People can be proven wrong.

Con said, "it's impossible to prove people wrong. " I will first present two hypothetical scenarios where someone is proven wrong. I will then present 4 cases of other people who were proven wrong. Lastly, I will rebut the arguments presented by Con. I. Hypothetical Scenario. Say a man was arrested by police shortly after a reported robbery occurred. The man claims to the arresting officers, "I didn't do it, it wasn't me, I didn't rob the store. " During the court case, prosecution presents video evidence of that very man committing the robbery. His face is clearly seen on the screen, it's, without a doubt, the same man sitting in the court room. In presenting that evidence, the prosecutor has proven that the man was wrong, he did infact rob that store. If it wasn't the same man, then the defense attorneys would have proven that the man was right, that it wasn't him. In essence, if it was indeed the same man, then the prosecutor proved the man wrong. Hence, someone proved someone else wrong. II. Hypothetical Scenario Two. You are walking your dog down the road when suddenly a man drives by. The man then stops his car and tells you that all pigs can fly. Ironically, you are across the road from a pig farm and can clearly see that those pigs do not have wings nor the capacity to fly. You then show the man that those pigs across the street can't fly. Bam, the man was proven wrong. III. Four other, real-world examples. "The Beatles have no future in show business. " This was said by a Decca Records executive after the Beatles auditioned for them in 1962. The Beatles went on to become one of the greatest bands during the 1960's, and most certainly found their future in show business. "There is no reason any individual would want a computer in their home. " This was said by Ken Olson, founder and former CEO of Digital Equipment Corp. in 1977. Nowadays, computers are found in 84% of American houses. [1]"There is no chance that the iPhone will get any significant market share. " This was said by Steve Ballmer, the former CEO of Microsoft, in 2007. Nowadays, the iPhone is the most recognized phone in the entire world, and it's most certainly taken control of the market. "If excessive smoking actually plays a role in the production of lung cancer, it seems to be a minor one. "This was said by W. C. Hueper, of the National Cancer Institute, in 1953. Nowadays, we know that excessive smoking is one the most common causes for lung cancer. Each of these can be seen here: [1] . http://www.pewresearch.org...I have now shown multiple cases proving that people can be proven wrong. **Rebuttals**IV. Irrelevant argumentsMy opponent seems to enjoy posting abstract, irrelevant claims in some effort to negate the resolution. As I understand it, it's Impossible to prove a negative. This is irrelevant to the resolution which focuses specifically on proving people wrong. It's Impossible to prove Impossibility. Please see above response. It's Impossible to prove Absence of Evidence. Please see above response. V. L. Ron HubbardMy opponent said: L. Ron Hubbard stated in his 1950 book on Dianetics that Absolutes have to be considered logically Impossible. BOP to disprove that is on you. This is, again, irrelevant to the resolution since we are not discussing absolutes. There is no BOP on me, in this regard, because there is no relevance of your argument to the resolution at hand. VI. PurityMy opponent then goes on to state: Pure Truth, therefore, cannot exist. Pure Falsehood, therefore, also cannot exist. A person cannot, therefore, be completely right or completely wrong. A person, therefore, cannot be proved right, or wrong. There is a difference between being completely right, and just being right. Con is jumping across that gap without giving any justification for doing so. Furthermore, there are most certainly scenarios where someone can be proven wrong - please see above examples. VII. Absence of EvidenceFirst off, it's absence* with a *c*, not an *s*. This site has the option to "check your spelling", use it. Secondly, the reason I hadn't provided any evidence to back up my position was because I hadn't posted yet, lol. You literally went before me - so obviously I wouldn't have any chance to present evidence until my turn came. To claim absence of evidence when I hadn't even had the chance to present any yet is just absurd and fallacious. Lastly, I've now presented evidence - thus the absence has been filled. In closing, I believe my opponent fundamentally misunderstands what I am trying to debate here. Roughly 80% of his arguments were either irrelevant, unjustified, or nonsensical. I have presented several instances where people have been proven wrong, both hypothetically and in reality. I've also provided rebuttals for each argument raised by Con. I now return the floor to Con, and caution him that trolling is against the rules of this debate. Thank you.