Whites are superior to blacks, and blacks are dragging us down.

Pro did not engage in the debate. The last Round involved Pro copying and pasting remarks made in Round 3. Did Pro debunk or engage in any of the evidence I provided by Con throughout the debate? No, just continued to use sources Con accounted for or dismissed altogether. Did Pro use the evidence he presented to demonstrate whites are superior to blacks and that blacks are dragging us down? No. Here is Pro’s entire debate strategy distilled to its essence: Claim: Whites are superior to blacks Reason: Because of aggregate number related to IQ discrepancies [which Con conceded but which are explained by other factors] Evidence: Wikipedia Inference/warrant: IQ discrepancies between whites and blacks show that whites score higher than blacks on average Conclusion: Therefore, whites are superior to blacks! PRO DID NOT ANSWER OR DEBATE BECAUSE THE LOGIC WHEN APPLIED IS ABSURD I will apply it to the specific individuals I brought up during the debate: Claim: Hillary Clinton and John Kerry are superior to Colin Powell and Condolezza Rice Reason: Aggregated average IQ scores are higher in whites than in blacks Evidence: Clinton and Kerry are Caucasian and Powell and Rice are African American. This is substantiated by Wikipedia and I will not address counterevidence or counter-explanations. Inference: Since IQ scores are higher among whites and lower in blacks, whites are superior to blacks Conclusion: Hillary Clinton and John Kerry are superior to Colin Powell and Condolezza Rice [THIS IS JUST THE FIRST PART] DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? NO. THERE IS ZERO CONNECTION BETWEEN THE RESOLUTION AND THE REASONS, EVIDENCE, INFERENCE/WARRANT, AND CONCLUSION This is how Pro proved blacks are dragging us down: Reason according to Pro: “I will now prove blacks are dragging us down. Blacks commit violent crimes against whites at 40 times the rate that whites commit violent crimes against blacks (Color of Crime). ” What was the source? Pro did not provide one. Therefore, it is not evidence since I will say it is untrue because on what? Nothing, no evidence because pro did not provide evidence. CON SHOULD RECEIVE POINTS FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS Conduct: Pro provided zero evidence in rounds 1-3 but provided several homepages. In the last round, Pro merely chalked it up to a mistake. However, where was pro finding all this fantastic evidence? Wikipedia Spelling and Grammar [this is Pro’s concluding statement]: “Why do i have to prove this? Does Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice represent the the black race? No, they don't same thing vise versa, therefor you question is illogical. ” [Lower case [i] which is taught in and understood as the standard in elementary school] [the the example of repetition of an article] [vise versa spelling error. It should be vice versa] Therefor not the correct word Therefor means this or that Therefore mean consequently “you question is illogical” should be your question is illogical Voters should read this sentence: “No, they don’t same thing vise versa, therefor you question is illogical. ” “they don’t same thing vise versa” is an incoherent sentence and does not meet standards that you would expect for middle school students [Con’s reason for going on at length about spelling and punctuation is due voters also leaving this category as a tie. Likely, because they don’t want to find examples, but I’ve already provided examples and would like voters leaving spelling and punctuation a tie to provide an example of a paragraph like the one I provided from Pro above.