My opponent is a zombie (not serious)

To reword my argument formally I will say that I am in favor of the philosophy of Descartes which is available here for someone wanting more information. (Watch video 1) http://www.youtube.com... My opponent will try to prove he exists in body and mind while I prove the opposite. I wish him well. Argument #1: Physicalism and Mentalism As seen above the only things certain are my existence and a few basic mathematical formulas. With this information we only have two possibilities left to us. 1: We live in the world of Physicalism, the commonly accepted belief where everything including consciousness is a physical object and if I am almost certain I touched something it indeed happened. http://en.wikipedia.org... 2: We live in the world of mentalism where everything is an image in my mind which is not physical but is instead mental material. http://en.wikipedia.org...(philosophy)Ruling out any hybrids of the two theories as there is no mentally sound method of a non-physical mind interacting with a physical body. http://en.wikipedia.org... More on this later. Argument #2: Hume's Philosophy Note that when I say that I exist I am in no way speaking of my entire visible body but rather sense outputs and a mind which is capable of collecting data, inferring, and making decisions, something you zombies can't do. This is because if that statement was not said my zombie opponent may respond to that stimuli like a Venus fly trap and say the following video proves I don't exist. http://www.youtube.com... Hume was a philosopher explained in more detail in this video who says that only the surface or what I can see exists. (Watch video 2) For instance no matter how many times I see you're skin I can assume you're lungs don't exist. As I am yet to see the soul, consciousness or mind (not to be confused with the brain) None of those things exist according to skepticism as they are yet to be observed while I have observed them in myself and am positive they exist. Argument #3: Occam's Razor (see video 3 for definition) http://www.youtube.com... Back to the two possible worlds we may live in some have stated that Occam's razor disproves the mentalist theory as they find it too complicated yet I, as well as several other philosophers, believe physicalism is the complicated one. Look at all the problems posed by physicalism. *How did this physical world come about when it disproves supernatural or non-physical elements. *How does the mind work when several neuroscientists are racking their brains out to find how a few neurons and receptors can equal up to the mind which is the most complicated observer and decision maker. *How can what we see now be the complete explanation for what there is if a colorblind person experiences color for the first time learns something new saying that there is more knowledge than physical knowledge and properties (or qualia) do exist as independent objects. http://en.wikipedia.org... http://en.wikipedia.org... It is much simpler to assume that my body, which is in a universe that has little to no resemblance to this one, is in a blank state (such as a coma, being in the womb or something unknown to this illusion of a world) and I am imagining a universe and going through it. If that is the case than I pride myself in my work. Au revoir and wait for more.