Nonsensical argument debate

"Pro has not backed up any of his wild assertions with any sources. They are all plainly false to anyone with the slightlest common sense"Common Sense was ruled unconstitutional in the 5th amendment, if you want to try to disprove my arguments then try something else. "There is no evidence that George Optimus Prime Lincoln was a real person"Well duh hes not a real person, hes a cybernetic organism MIXED with a person.... Dont ask me how his parents had sex its too graphic and I dont understand calculus yet. "Google search results have turned up nothing"Well naturally Google wouldnt say anything... Google is owned by the money hungry Jews who all work for Megatron, the mortal enemy of George Optimus Prime Lincoln. "which does not cure testicular elephantitis"It doesnt cure it, it treats it, theres a difference..... "Finally, testicular elephantitis does not cause people to "drag their balls across the faces of old statues"How do you think the Sphinx lost its nose??? IT WAS FROM PEOPLE RUBBING THEIR BALLS ON ITS FACE FOR THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF YEARS. "pro-choice people do not respond unusually to the color purple" Well who would? The color purple is just a crappy book that wastes a good 2 and a half weeks of your life. Im talking about the actual color purple, THAT is what pro-choice people have an unusual reaction to. "Regardless, the fact that they do not have souls does not justify throwing them into the sun"The sun, no, but we're talking about shooting them into Space, its completely different and very justified. "he would not support throwing all people into the sun."You dont know me, YOU DONT KNOW ME, COME AT ME BRO"Relations between Spain and Israel are fine"Of course theyre fine, they teamed up to fight the pro-choicers for the rights to Jennifer Lopez!"Space is underpopulated because humans cannot survive in space"Well duh, the liberal laws make it impossible for ANYONE to want to live there, thats why we have to forcefully shoot people into those places, so they can go and reform it. If they fail then we should only risk those who provide the least for humanity, which are pro-choice people, since they have no souls and a history of defacing statues with their hairy balls. "In order to justify murder, Pro will have to offer some very compelling reasons"They have no souls, what more do you want?"So far, he has given us a bunch of nonsense."Wouldnt that mean im winning?"If Pro knew the first thing about nonsense, he wouldn't know the first thing about nonsense"Makes perfect sense to me. "If I were doing this debate, I would probably pull some stunt like pretending not to know that it's a nonsense debate"A better thing to do would be to take a massive dump on your keyboard, take a picture of it, and then use that picture as your entire argument, which would be a damn good argument depending on the size and color of the poo. "A subset of English sentences interesting on quite independent grounds is not to be considered in [redacted] that branching is not tolerated within the dominance scope of a complex symbol"They are if the complex symbol is simply a substitution for a prolonged elaboration on 24th century metalloid properties, which is the case in this scenario, so such a sentence is tolerable and therefore valid. "this analysis of a formative as a pair of sets of features is necessary to impose an interpretation on the ultimate standard that determines the accuracy of any proposed grammar"Unless youre a zombie, then the laws of the ultimate standard are voided and accuracy of grammar can be defined by planetary alignment (except on mondays or during the month of Toyotathon)"Suppose, for instance, that the natural general principle that will subsume this case is to be regarded as a corpus of utterance tokens"Thats completely impossible, the natural general principle is completely contradictory to the corpus of utterance due to the 5th law of thermogravity, so such a proposal you are proposing cannot be proposed.