thank you USA for killing Ayatollah.
Previous Ayatollah wanted peace and lack of escalation.
Now Iran has a new more advanced Ayatollah who wants more escalation.
I dont think I lost, but yeah, I cant blame myself for what voters do.
No good votes, I will just assume I won this.
Vote as you please, really. I dont report bad votes.
this is proof that Allah exists
Its not that I oppose use of AI. In fact, I am very much pro for use of AI in debates.
I just think it should be clearly stated, so that when I accept a debate, I know in advance if I am debating human or AI.
I dont always feel like putting in effort while my opponent just copy pastes all from AI.
So if I know in advance my opponent uses AI, I can use AI too, or maybe put in less effort.
It was a good debate.
Ah, I see, you are trolling. Nevermind.
Atheism is not a conclusion, but a lack of.
This is such an easy debate for me because the topic talks of actual action which happened. If this was hypothetical, I would be forced to argue that USA will likely target civilians. But since action actually happened with USA slaughtering civilians, my argument is about as certain as it gets.
I have a lot of arguments for both objective morality and against it. Arguments against it are strong too, mainly focusing on primitive term definitions, while arguments for objective morality focus on self defeat of subjective morality, as well as things which remain true in all cases (always everywhere true = objective).
tho I am not giving arguments here because this debate is very balanced and basically any argument can easily cause win of one side over the other.
Funny enough, I support both sides of this topic.
Personally, I use chatgpt 5.2, Grok, and some small local AI as well for quick offline responses. And yeah, a lot depends on prompt, but I will usually ask AI for opinion instead of forcing it to defend mine. A much better path, honestly.
I am not sure if he accepted islam, or if he just cant find time for site anymore due to real life. tho I wouldnt be surprised if he turned to islam.
No, my friend. One does not need to support Hamas to argue against an obviously flawed topic. Maybe ask AI its actual opinion instead of forcing AI to argue for your dumb thing.
I will accept one of his debates just to show how chatgpt 5.2 is way better than whatever he is using.
"Out of fairness to my significantly inferior opponent I will be giving him a 1 round advantage here"
Yeah, he is still using chatgpt 4 at a time when chatgpt 5.2 is available and even free. I didnt even know we could still use chatgpt 4. the dude is somehow using AI from 2023 or 2024.
"## Superior Persuasiveness
AI agents like GPT-4 outperform humans in online debates..."
Gpt 4 is literally from 2023. He is somehow using outdated AI which talks nonsense. When you ask chatgpt 5.2 this same topic, it doesnt give even close to same answer, and it doesnt give short answers like he does.
He seems to be either using way outdated AI, or instructing AI in such retarded way that it forces AI to give false answers.
I hope you dont get banned for saying that, because I want to play with you more.
Damn, just when I thought you will say something nice
""Improvement" refers to a measurable positive change in conditions"
Now define positive.
Now AI even writes your insults?
Hehe, now go ask AI for definition of "improvement".
"World improvement is not subjective"
Please stop talking nonsense. You don't even know what word "improvement" means.
"AI says that AI is a better debater"
Great, now it even uses circular logic.
So AI is both debater and voter on a same debate? Maybe update your AI so it understands it can't be both debater and voter.
I dont really object to the use of AI. I don't care. But as I said, update your AI app, because current ChatGPT is chatGPT 5 and you seem to be using something much inferior.
"The world has improved massively across objective metrics"
Actually, improvement is always subjective, so you could say that for you, world subjectively improved because AI told you so.
After doing more research, it turns out number of fertility rate to abortion rate is lowest today.
Fertility rate dropped by about 20% in past 20 years. In other words, there are 20% less live births, and likely more than 20% less pregnancies.
So while abortions are higher in year 2023 than in year 2010, number of pregnancies is lower in 2023 than in 2010.
So, to put it simply, you have less pregnancies, but more abortions. that isnt any sign of decreasing abortions, but decreasing number of pregnancies, which is its own harm.
But abortion to pregnancy per woman ratio, or to be more specific, abortion to live birth per woman ratio, is higher today than at most points in history.
While year 2000 did see a lot of abortions, it also saw a lot of pregnancies. today, you have a lot of abortions, but less pregnancies.
In 2000, there were an estimated
6,401,000 total pregnancies in the United States. This total included approximately 4.06 million live births,
In 2010, there were an estimated
6,069,000 to 6,155,000 total pregnancies among women aged 15–44 in the United States. The overall pregnancy rate was 97.3–98.7 per 1,000 women, representing a record low for the 1976–2010 period. These pregnancies resulted in approximately 3,999,000 live births
In 2023, there were
3,596,017 live births in the United States
that is about 12% less births in 2023, from about 4 millions to 3.5 millions. So while there are more abortions in 2023 than in 2010, there are also less births in 2023 than in 2010 and in year 2000.
And same is true for year 1990, 1980, 1970...ect.
Number of live births is lowest today, not any time before. So if we measure abortions to live births ratio, that ratio is highest today, not any time before.
"A lot of abortions being illegal supports my point though?"
No, because number of legal abortions increased in current time when abortion is LESS LEGAL.
"When you control for legality, which goes back and forth, the trend is decreasing."
Decreasing how? We saw a rise in past 6 years despite abortions being less legal than before. Again, if your point is that we have less abortions today than before, that is not true in any year before 1977, not true in years from 2007 to 2023. You cant show a single year in 2007 to 2023 where abortions were higher than in 2023, and 2024 likewise saw an increase.
that is 16 years where abortion didnt decrease. So to claim it is better than before is false.
And when we take into account surveys, the numbers are higher than 1 million abortions per year.
When we take into account that there are actually less pregnancies today than before, it gets even worse, because while number of abortions isnt decreasing, number of pregnancies is.
Approximately 40% to 50% of women who have an abortion in the United States have had at least one previous abortion.
So when we say 1 in 4 women will have an abortion, we also must add that half of that number will have 2 abortions.
So its no longer 40 million women having an abortion, but 20 million having 1 abortion, and about 20 million having 2 or more.
that sums up to 60 million abortions.
And it gets even worse when you take into account those who had more than 2 abortions, which is about 10%.
So per surveys, total number of abortions is over 60 million per current reproductive population, by age 45.
this shows a rise, not fall.
Also, just to add this as well. I see you used guttmacher as a source, but that source also has survey estimates, and these show a significantly different numbers from number of legal abortions.
"A new analysis from the Guttmacher Institute’s Abortion Patient Survey estimates that one in four (24.7%) US women of reproductive age1 will have an abortion by age 45 if the 2020 abortion rate remains constant."
https://www.guttmacher.org/news-release/2024/one-four-us-women-expected-have-abortion-their-lifetime
One in 4 women having an abortion means about 40 million abortions in 30 years, which is somewhat 1,3 million per year, but this doesnt even account for those having more than one abortion in lifetime.
So these survey studies show a much bigger numbers which arent same as legal reports, because survey also reports some illegal abortions.
Also, why cherry pick year 1978 to 1998 (20 years time), and not, lets say time from 2000 to 2026 (26 years time)?
Because that period of 26 years saw an increase in abortion numbers, not decrease. Number of abortions today is higher than in 1977, and past 26 years mostly saw an increase, not decrease.
