Mongeese's Ultimate Team War

<"In the anime, he had the ability to use people as puppets. In the manga, he had the ability to use a spoon."> Using a spoon isn't a power. Besides, that in no way rebuts what I said: "I never used two sources to give Mewtwo any powers, equipment, etc. Mewtwo's powers were generally described, and then it was mentioned that he/she/it uses a piece of equipment specifically in the manga. I didn't use anything 'non-canonical.'" <"Doctor Manhattan still doesn't have a limit... which makes him against the rules..."> Seriously, I've negated this. More rehashed arguments -- again, just because it's stated doesn't make it so. It's useless to just say so, and not support yourself with something that hasn't been negated. Essentially, my opponent's claim is another, useless, rehashed argument. <"It is always five-o'-clock. You think time is passing, but it isn't."> Which is exactly why it helps my team. Time doesn't pass, which, as I showed, means that nobody can move, except Manhattan, which means he's capable of doing what he wants to whoever he wants, which means I will inevitably win. Stopping time before Manhattan does only plays into his and my hands; my opponent is doing our work for us. <"The tide doesn't change. The clock is frozen."> Yeah, and oxygen stops flowing, which means you'd have to move around to get some -- but moving isn't possible when time is stopped, so yeah, anything which requires oxygen would die. My opponent's own setting works against him. <"Margaritaville freezes our concept of time at five-o'-clock, nullifying any additional time powers. The margarita trumps all."> No, it doesn't "nullify" them -- it assists them. Freezing time at five o'clock is only doing my team's work for them, considering that Manhattan can still operate when time stops, while nobody on my opponent's team can. <"The Millennium Puzzle *is* dark magic."> Too bad my opponent's chosen canon doesn't say that, eh? Again, he's applying something to his team which is non-canonical, which is in violation of the rules. <"Nowhere in your member descriptions is any ability to traverse through dimensions mentioned."> A excerpt of the Surfer's description: <"He can navigate space, hyperspace and dimensional barriers,"> So...yeah. My opponent is wrong. <"This obviously means that they have unlimited ability."> I mean, seriously, I've already explained twice why that isn't the case, and it's yet to be rebutted, which means it stands: <"you cant place a limit on something in which limits can't logically apply, which means it cant be with nor without limits. it's essentially like asking if there's a limit on one's ability to walk -- sure, you can get tired, but there isn't an energy bar which runs out, rendering an individual unable to walk. It's the same thing with Manhattan's ability to manipulate time, energy, and matter -- there isn't an energy bar, which means limits don't apply. The mentioned abilities aren't really fields in which having a magnitude of power makes sense."> <"If Ganondorf is in space, he's just floating out there."> Uh...yeah. Which is exactly why he's defeated -- to quote my opponent: <"However, in this debate, he only has to be defeated, not killed."> <"Link and Yugi still don't drink."> Considering that's a claim that can't in any way be substantiated, I'd think it would be better to not say it. <"The Triforce of Power holds his body together."> Again, the Triforce wouldn't be too difficult for the Surfer or Manhattan to break up. I've already explained that. <"Well, at least Ganondorf can be defeated."> I played the Zelda games. I'm well aware of that. He was defeated more than once. Also, sending him to the outer limits of space would make him unable to participate in the battle, which therefore means he's defeated. <"1. CON has broken Rule 2 multiple times, with an apparently unlimited Doctor Manhattan and Silver Surfer, and therefore loses the debate."> I didn't break rule two at all; I've already shown how, and my opponent never rebutted it with an argument that wasn't already debunked, which means my argument stands. <"2. Both teams are wasting away in Margaritaville, so it's a draw."> Margaritaville is an advantage for *my* team, considering time is already stopped, which leaves everyone at Doctor Manhattan's mercy. <"3. Team PRO hides in the Shadow Realm, where Team CON can't get to. Therefore, it's a draw."> Team pro running away doesn't equate to a draw -- it means I've won. Team pro would be avoiding the battle on purpose, which is essentially a forfeit. In closing, despite pro's assertion that I've broken rule two, I've shown how I haven't, and my argument wasn't rebutted with anything new; therefore, what I said stands. Not only that, by my strategies still stand, considering my opponent either hasn't offered a retort, or used negated arguments: Me: "My opponent hasn't offered a logical retort to #3, #4, nor #5, either; Manhattan can still easily vanquish them to the outer limits of the universe, or some plant which would then be destroyed, and he can still evaporate them (as can the Surfer.) I've already shown that my opponent's team is still susceptible to mind control, so yeah. <"Simply put, my team cannot be defeated by my opponent's team; my team's ability to know what my opponent's team will do before they do it makes it so that they can counter anything my opponent does."> This point still remains, as well." ... Also: "My opponent admits that Manhattan cannot be defeated, which means my team can't be defeated, which means my opponent can't win. He's essentially conceded the debate." Actually, Manhattan can be defeated -- just not by anyone my opponent has chosen. He's unable to be defeated in this debate, which means I win. I've fulfilled my side of the argument; I've shown how any why I win. My opponent hasn't fulfilled his side; his arguments were negated. I also shown that he broke rule five twice. Lastly, my opponent has essentially assisted me with his argument regarding "Margaritaville." Essentially, there's no way for his team to defeat my team, which means my team win. Thanks to mongeese for starting this debate, and thanks to all the readers. Considering the above points, I urge you all to vote con. Also, since I can't vote, I'd like to ask my opponent not to vote, either.