Resolved: Frodo was not justified in taking the Fellowship into Moria.

Pro began by saying that Con has not brought proof for many of the responses/arguments he has made in this round. This is absolutely not true. I invite the judges to look over all of my arguments throughout the debate. The Pro has simply dismissed evidence brought forward by Con. Both sides have had instances where they overlooked the other side's evidence/argument. I would say Pro is guilty of this more, but let's not get bogged down there, let's look at the big picture. DA1.a and 2.b.1 - crossapply Pro plan is not a universal argument - it points you to a Con argument that responds to several Pro arguments. Go ahead and look at the Pro plan for further discussion of these two Pro args. DA1.b: Pro said that Con did not prove that Gandalf had to DIE to become the White Wizard or that Gandalf would not have become the White Wizard had they not gone through Moria, both of which I brought up in my last two rounds. General response - I don't go around saying I win every argument. Specific responses - death required. If death wasn't required, why didn't Gandalf just transmorgrify himself into the White Wizard earlier? It would have made the transit through Moria much smoother. DA2.a Pro then said that Con was not on the topic of Pro's DA2. Response - in fact, Pro is the side who is not on topic. DA2 was originally about lost time, not about Aragorn's abilities. Pro has just conceded that Aragorn did not in fact lose time as the leader of the Fellowship, which was the main Con point here. DA2.b.2: Pro then said the actual delays added up to 36 hours. Response 1 - no proof. Pro has been claiming he has mounds of proof, while accusing me of having no proof at all. Where's your proof, mate? Response 2 - minimal. 36 is tiny in the grand scheme of things. Response 3 - no alternative. Once again, crossapply Pro plan. If there is no alternative, any delay doesn't matter. DA3: Pro then explained why Bilbo's path was easier. Con has an apology - I stated that Pro did not support his arguments because Pro did not explain them fully. Apologies, as Pro has now explained. Response - still only one mistake. The main point still stands, that only one mistake would have sunk the whole Fellowship. DA3.a.1 See DA1.b DA3.a.2.1 Pro said no evidence. Response - description of Ring's draw. The evidence I brought forward discussing the Ring's irresistible draw was uncontested. The entire DA3.2 should go Con immediately. DA3.a.2.2 Pro said it was irrelevant. Response - It's obviously relevant because... DA3.a.2.3 Pro said Frodo did not stay. Response - Boromir would probably have taken the Ring eventually had Gandalf been there and the Fellowship had not been divided. Even if he hadn't, and he lived, he would probably have gone after Frodo, much like how the Ring irresistibly drew Gollum. General response to Pro's arguments about DA3.a.2 - speculation. Pro is simply speculating DA3.b.1 Con wins this argument, uncontested. Moving on... DA3.b.2 Pro said that Con did not contest that Eru's intervention could not be depended upon, when in fact I did contest it. Specifically, I said, quoting from Con Round 3: "It's safe to assume that Eru would get involved again to keep the Ring from Sauron." Con's DAs: DA1: Pro contradicted himself several times while responding to this argument. Balrogs don't make orcs or have living orcs in their tombs. That argument evinces a lack of knowledge of the books. Also, I'd just like to point out one thing that Pro said in his last argument: "Orcs are a) breeded, or b) conjured from the ground, as depicted in the movie (Saruman)." This in effect concedes the entire point I've been trying to make - that the caves were most likely crawling with 'rebred' or 'reconjured' orcs. DA2/3: I did not say that Pro completely dropped these args. I said that he dropped my double bind argument - that either one or the other is true, and both are Con situations. DA2/3.1 Pro said that Gandalf could have been there to counter the effect of the Ring on Boromir. Pro has once again failed to prove this claim. Disregard this argument. DA2/3.2 Pro then said that the Orcs of the caves were weaker than the mines. Pro has once again failed to prove this claim. Disregard this argument. For the sake of clarity, the double bind argument is reprinted from the last round: "Pro did not respond to the double bind imposed by these two DA's - that either you get massacred or you have the Ring stolen by Boromir and Sauron gets the Ring." One thing Pro irrefutably did not respond to is the impact I brought up near the end of the last round. Basically, it is uncontested that if the Con wins the Con disadvantages, the Con also wins the Pro plan, and therefore Con also wins the debate. Pro then said Con did not respond to the Pro plan. I ask to look at the three disadvantages that Con brought up. Those were direct responses to the Pro plan. Once again, reprinting: "At the end of the day, the Pro plan simply doesn't hold water."