No one has ever known a lick of truth in their entire life.

Since you failed to clarify what truth meant in your opening speech, the duty fell upon me to define it, therefore i will continue the debate in answering your responses to the truths that i stated earlier. You didn't seem to have a difficulty answering those though, so i hope you dont mind continuing the debate in this sense firstly, the method that you are using to try and prove your arguments is a fallacy. Because things have been disproved in the past, it does not mean everything will be disproved in the future. I can group your answers and answer them as one essentially, because most of your answers are that what i believe doesn't exist because empirically it has been proved that what humans believe, is always proven wrong. you cannot use this type of reasoning because at the point that there has ever been a single thing that has stayed proven, then you cannot completely fall back on this. I'll say grass is proven true, we accept grass in some way, shape or form to be true. Also, you must prove my arguments false yourself, even at the point that we both accept that everything prior to now is false, 1) you say that i do not exist b.c you do not know that i exist, and that my only proof is my own belief, and that it will be proven wrong in the future. First your only proof is stating that you dont know i exist and that i will be proven wrong, so i can just say that i believe that i exist and it will not be proven wrong in the future. This will function as long as i can prove that a singular thing has not been unproven. Lets say that one thing is the grass example from above. In addition, in order to communicate the statement that things exist there has to be a medium in which it can be communicated, proving existence. Also I think, therefore, I am. 2) the earth may or may not rotate around the sun, however there is a way to consistently measure the passage of the sun over the sky and the movement of celestial objects, and with that consistent measurement we can reliably say that someone "is 18 years old". You must prove that the figments i refer to are not true to win this argument. 3) You say that the website is not real just because i believe it to be true, and it will be proven false, and also that my name is only assorted pixels. First of all, since i provided the definition for truth in this debate, what i believe is true becomes truth. second you see my name to be assorted pixels, i see it to be my name. we both see the truth under the subjectivity of the universe. in the same way that there may be a god for one person, and not for another, and both coexist in being true, this functions. 4) Just b.c i wont exist at some point, it doesn't change the fact that i exist now, and that i came from somewhere, namely my parents. No matter if the truth is lost in time, it doesn't change the fact that it is true. Also, extend from my last speech, that i consciously type my thoughts therefore i exist, therefore my parents exist. 5) The definition of sense has changed, however i feel what i feel because i feel it, as you say we first believed. What we call feeling officially changes, however what it essentially is stays the same. like, really, all your arguments are based on the fact that what i believe now will be proved wrong, its your burden of proof to show that they are wrong, not that they eventually will be, because that is not showing that they will be wrong. there is never a hundred percent chance that something will be wrong, even if it has been shown a hundred percent of the time previously. Empirical proof simply isn't enough. Also we may both be right, our truths may be different, yet co-exist. Also to the existence arguments, i might as well say sophism and say that nothing exists except me, because the only thing im sure about is myself, which at the least would prove some of my arguments true and yours false. On the hypocrisy of your title stuff, you make the assumption that since it is unprovable it is false, and that you know it to be fact because it will be proven wrong at some point. But ill choose to think of this logically. You say that no one has ever known a lick of truth their entire lives. then you say that that will be proven wrong in the future. If you state your assumption to be proven wrong, then your assumption is incorrect to some extent, even if it proves your idea later on its incorrect now. But say im getting confused, cause ,i might be since my winning being your losing being me being right being you being right is a weird concept, you state this: " I believe a lie, proving what I say to be true for now" at the point that you believe anything to be true, you automatically lose as you now know a lick of truth and thereby cannot prove your title of the debate false because even if what you know to be true now changes, the fact remains that it is truth, and you have known it in your life. to the smiley, pixels, protons electrons thing. im just going to say that this applies to the subjectivity of the universe and that we both see things differently and that they both are the truth. By the way, ontology makes my head hurt, i would appreciate it if you reduced the number of rounds as i have had debates like this with my friends, and in the end noone can prove each other absolutely correct or incorrect and results in all parties involved with some level of head acheness. To the voters: remember that he relies almost entirely on empirical proof, and must instead himself prove that they figments i refer to are completely false himself, not that they will be false someday. Also that i believe stuff to be true right now, and according to the definition of truth that was provided by me, since he failed to provide one intitally, thereby making mine the one to prefer, his argument is proved false as i believe something now, showing that something is true sometime in my life. Also we can both believe thing different things and they both can co exist. Finally he believes the title of this debate to be true to some extent even if he believes it will be wrong later on, as long as he believed it to be true at some point in his life, he loses and it hurt my head enough to write that, so i only proof-read it once so their may be some gramatical errors, sorry if there is. And wow, this stuff is really hard on the mind.