Vi_Veri is hotter than theLwerd.

In discussion of the burden, my opponent offers two contradictory statements: "In a true debate, you don't necessarily need to definitively prove yourself right; you just need to provide a reasonable rationale which backs up your resolution." "This undermines the underlying spirit in debate. To argue in favor of that which cannot be proven." What he's saying is that we shouldn't argue in favor of what cannot be proven, yet in the same breath says that we don't need to prove ourselves right; it seems to me like he is trying to hold me on a different standard than he holds himself; at least, it seems to be so, prima facie. And yes, while the spirit of the debate is to grow, and learn, and share ideas, I was outlining the burden for actually winning the debate. But no, it's entirely fine for you to have that short reply; it helps to clarify if I have your input as well. So, thank you. First of all, he brings up the age issue. A couple of things here: First of all, just because theLwerd can legally drink alcohol does not mean she does. This is the fallacy that we would call the appeal to probability, which says that because something COULD happen, that it WILL happen; obviously, my opponent's logic here is not entirely sound. Second of all, Vi_Veri could very well drink despite being under the legal drinking age; "Underage females were more likely to report binge drinking (16 percent) than were females aged 21 or older (13 percent)." http://www.oas.samhsa.gov... We can see here that, theoretically, it's more likely for someone underage to drink heavily than someone who is of legal age (the 'forbidden fruit' concept). So, assuming that theLWerd does drink, it's not a stretch to say that Vi_Veri is also quite likely to (again, I haven't asked). Third, and most importantly, I highly doubt that theLwerd binges enough on alcohol to significantly alter her appearance; after a quick look at her profile picture, she doesn't look like an alcoholic by any means. And you still have yet to draw the causal link; even if her looks were correlated with her alcohol consumption, do not forget that 'correlation does not imply causation'. Then you talk about theLwerd's weight; while I'm not comfortable discussing the weight of a woman I have never met, I will try to argue this paradigm with you as best as I can. I'd like to point out, voters, that he openly admits that her allegedly larger weight is "maybe... better". So, what he's really doing is conceding a possible hole in his side of the debate; I'd really like to crystallize the fact that, he is extremely close to conceding the debate here when he discusses how 'thick chicks are awesome'; and, since most of his opinions are what he uses to back his side up, you can use these statements against him. And, really, he's trying to judge weight from a tiny part of an arm in a picture; there's no telling how wide or thin she is, so his entire argument could very well be based on fallacious evidence; keep that in mind. Next, you can simply disregard his hair color argument; First of all, while my opponent may prefer brunettes over blondes, it may not be that way for most of the male population; again, try not to let his personal preferences count entirely as fact. A personal observation is far different than actual logic; he's simply using his preferences to make largely unwarranted assertions. Second of all, I'd like to point out that, as the stereotype goes, blondes are more likely to engage in risque behavior of any kind; blondes are known for 'having more fun', and this stereotype drives a lot of males to crave a blonde girl (obviously, because of what they believe to be their increased chances at sexual activity). And one note; I've looked at theLwerd's picture from two different screens, and in neither case can I actually confirm that her hair is actually blonde; I'm not saying it's impossible, but it looks to me a lot like a light to medium brown, which looks blonde because the light is shining brightly off of it; I would really like some confirmation on her hair color before I even try to argue my opponent's point on blondes v. brunettes any further. Next, we have skin tone. I'd first like to point out the contradiction here; he talks about how common paler skin is, yet he also states that a large ratio of girls are tanning; he needs to make up his mind as to which one is a larger proportion of people. Second of all, it is once again a matter of personal preference; not everyone prefers tan over pale, or any color over any other. While my opponent says that he... loves that brown sugar... I for one don't mind pale skin; I've seen some very gorgeous girls that haven't tanned even a bit. It's all a matter of perspective. And this is the argument that's going to rock the flow for you; despite what my opponent might prefer, or what he says that the general public likes, sexual attraction is entirely a subjective matter; it all depends on the person you ask. Some males enjoy slim, others enjoy heavy, some enjoy blondes, others enjoy brunettes; some like intelligence, others don't; some like drinkers, others don't; some like tanned girl, others don't; I could go on with an infinite number of characteristics, but my point is that it all comes down to a matter of personal preference; and because, obviously, my opponent (hopefully) is not aware of the preference of a majority of the general public, he can not definitively prove to you that the user Vi_Veri is, without a doubt, more sexually attractive than the user theLwerd. If there's even the slightest doubt in your mind that he hasn't achieved his burden, you'll vote CON. I look forward to what I'm sure will be a most interesting response, and I urge that, for the sake of common sense, you give this round to the CON.