Children need more time at school in P.E & Sport lessons

I will now jump into my opponent's final points due to the amount of characters allowed each round. My opponent tries to defend her lying by saying she is a P. E teacher but is only hiding her information because "people like me" can and already have accessed it. My opponent fails to point out that she has not said she lied about where she lives, so obviously she doesn't care too much about personal information. Her profile also states this: About me: I love to debate I won a debating championship at school Activities: sports and debating homework. So obviously, my opponent is fourteen and is continuing to lie to you dear reader. How can you trust her points in this case if she won't admit the truth about herself? Now my opponent has conceded that I make good arguments. My opponent is assuming children only get 1.45 hours of sports a week as that is the basis of her whole case. Otherwise, if children are getting more then her entire case is pointless and void. My opponent has once again misread for reasons unknown to myself. I have made it clear that children should not be playing sports at lunch time because that is when they are suppose to be eating. By law, schools are required to have a certain amount of time for lunch each day. Once again, my opponent assumes children are playing only computer games, video games, or watching TV instead of going outside. My opponent has made more assumptions then anything in this case. My opponent fails to see how the parent of one child could pick up both children after school, they are called play dates. Besides, this case is not about children choosing TV over exercising supposedly. Not exercising does not lead to obesity. I am a great example of this. I have rarely to never work out, and I am skinny. Why? Because I do not stuff myself with fast food and other unhealthy foods. I have a balanced diet. A slow metabolism does not matter if the child is not overly eating unhealthy foods. And of course these children are obviously already exercising. My opponent is only suggesting for them to exercise MORE not in general. Remember this dear reader. Here, my opponent contradicts herself once AGAIN. Her evidence is simply non-existent as to WHY children should get 85 minutes out of class time that my opponent has conceded as more important then P. E. Once again, my opponent states children need to get 2.30 hours a week but have NO EVIDENCE to back this up. Then my opponent states children are only getting 1.45 minutes over a five day period, which is so VERY wrong. And once again, recommended by whom? My opponent never stated whom. If my opponent sticks with all her points, she has therefore stuck with points that contradict her case, points she has conceded to me, etc. For the record: I am not against P. E and I never stated that it should be at lunchtime. I do not believe however that all this time should be taken out of class for P. E. Final Points: Any points of mine my opponent failed to refute, I assume she has conceded and should be treated as such. My opponent had no organization such as contentions, no definitions of any of her words, and had horrible grammar and spelling. My opponent had no health evidence at all to back up what she continued to claim throughout her case despite my questioning for such evidence. My opponent conceded that P. E takes up valuable time in the classroom which therefore makes time in the classroom more important then P. E. My opponent points have all been refuted, while mine stand strong. My opponent has lied to the reader about not only her age but profession along with outlandish statements throughout her case which I previously pointed out.