it is more probable than not that mermaids exist

I have a couple responses to my opponents statements.My first response is this. I titled this debate to encompass around the word probable for a reason. We cant really come to a conclusion of if the video is completely false or not because there are alot of factual events in the video. If I was in a position of wanting to get this information out but avoid government prosecution at the same time I would show the video and then later say it was fake to avoid penalty and avoid the government. Please don't get confused. I'm aware that those images were computer generated. If this information was true then they would have had to generate some images because they never found a complete body. What we should pay attention to here is the facts within the video and not so much the computer aspects of the video. The video is not the meat of my debate but the facts within and some other facts that would lead to probable cause that it is at least possible that mermaids may exist.The mass whale beaching from sonar tests are real.http://www.nrdc.org...The bloop is realhttp://www.newscientist.com...NOAA is realhttp://www.noaa.gov...Look surprisingly the website where the stolen navy footage was on has been confiscated by the FBI. surprise surprise.http://believeinmermaids.com...There are many other factual occurrences in this film. Is this coincidence or not. I will let the audience make there decisions regarding the evidence of these occurrences. Is that not probable cause to atleast think if they could exist?My second response is a more logical approach.The NOAA reports the worlds oceans covers 71 percent of earth.5% has been explored leaving 95% of our oceans undiscovered. According to The gaurdian.co.uk....."More than 600 new species have been discovered in Madagascar's unique habitats in the past decade, among them 385 plants, 42 invertebrates, 17 fish, 69 amphibians, 61 reptiles and 41 mammals, according to a report published by WWF"............http://www.guardian.co.uk...This was only in the last decade and only in Madagascar. At least 86 sea animals were found in one area of earth. How long have humans been around on earth? We are just now finding these creatures after 30,000+ years of our species being on earth. If only 5% of our oceans have been discovered that means there are millions of other species living out in the ocean existing without our knowledge and have been living and evolving for years. SO if mermaids existed is it possible we wouldn't have found them by now? yesIf you remember the Neolithic pictures you saw in the video those are actually real paintings made in the Neanderthal era. It depicted humans killing the sea creatures that look like mermaids. maybe humans drove them away into hiding and possibly near extinction?IS it possible that a primitive ancestor could have mutated into a mermaid?Absolutely. Lets look at ourselves as humans. We have, Webbing between fingers (other primates don’t have this) Subcutaneous fat (insulating from cold water) Control over breath (humans can hold breath up to 20 minutes, longer than any other terrestrial animal) Loss of body hair (hair creates drag in water) Instinctive ability to swim (human babies are able to do this) A highly developed brain, which depends on nutrients provided by seafood like mercury. Lets look at manatees. Surprisingly there not related to any other sea creature and there DNA doesn't show any proof of an exotic oceanic ancestor. Scientists believe that manatees and dugongs evolved from 4 footed land mammals 60 thousand years ago. Who was a wading plant eating mammal. Manatees closest ancestors are actually elephants,aardvarks, and the hyrax..........http://www.learner.org...Besides this example im sure everyone else is aware of the evolution and adaptation of the Galapagos islands. With that being said if a land animal is capable of evolving into a sea animal then there is probable cause to believe that a human land animal can evolve into a sea creature. Coincidentally the manatee has the head of its previous ancestor and the body of a fish. Is this just coincidence? I think not!My job as the pro of this debate was to meet the definition of probable with is,probable-supported by evidence strong enough to establish presumption but not proof. etc....So In order to win I need to establish that the conditions of this is atleast possible. I am not obligated to show proof that mermaids exist but rather to prove that evolution of mermaids could have happened. I believe I have done such. Thus again a pro vote is a logical response to this debate.