Resolved: It is impossible to prove anything

<< This is my signature profile photo. If you scroll over it, you read JasperFrancisShickadance. You can do so in any other rounds that Con or Pro wrote already, and you will see that all the rounds--including the one at the top of this page that says 'Instigator.' All through this debate, my opponent's name and profile picture has remained the same, so even if different people are writing the words you have been reading currently, the writers are under (the SAME NAME which happens to be AlternativeDavid). Even if AlternativeDavid is a figment of my imagination, I created AlternativeDavid, and AlternativeDavid created this debate. The proof is in my words and you can see it as you read this debate and scroll over the profile pictures and read the names. Because there is nothing to refute this, I have proven it. See this debate for further information on this sort of topic: http://www.debate.org... My opponent said this. "How can one prove the the author of these words was named Rene Descartes? Also, Con cannot know that I think. Con can simply believe that I think." You need proof my opponent said it? Look to the previous round. Now it's proven. For a rebuttal of what AD said, read here: http://www.freerepublic.com... No matter whether Rene Descartes even exists or said it or not, the statement still applies to us. (The statement also applies to whoever wrote the saying because they were thinking when they wrote it therefore they existed.) Furthermore, Pro is wrong when saying he is a figment of my imagination, because when people start to vote we will have proof there are other people reading this debate and these people are obviously not a part of my imagination and can see a distinct difference between us two and our profiles, etc. etc. The list of proof goes on. I have proved that I can disprove you and I also have proven that we are different profiles. Pro says: "How can one claim that I created this debate, when for all Con can know, I may not be the creator of this debate? I could be any of seven billion people, it's more likely that I am not the creator." Whoever my opponent is in real life doesn't matter because, in this debate, he is under the name of AlternativeDavid. The creator of this debate is none other than AlternativeDavid, because if I am wrong than this debate itself most likely doesn't even exist. My opponent tries to rebut me saying "You are reading these words." He said, "Maybe I am approaching this blindly and have perfectly guessed everything that Con has said. Con cannot truly know if I am reading these words, for I may be a scribe of the reader. If I am not reading, but writing, then this claim is incorrect." Writing and reading are inseperable. See this site: http://www.nwp.org... "As I have already shown the fallacy in Con's "proof" of existence, this statement probably holds no water." If you, pro, have shown the fallacy in my proof for existence, have you proven the so-called fallacy or not? If you have proven it than this debate is over. If you have not, than your words have no validity so we should ignore what you say. AD: "Will I have proven it was my turn, or will I have stolen 9spaceking's turn to give an argument? If it was his turn, and I merely interjected and stole his round, then it may not have been my turn to argue." Readers, let me ask you if when you read the next round, the profile pictures match all the others of Pro's in the previous rounds, and if when you scroll over the pics you are able to read "AlternativeDavid"? But certainly, if you read 9spaceking instead, than Pro has proven something and his resolution is finished. Yet if my opponent is wrong in saying 9spaceking or anybody else is actually the debater, then it has been proven how AlternativeDavid and I are the only people debating this. That it is my opponent's turn to argue is also proven.