a break. He is probably typing with his thumb, on some crappy Android device, smaller than his dick. Soooooooo 😂
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

That's a fair point or maybe he is typing with his dick 🙀
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

You dumb fuck. Religion is resistant to science, not the other way around.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Climate Chaos is the Religion of the Left !So Leftist are not resistant to religion there SouthPark !
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

Are you actually trying to make yourself look dumb? Did you practice being this dumb or does it come naturally?
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Isn't the Leftist believe all the scientist have to say about Climate Chaos ? Yes so it is a Religion to the Left no denying that !
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

Unless of course you actually look up the definition of religion. So, I guess it comes naturally to you.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Religion of the Left is Climate Chaos that has been shown. What else you got ?
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Throughout history, governments have twisted science to suit a political agenda. Global warming is no different, according to Dr. Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Lindzen compares global warming to past politicized scientific movements: the eugenics movement in the early 20th Century and Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union under Stalin. However, the MIT professor argues that global warming goes even beyond what these past movements in terms of twisting science.“Global Warming has become a religion,” writes Lindzen. “A surprisingly large number of people seem to have concluded that all that gives meaning to their lives is the belief that they are saving the planet by paying attention to their carbon footprint.”You going to argue with the MIT professor there SouthPark ?
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

An appeal to authority fallacy is your proof that you aren't an idiot?
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

SouthPark wrote this and i quote -"Religion is resistant to science" that is a falsehood and i have exposed it. Now tell me i am wrong !
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

So, you are admitting that leftists are Christians?
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

A piece of legislation Senate Bill 1161, the Orwellian-named “California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016.You tell me the Religion of the Left is not religious
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

The religion of the left is Christianity.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

A piece of legislation Senate Bill 1161, the Orwellian-named “California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016Not so much there in Moonbeam Land now is it !
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

That legislation was passed by Christians.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

So give the date and time and the number of Christians that passed that legislation !
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

No , you exposed nothing except your ignorance on what is true , and if you want evidence look at your own country where a fair percentage of your population dismiss Evolution and global warming as nonsense which leaves a fair chunk of Americans aligned in their viewpoint with Saudi Arabia and Turkey , how fucking embarrassing is that ?Thankfully the tide is turning as the youth of the US are beginning to reject the nonsense of previous generations .You're wrong :)
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Sorry there Progressive again you are wrong. The ignorance is on the Left you just can't deny what is factual !
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

You really ought to lay off the weed man ..............................
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

A piece of legislation Senate Bill 1161, the Orwellian-named “California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016,” would have dramatically extended the period of time that state officials could prosecute anyone who dared challenge the climate orthodoxy, including statements made decades ago. It would have sought “redress for unfair competition practices committed by entities that have deceived, confused or misled the public on the risks of climate change or financially supported activities that have deceived, confused or misled the public on those risks.”Those in Moonbeam Land do view Climate Chaos as a religion ! Did you miss the Senate Bill 1161 there SouthPark ?
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

Do you also think Republicans view guns as a religion? Passing legislation and practicing religion are 2 different things.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Throughout history, governments have twisted science to suit a political agenda. Global warming is no different, according to Dr. Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Lindzen compares global warming to past politicized scientific movements: the eugenics movement in the early 20th Century and Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union under Stalin. However, the MIT professor argues that global warming goes even beyond what these past movements in terms of twisting science.“Global Warming has become a religion,” writes Lindzen. “A surprisingly large number of people seem to have concluded that all that gives meaning to their lives is the belief that they are saving the planet by paying attention to their carbon footprint.”You going to argue with the MIT professor there SouthPark ? Answer the question
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

"You dumb fuck"I know you are refering to your father(idiocy) thou art in your genes."Religion is resistant to science, not the other way around."you idiot......do religious people not use electric power, vehicles and meds etc. which are products of science?It's just that religious people are not that stupid to a accept your incomplete atheistic under cover(science) nonsensical theories, with so many unanswered questions surrounding them.....
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Evolution wasn't considered atheistic until a religious "God believer" said it had nothing to do with God. Oh and your examples are fucking stupid too. The Amish reject those things because they are religious. Jehovah's Witness reject medicine because they are religious. The only people who reject science are religious. But, not everyone who goes into science rejects religion.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

"Evolution wasn't considered atheistic until"You are fool. Who do you expect to admit that....a cunning atheist trying to poison of the minds of its victims?Idiot i wont even address the rest.......your reply is useless
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Very well debated :) what a convincing argument :)You truly are beyond idiocy
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

Whenever i see cartman's comment on "new argument", i get irritated before i even read what he has to say, so i don't like replying with an irritated head unlike you do with a frozen brain.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Frozen brain ? Indeed , I just read your gibberish about Evolution I'm still laughing 🙀 I also see you got another severe ass kicking , how many a day do you get ?
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

Gibberish? But ofcourse you have a frozen brain it couldn't penetrate.And you are laughing at what your brain will tear up all of its muscles to manufacture.Ass kicking? When i haven't shut up? Meaning my brain is still working. How many hours does your brain work for in a day?
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Your 'brain' is absent as can be evidenced by anyone on CD 🙀
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

You are right. My brain is too big for my skull,so i have it in a bigger container in a top secret place. And i connect with it wirelessly. How about you ? You have it and it's frozen.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Oh, so that's how the delusional blue chicken ate it. I wondered about that. But it's strange that your skull couldn't fit in something the size of a seed. Mine can fit in something the size of my brain, after all, so a skull being so small is strange to hear.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

"But it's strange that your skull couldn't fit in something the size of a seed. "It's the biggest seed in the world, like size of a basket ball. And it keeps growing, producing so many fruits of wisdom and intelligence. The delusional blue chicken was too greedy and 'tried' eating a full fruit and died from choking. So you are right, the delusional blue chicken 'died trying' to eat from the fruits of my brain. I told you your mum signed up, she's next
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Yes you're super intelligent let's have a look again at your views on Evolution 😂😂Let's look at Jeffries theory of Evolution 😱😱😱.......So if it is true that humans were once monkeys, then it means humans are going to change into what next? A hamburger? Abiognesis or evolution, whatever, it's bullshit.......Two five year olds just asked me if a Half wit typed this I said " yes called Jefferey '📖📖The theory of Evolutuionary Hamburgers by Jeffery the pot plant 📖📖On sale in all bookshops in Ghana ....... only 😱😱😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂����😂😂😂😂😂😂😂���😂����😂😂😂😂😂
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

"Let's look at Jeffries theory of Evolution 😱😱😱...."Umm. Have you ever been to an english class before?Pls it's jeffrey's theory not jeffries. Ask your two wise men to explain it to you.And also, i cannot have a theory on a theory. It's either an argument or questioning.Tell me, are you satified with satisfied with the profundity of nonsense you say here?A fool's paradise ofcourse.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Let's look at Jeffries theory of Evolution 😱😱😱.......So if it is true that humans were once monkeys, then it means humans are going to change into what next? A hamburger? Abiognesis or evolution, whatever, it's bullshit.......
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

No, the seed of a grain. You'd know if you still had it. 😀😀😀
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

"No, the seed of a grain.You'd know if you still had it"It is your opinion. You have a right to it.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

You have the' intellect ' of a pot plant and reside on a window ledge somewhere in Ghana your sustenance as in watering twice weekly is conducted by sympathetic neighbours who undoubtedly ' feel ' your families pain .
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

"of a pot plant and reside on a window ledge "Just like the lamp on a hill jesus talks about. Shinning for the whole world."watering twice weekly"The appropriate word is shower. And showered with gifts as they are overwhelmed and like to show appreciation for the joy it brings to them."is conducted by sympathetic neighbours "Conducted by astonished neighbours(who jesus says is a neighbour; the whole world)."who undoubtedly ' feel ' your families pain ."Pain from the envy that such a treasure is not owned by their families.Hey frozen brain.....you got this theory all mixed up...it's too cold in there right? You need some heat...
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

Yes , all this from a guy who said............So if it is true that humans were once monkeys, then it means humans are going to change into what next? A hamburger? Abiognesis or evolution, whatever, it's bullshit.Humans into 🍔🍔🍔 you truly are a fucking idiot 🙀🙀🙀
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

"Humans into 🍔🍔🍔 you truly are a fucking idiot "I see you can't stop talking commenthater.Keep on then....but i'm done with your useless rants.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

What a fabulous counter argument. That's an interesting strategy. I have never seen the "I won't admit the truth, so I don't need a counter argument" strategy. Thanks for something new.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

Science void of atheistic nonsensical theories is good: evolution, big bang etc.Tell me, what do either of these have to do with atheism? Neither theory suggests there is no god, the only thing making these theories "atheistic" is that they contradict fundamentalist christianity. That doesn't make evolution, nor the big bang "atheistic", if anything it is anti-fundamentalist, and not really when you consider the fact that the theory was never intended to contradict anyones religious beliefs, it just happened to do so and was only intended to explain the phenomena of biodiversity of life, and it explains the phenomena very well establishing evidence across several fields of science that also coincidentally documented things that fit the theory (thus being established as evidence). Evolution is more Pro-truth" than it is "anti-fundamentalist christian", and it is more "anti-fundamentalist christian" than it is "atheistic". The Big Bang theory came from a catholic who believed it to be the moment of creation from god himself. Of course none of that is scientifically verifiable and thus has no place in a scientific theory so of course when science classes teach the theory they don't teach it to students as gods work, they just teach it for what it is meant for in the field of science as they should, an explanation to how our universe as we know it was created, why the universe is expanding, and etc, because it does that well. Now tell me, if the scientific community is trying to bend science to support the atheistic stance on god's existence, why would we accept a scientific theory from a religious man claiming it be evidence for his god's creating of the universe?It is evident that all the flaws in science are from theories generated by hypocritical atheistic scientists.No, the flaws are generated from the fact that the entire universe and the whole of reality are pretty fucking incomprehendable... Entire Scientific fields that are obviously studying very real aspects of our reality contradict each other... What we understand from the very big "Astrophysics" crumbles to dust when we walk on over to "Quantum Physics" territory and vice versa. The most controversial issues within science is not evolution... Evolution is one of the most backed scientific theories in history, as far as the scientific community is concerned is pretty much fact at this point with over a century of research backing, only controversial politically. True scientific controversies have nothing to do with religion, atheism, or anything that is actually pretty fucking off subject. God is not even considered a factor, because god cannot be scientifically verified one way or another, not even used to explain anything scientifically. Science doesn't reject nor accept god, it doesn't consider god at all and probably won't until we get emprical evidence of god if we ever do.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

"Neither theory suggests there is no god,"It doesn't suggest. It implies a high possibility of no God(capital 'G' pls take note). Like 85%."the only thing making these theories "atheistic" is that they contradict fundamentalist christianity"Even without christianity they still don't make sense."That doesn't make evolution, nor the big bang "atheistic""Even if soCome on!! You know the train is moved by atheists. Those scientistts get their emotions mixed up with work. You don't have to wait for them to come for confession."not really when you consider the fact that the theory was never intended to contradict anyones religious beliefs"So it's a coincidence? It's sensible . But then it's just the outlook. You cannot confidently conclude on motives."Evolution is more Pro-truth" than it is "anti-fundamentalist christian", and it is more "anti-fundamentalist christian" than it is "atheistic"."Evolution makes sense(continuity) to some extent(doesn't mean it's true though); incomplete at the core(origins) making it nonsensical."The Big Bang theory came from a catholic who believed it to be the moment of creation from god himself. "There are demonic doctrines. "Not all who say lord lord............"And it sounds like more nonsense if you believe in the big bang theory and yet say God exists or he caused it in creation. He is a loony seeking attention and he got it. Even these atheistic scientists made it less nonsensical by making it highly imply God couldn't exist then."why would we accept a scientific theory from a religious man claiming it be evidence for his god's creating of the universe?"Religious is just letters. Your heart proves it. That guy was atheist at heart. And atheist scientists grabbed it. Most religious scientists reject what their fellow religious person said.....why? The catholic guy was either lying he believes God exists or he is an idiot.I don't even think he even had a personal bible he used to read. The big bang was one of his childhood imaginations, he never let go(many can't), and he finally got a good platform to shylessly blurt it out. And it was grabbed by........(not all scientists)I have a lot of self made scientific theories. Some are with existing evidence and some are assumptions. So there many people who have a lot of things in their heads. some are good and others nonsense(what big bang happened to be)"True scientific controversies have nothing to do with religion, atheism, or anything that is actually pretty fucking off subject. God is not even considered a factor, "That is the good science i was talking about. It's okay they don't involve God. It's not their fault they cannot find scientific evidence of Him. They study nature, but he created and exists independent of nature. He set and changes His own rules whenever He feels like it. It will be disrespect, to discover Him like a planet.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

Jeffery you really ought to stop talking about Evolution it's hilarious but extremely embarrassing the level of your ignorance , you're the type of person who needs an operating manual for a screwdriver 🙀Another ass kicking I think is on the way from KingGinger 😭😭
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

"the level of your ignorance "Me ignorant?About three years ago i used to watch video documentaries explaining such nonsense and also of that sick guy in a wheel chair etc. I just don't store nonsense up in my head. I watched videos of evolution which is better than reading,ofcourse, and concluded it is mostly nonsense."you're the type of person who needs an operating manual for a screwdriver"Instead of being worried about me, be worried about your magic trick that awfully went wrong; permanent brain freezing.You have never made any sensible arguments.........you are just a comment(h)ater.......You feed f people's sense. Or else you are always are faced with a sense famine.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

You're not alone ignorant you're incredibly dense , I pressume you're talking about Stephen Hawkings ( sick guy in a wheel chair ) showing once again what a truly idiotic creature you are .You say .... I just don't store nonsense in my head ...😂😂 That's all you store in your head as you believe stage magicians are in league with demons , that spirits exist , that people talk in tounges , and hilariously think Evolution is trying to demonstrate how humans could turn into ...... hamburgers 🍔 You're plain and simply a fucking idiot
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is good for world

"you're incredibly dense , I pressume you're talking about Stephen Hawkings ( sick guy in a wheel chair ) showing once again what a truly idiotic creature you are "You think i don't know hawkings is his name? This is the second or third time i mentioned him on CD. And the first time, i mentioned his name, but the wheel chair description is enough So i don't need to mention his name always like whenever i mention a magician with a frozen brain you automatically know its you. Right?"magicians are in league with demons , "Untill it's accurate, i never said that.And you always say this, is that all you got? It so cliche. "that spirits exist"And so? You say it as if everyone in the world is atheist like you. Come to reality idiot, not everyone uses a frozen brain."that people talk in tounges "yeah and so? Quit yourchildish tirade, you are an old man for God sake. If you are so intelligent as you claim you have a masters, why did you do magic?"hilariously think Evolution is trying to demonstrate how humans could turn into ...... hamburgers "I think you will need some heat to comprehend the original sense; frozen brain.
Debate: are scientist and science good for the world
Side: science is bad for world

Let's look at Jeffries theory of Evolution 😱😱😱.......So if it is true that humans were once monkeys, then it means humans are going to change into what next? A hamburger? Abiognesis or evolution, whatever, it's bullshit.......Two five year olds just asked me if a Half wit typed this I said " yes called Jefferey ' 📖📖The theory of Evolutuionary Hamburgers by Jeffery the pot plant 📖📖On sale in all bookshops in Ghana ....... only 😱😱😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂��😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂���😂😂😂😂😂