Forrest Gump is a true story

I. In every single black and white tape showed, Forrest Gump is there. My opponent poses this argument with the claim being that it means that Forrest Gump was in all those locations at the time that the events took place. My opponent further claims that he researched the movie and found that all these events and people are true. The immediate problem with this is that my opponent is presenting this claim with absolutely no evidence whatsoever to validate or back-up the claim. I can say the same thing, but without evidence, it's nothing more than an opinion which holds no validity whatsoever. I have done research of my own. What I found was the actor who voiced President Kennedy in the movie, his name is Jed Gillin. [1]So how was this done? Since it really does look so. .. real. I had the same question after seeing the movie for the first time. After a simple Google search, a website named askville. com, hosted by Amazon, provided the response that the producers searched for just the right piece of film, with John Lennon's part being his actual appearance on the Dick Cavet show. [2] The link further states that they then recreated that archival footage with an actor (which in the case of JFK is the actor shown in link 1). "They combined their new work with the actual clip via CGI and clever editing. Finally they replaced mouth movements of Kennedy and Lennon (so they appear to be "saying" the new dialogue) again via computer, and the work is done. " [2]The evidence for CGI usage and actors may also been seen in a third source which breaks down how the entire CGI process worked and was implemented throughout Forrest Gump, including the opening scene where a feather is floating around infront of Forrest Gump. [3] Basically, computer programs allow for graphics editors to influence the images on the screen in a life-like manner while, in reality, they are nothing more than animated processes. If anyone would like to understand more about CGI or Computer-Generated Images, please visit: . http://en.wikipedia.org...[1] . http://home.earthlink.net...[2] . http://askville.amazon.com...[3] . https://storify.com...II. The movie was based off of fact, and had no fiction in it whatsoever. An immediate rebuttal to this claim by my opponent would be that there was indeed fiction in this movie. One example of this can be seen when it was shown that Forrest Gump was the inspiration for John Lennon's song "Imagine". In reality, the inspiration for his song were several poems from Yoko Ono's 1964 book Grapefruit. [4]Another example would be where it was shown that Forrest Gump was the inspiration for the dancing style of Elvis Presley. In reality, as a young man Elvis idolized a gospel group called The Statesmen. According to Elvis' backup singer and lifelong friend Joe Moscheo, Elvis' leg-twitching dance moves were inspired by The Statesmen's bass singer, "Big Chief" Wetherington, who was famous for his leg twitching. [5]Furthermore, in the Watergate scandal scene it was shown that Forrest Gump was responsible for discovering the scandal by complaining that someone's lights were keeping him awake. In reality, it was Frank Willis, a security guard who discovered tape covering the latches on doors throughout the building. [6][4] . http://en.wikipedia.org...(John_Lennon_song)[5] . http://www.imdb.com...[6] . http://en.wikipedia.org...There are numerous examples of such fictions occurring throughout the movie Forrest Gump. These three examples are merely the tip of the iceberg. III. Forrest Gump buys apple stocks. Just because a company is real doesn't mean that the events portrayed in the movie are true. For instance, in the film '2012' featuring John Cusack, there is a scene where a McDonald's get annihilated by earthquakes in Los Angeles. Does that mean that McDonald's really fell through a hole in the earth during an apocalyptic scenario in real life? No. My opponent is merely misunderstanding the separation between Hollywood films and events that occur in our everyday reality. Not everything you see in movies are true. In closing, My opponent has presented three arguments in an attempt to affirm the resolution. The key issue is the lack of evidence which would serve to validate his arguments. None of Pro's arguments have any form of evidence or validity to them. I have provided rebuttals to each of those arguments which are all backed by evidence. Due to character limitation, I will hold off making my own arguments until the next round. As it stands though, the arguments presented by Pro are all defeated. So long as none of his arguments are left standing, he fails to maintain the BOP and fails to affirm the resolution. I will only present arguments negating the resolution if he should manage to somehow defeat the challenges I've just raised with my rebuttals. I now return the floor to Pro. Thank you.