I will not contradict myself

Contradiction #01 I offer this definition of flattery: 1.paying of compliments to win favor: an act or instance of complimenting somebody, often excessively or insincerely, especially in order to gain an advantage http://encarta.msn.com... This definition differs in that it says "often excessively or insincerely". Just because his definition was posted first does not mean that it is the only definition. No matter how many definitions he provides, he cannot prove that my definition is not a true definition of flattery. By my definition of flattery, it is possible for Colbert to imitate Glenn Beck without excessively praising him. Contradiction #02 The questions that Con uses to prove this contradiction are very different, and thus my answers are different without contradicting myself. Con says that " I could infact ask the same type of question", but they are not the same type of question. 2. Are statements made in Round 1 presumed to be correct by you? This is a direct question about statements in round 1, which rule 5 protects me from. 5. If I asked you 'Are all statements you made in a previous debate correct?' and you answered 'yes,' could I prove that some statement on a previous debate contradicts a current statement? This is a hypothetical question. Hypothetical: 1. involving ideas or possibilities: existing as or involving something that exists as an unproven idea, theory, or possibility http://encarta.msn.com... A hypothetical exists as an unproven idea. My answer of "if I did answer yes, you could do so" was also a hypothetical. Since neither of these hypotheticals have actually existed in this debate, and this is my last round and therefore the last time I will type in this debate, at least my hypothetical will never come into existence as a proven idea. I typed "if I did answer yes, you could do so" with the express intent of not answering yes and therefore not ever actually answering the question. Unproven hypotheticals cannot be used to prove a contradiction, as they have never actually occurred. Contradiction #03 I do not believe that any of the proofs found at http://en.wikipedia.org... actually prove that .999(9) is equal to 1. This is for two main reasons: 1. The proofs include backward logic. The first few proofs are the best examples of this fallacy. The first proof states that .3333(3) is equal to 1/3, which it is only so if .9999(9)=1. The end result is assumed to be true before it is proven, which justifies the means to get to the end result. This does not prove anything. 2. There are mathematical flaws in some of the proofs. For example, the proof that my opponent posted is not true. If "X =.999(9)" then "10X = 9.999(9)" is not true. For example, if I were to take 999999 and multiply it by 10, I would end up with a 0 at the end, which is significant. If I take any number of repeating 9's and multiply it by ten, there will be a zero at the end. If it is before the decimal, it is obviously significant. If it is after the decimal, it only becomes significant when subtracting a number with repeating values, such as was done in the proof. 9.99999(9)0 - .999999(9)9 for example, would end up with a value smaller than 9, not 9. I do not have enough characters to disprove each proof, but I have found mathematical flaws or backwards logic in each of the proofs. I've also disproven the only example that my opponent has brought up in this debate. Contradiction #04 This contradiction is based on the assumption that a statement and sentence are the same thing. They are not. Statement: 1. expression in words: the expression in spoken or written words of something such as a fact, intention, or policy, or an instance of this http://encarta.msn.com... Sentence:1. grammar meaningful linguistic unit: a group of words or a single word that expresses a complete thought, feeling, or idea. http://encarta.msn.com... I clearly typed "several of the STATEMENTS" in my answer, and there are several imperative statements in my first round. Contradiction #05 I said that I will not say my income status on this website and I have not. My answer of "No." to "Do you make more than $1,000 weekly?" is not a statement of my income status. For example, it would be a lie to say that I make $999 weekly, although it does satisfy the requirement of making less than $1,000 weekly. This is because I do not make $999 weekly. Nobody on this website knows my weekly income because I have not said what my weekly income is. I have said that my weekly income is less than $1,000, but I have not said what my weekly income actually is. Another way to look at this is x<1,000. What is x? You cannot know, because it has not been said. I'm out of chars. Good debate