I will not contradict myself!

My opponent was only able to give 3 new questions due to a fued with his cousin. I understand his loss of focus and I am okay with him posting 17 questions next round if he wants too. For now, I will try and answer the new questions he did add this round, and defend that I have not contradicted myself. (New Q.) 1) Do you like ice cream? I like some flavors of ice cream, in some forms better than others. 2) Can pigs fly? If any pig should want to fly, they should start talking to some of the pioneer animals in the field like the sheep in this video. http://www.youtube.com... It's possible, even if unlikely, should God allow it. 3)Can this swine fly?http://verynoice.com...... same answer as question 2 ('Contraictions') 1) Con say's I contradict by stating Spelling and Grammar are both unimportant, and important. Take note though that my comments that supposedly put spellinga and grammar at a 'unimportant' level, is "as long I communicate what I need to in a argument it's really hard to remember to care." This statement actually does not give information on what importance I put on spelling in grammar. It is a mere reflexion of the unfortounate truth that I do not have the disciplen to follow through perfectly in action with what I believe in. after I see that the message I intend to communicate is on the argument post it's easy to think 'all right I'm done, I'm going to leave this computer and play Soul Caliber now!' My Brain mentally gives a sigh of relief after its gotten about that far through writting an essay for an english class, a sermon for sunday at church, or a debate on this site. It's that stage where I have offically finished putting and editing all the content half of the debate. The difficulty to maintaining the disciplen to review and use spell check twice over on my argument I claim I have is consistant with any spelling and grammar errors my opponent say's I have (there probably in round 1, I didnt figure out that Firefox is not checking them autimatically in this new 'rich text' box until round 2). I can still be consistant when I hold the value that it's important to brush my teeth every morning and not actually commit to brushing each morning. Disciplen in doing something is seperate and distinct from the value one holds in actually doing it. 2) 100% accuracy & the square root of 69 My answers to question 1 last round and question 8 in round 1 do not contradict. one question asked my of my thoughts on degree of possble accuracy, the other was to provide an answer of some kind to a strait up math equation. For all purposes the 100% accuracy is not neccisary to be confident in an answer enough to go ahead and give it, and I say as much when I answer about the equivalent of .99999 and 1 if thats what you need to cut in a piece of wood. Is the answer to the square root of 69 I gave in round 1 good enough to give, I think so. is it 100% accuarate, no but it's accurate enough. 3) I did not 'attack' your use of grammar, even suggested that you would be able to explain it later, and had I known to start looking at internet meme's I would have but my imagination was not so great as to see that might be what that question was a reference to. My answer was 'I dont understand' cause I did not, but if you look I acknowleded you could ask another question this round. It's not a break of conduct to answer questions one dosnt understand 'I dont understand'. 4) It would not have been easier because then I would have to defend that I'm not just a fish but a box also. In any case I do not breack rule number to in that answer because I do give an answer of some kind, that a 'if-then' question is in a hypothetical sense and that answering it does not give admission to the 'if' being the actual case, only what the case would be 'if' the 'if' where so.