Whether or not the universe was created, is independent of our knowledge of the universe.

I trust that he read and accepted the conditions as well. With that in mind, let's see what Con has been saying. Contradiction? Con starts off by claiming that "Reality does not exist out of the subjective perception of living creatures within it. " but then he turns around and says "Reality is 100% subjective. " One of the two statements must be a mistake. Presumably his first claim, since it doesn't match the rest of the argument. Having brought this contradiction to Con's notice, I will now ignore it. However, if it was intentional. .. I ask that Con, reconcile the contradiction and clarify what he meant. Rebuttal 1Con is arguing that the truth or reality of a given event or phenomenon depends on the perception and experience of a participant or observer. In other words Con is basically suggesting that perception is a cause. Rather than an observer perceiving a phenomenon and then interpreting it, the phenomenon occurs because the observer is perceiving it. Does this mean that without someone to perceive something, nothing occurs? How did the universe come to exist if nobody was perceiving its creation? Was the world truly flat when everybody perceived it as such? Rebuttal 2 "The pain's creation never exists outside of the perception of people. "While pain is subjective, and felt primarily by the person experiencing pain, the events that lead to physical pain are objective. The woman was raped, and that rape was not created by her own perception. .. who would intentionally create their own rape? Especially if they were to experience it as horrific and painful. The woman's rape was not caused by her perception of it. .. but by the actions of the person who raped her. My ArgumentI am essentially arguing that knowledge of something is independent of the thing itself. In other words, knowledge is not a cause. Whether true or false, knowledge does not change anything on its own. Do note that knowledge that is used or applied can change reality, but by the simple act of knowing something you do not change anything. When humanity still thought that Earth was flat. .. did their "knowledge" cause the world to flatten itself and comply with their beliefs? No. Just because you know that the bus is supposed to arrive at 11:23AM. .. does that mean you caused it to arrive at that time. No. Just because you know that a car runs on petrol. .. does that mean you are the reason why? No. Just because you know that Canada shares a border with the U. S. A does that mean you had anything to do with causing it? No. I could list examples till the day I die. Knowledge does not change anything in and of itself. Knowledge is not a cause. And knowledge is independent of the thing known. Knowledge has no bearing on whether the universe was created or not. The universe does not change itself to match our knowledge. That's why sometimes it turns out that we are wrong about things. Science thought the world was flat, but the world didn't bend to its whims. .. it is us who had to adjust our knowledge to fit the facts. I rest my case and end with a quote from the first round. "Knowledge of a creation is independent from the creation itself. "I thank my opponent for their arguments and look forward to what they have to say next. P. S I remind Con to carefully read rules 1 and 4 again.