You shall replace my calculator

I will first start with my opponent's case/refutations, move to my case, then weigh the sides.Con's Case/RefutationsHis first contention can be dropped, because his schedules are extra-resolutional within this debate. The objective is to prove that my mathematical performance in school will excell if use my opponent instead of a calculator. Furthermore, any points on this so called life he claims he has will be dropped since this is in direct violation of the autonomy observation i set forth. His choices, like classes, are irrelevant within this hypothetical debate.His second contention speaks of hindering his performance, but I must highly digress. This would allow him to expand on his knowledge so that the answers to certain problems would be given at a faster pace since he would grow more used to the equation type. To his"falling behind portion", this is impossible since the least he can fall back to is what i would be covering in class. But also note that he spends free time studying math. So in theory, he shall always be ahead since continues to study ahead.His third contention can be fixed with two special, modern inventions: 1) this really cool stick known as a pencil and 2) a flat plane known as paper. As I've established before, you have incredible memory. This means you maybe can remember the values so you state them instantly. But nonetheless, even if it does take you longer, I will remain more confident recieving an answer from you instead of my calculator. Why? Because you will know the formula as well as the answer, while I would have to remember the formula to input in the calculator (something I'm not very good at).On to his fourth contention. This may be a seemingly good point, but note 2 key things:1)My performance will increase, so I stay true to upholding my burden.2)He can do something my calculator can't do...INTERACT. This means he can teach me on the subject so i can solve part of he problem myself while he provides information like logs, sines,cosines,tangents and etc. And when I move on to my next subject, the process can be repeated. Again disregard the "I can't be with you everywhere point", because his autonomy (such as not being present wherever i go) is irrelevant.He conceads memorizing pi, then chucks it off as a feat. But denote pi is a necessary element of mathmatics. Further recognize my calculator does not provide me with a thousand places of pi. He does. Thus I can provide more accurate information since he can "display" more places of a solution to a problem. Limits point was already attacked, so drop this refutation.Second point's use of his third contention can also be dropped. I also provided that he does not need to know the values, but the functions only. In fact, scroll to his refutation to my fourth point. He contradicts his own idea of memorizing the values and acknowledges that he can use the functions given. So drop this refutation.My third point was elaborating on the idea that he can do what my calculator does as well as be more productive. The combination of my opponent solving for the values as well as plotting them provides he can do what is needed by calculator. Drop his refutation.My fourth point. The refutation to this was quite funny. Why? These reasons can outline its humor:1)He never refutes practicing math on his free time, so he concedes to that statement.2)He memorized pi to ONE THOUSAND PLACES.3)He then states he is too lazy to do the work despite the obvious statements aabove that show otherwise.4)He again overlooks the fact that his autonomy (in this case to not do the problem) is irrelevant. My opponent must look at my observation at least once in a while.Due to these point, the refutations is dropped.Con REFUSES to answer my question, stating it is irrelevant in this debate(clearly it is not since it provides as to how reliable he is). This can only mean Con ACKNOWLEDGES it would be beneficial to use him instead of a calculator and thus, you interpret this as a concession that the Pro is right. Also note that this was his very facebook post: "awkward 99.6 average >.< .. 4th quarter i'm puttin 150%. i can do this." Con, being unsatisfied with a 99.6 is an OBVIOUS indication he is reliable and he works hard. Compare this to my 89 average. I'm pretty from this point you understand Pro is fulfilling his burden. I end refutation of Con's framework with another statement he made on facebook:"Happy Pi day everyone!"My Case-Clearly I have refuted all my opponents refutations, so my case stands. I will also extend my case further on these grounds.-My observation also stands since my opponent never directly outlines how this should not be upheld. -He concedes to my contention 1 since he himself acknowledges he enjoys doing math, he is advanced in math, and that he has a great memory. -He concedes to his advanced knowledge and, since his knowledge continues to advance, he concedes to my contention 2. -He concedes to my contention 3. -He concedes to my contention 4 by acknowledging that said functions/formulas can be performed without a calculator. -Finally, he overlooks my question, thus we interpret this as my opponent conceding this as well.WeighingSo, several reasons why Pro is winning:1)Con concedes to the entire Pro case2)Con's refutations(which i must mention were not fully directed against my contentions) were all dropped.3)Pro clearly upholds the burden.4)By not answering the question, Con concedes Pro is right. This was further upheld with evidence. (Con knows the statements I provided are true)5)I have provided factual arguments while my opponents argues with contradictory opinions.Thus you vote Pro :). I await my opponent's response.Sources - www.facebook.com (I will not provide my opponent's profile as that may infringe upon his privacy. But Con must acknowledge the statements I provided to be true, because he knows they are, they are pasted on his facebook wall)- The sources I provided in my case extend to this rebuttal.