Unicorns Once Existed

Thanks Con.I will expand on my opening arguments before rebutting my opponent.Invisible Pink Unicorn:Pinkness:As mentioned previously, the invisible pink unicorn uniquely has both material and immaterial attributes that are both real and conceptial. Take the colour pink for instance. Whilst having the unique effect of throwing a heartthrob in the direction of male humans who perceive the colour, this colour is one that does not exist in the visible light spectrum. I would like to make the following addition to the argument for a pink universal mind.P1. All things in existance interact, at least in part, with electromagnetic wavesP2. The creator of the universe is purely mentalC. The interaction that creator of the universe with electromagnetic waves is purely mental.From this conclusion, only one such colour fits this descrption, of a purely mental colour, and that colour is pink. [1]Therefore we have evidence for a pink creator of the universe. Invisibleness:The only proposed entity for this is the invisible pink unicorn [2], which I have also demonstrated by the modal ontological argument. The creator of the univserse also must be invisible, while I would not go as far as to say that the invisible creator grounds the universe in it's mental state, any creator that interacts with physical reality to manipulate it and create the species of animals on Earth, humans included, must additionally be at least in part of the physical reality. We however have not seen this pink creator with even our most powerful telescopes, therefore we can inductively conclude that the pink creator is also invisible.Unicornness:While the creator pink unicorn is invisible, her signitures are left in the cosmos, and evidence of her prescence can be seen in gaseous nebula [3]. This, much like our incredible recent findings in the CMB, constitute some of our first direct empirical observations of the pink creator unicorn.Unicorn Species:The universe is indeed intelligently designed for life, which is trivially proven via various fine tuning arguments [4]. But the real question should be, what life is the universe finely tuned for? While the argument has been made and continues to be made that the universe is finely tunes for us humans, with the correct atmospheric concentrations, gravitational constants etc. If one actually looks at the details, they would quickly realise it is actually better suited for quadrapeds.Our rugged landscape was originally rugged, and littered with predators. Our Earth's relatively high density and hence, relative gravity means bipedals are more severely limited in their maximum growth sizes, all of which are better dealt with by quadrapeds.Furthermore we are an imperfect species, with various vestigial traits and design imperfections in our anatomy, far too numerous to conclude that gumans were the objective of intelligent design. In fact the only species it is logical to conclude the universe and the planet Earth must have been designed for are indeed unicorns [6]. Unicorns are aproximately twice the height of horses, and capable of living for hundreds of years. Only something the result of very precisely tunes biological features can achieve.Boltzmann Unicorns:This last argument is an extension of the 'Boltzmann Brain' problem seen in cosmology [7] which I will make briefly. It's perhaps not the most satisfying argument, but it at least demonsttrates that unicorns MUST have existed at least some point in the past. The multiverse is likely infinite in the past, even if one disregards that the invisible pink unicorn created the multiverse, the very fact that it's infinite also means an infinite number of preceding sub-universes to our own must exist in the past.That being the case, it is an absolute certainty that anything with a finite possibility of occuring in each sub universe, must have occured not once, but an infinite number of times in the past. And I assert, it is entirely possible that via. Quantum Mechanics, a unicorn in any such sub-universe could appear spontaneously.Richard Dawkins said:"But if, by sheer coincidence, all the molecules just happened to move in the same direction at the same moment, the hand would move. If they then all reversed direction at the same moment the hand would move back"The odds do not matter at all however, anything that is possible, if given an infinite amount of time, will occur an infinite amount of times!Therefore, if one accepts this argument, then I have already demonsttrated all I need to to show that purely physical unicorns must have once existed at some point in the past.Rebuttals:My opponent has successfully shown a number of 'false unicorns'. The dinosaur example can be ruled out since because the unicorn is obviously closely related to modern single-toed horses, it could only have arisen naturally within the post Cretacious period [9].Furthermore, both the horse and the Rhino are closely related. They both share a symmetrical bilateral, mammalian odd-toed ungulate morphology, and share a recent common ancestor within the Ceratomorpha family.Obviously this implies an intermediate species between the two must have existed in the past. Let's compare the physical characteristics of both:Rhino[10]:Weight: 850-4500kgHorns: TwoHorse[11]:Weight: ~350kgHorns: ZeroNow, let's see the characteristics of the putative intermediate species by taking an average of the values for the Rhino and Horse.Intermediate Species:Weight ~1512.5 kgHorns: 1And now let's compare that with what we can estimate from unicorn mythology:Weight: 2800kgHorns: 1While the weight might seem a bit off, it is calculated by taking the weight of the horse and multiplying it by 2 cubed (8), assuming the unicorn was exactly 2x the height of the horse. In fact the weight of ~1500 kg is achieved by a 1.7x height increase over the wild horse, easily accountable by the margin in mythology.Conclusion:I have provided solid, compelling evidence for the existance of unicorns on multiple fronts, I expect similarly extraordinary evidence to refute this. Absent of such means the rational conclusion is to accept the existance of unicorns.References: 1.) http://gizmodo.com... 2.) http://www.pinkunicorn.net... 3.) http://www.news.com.au... 4.) http://aeon.co... 5.) http://johnhawks.net... 6.) http://www.santharia.com... 7.) http://www.preposterousuniverse.com... 8.) http://www.preposterousuniverse.com... 9.) http://netnebraska.org... 10.)http://en.wikipedia.org...11.) http://www.ultimateungulate.com...