Everyone's beliefs involve faith

1. Yes you are correct, a wave is not a solid or a liquid or a gas and cannot take up space. However, that simply means that a wave does not take up space, not that is not made of matter. If you have actually read into quantum mechanics you would know that "matter waves" exist because they reflect the wave-particle duality of matter. -The reason that matter waves are possible is because the wavelength is inversely proportional to the momentum of a particle and because the frequency of matter waves is directly proportional to the total energy of a particle as deduced by "Louis de Broglie" the Nobel prize winner for physics whose research contributed greatly to wave mechanics formed by Erwin Schrodinger. -Therefore, Matter exists as a wave. I understand that two of my definitions of round 1 do not apply to waves but rather much larger physical objects or entities. The first part of my first definition in round one however still applies to matter: -"The substance or substances of which any physical object consists or is composed" And due to the fact that subatomic particles are not possible without matter as they are defined as: -"Any amount of various units of matter below the size of an atom, including the elementary particles and hadrons. " In conclusion, yes matter is a wave. However if you insist that it is not and that what we perceive is something else, let us examine your second argument. 2. You'r correct again sir a simulation needeth not copy something else. But then it is not up to the simulation is it? It is up to its creators. In order for you'r simulation argument to hold true, there must be a creator and there must be an original from which is was designed. In that original world Quantum physics are strictly theory which means matter exists without a doubt. And now finally onto the argument which you continue to persist with. 3. I understand that this entire debate is over "faith in matter". You say that faith is defined as: -"Believing in something without full evidence or proof" Then why should I have faith in matter? I have all the tools to prove matter exists if I must. I have provided all the evidence to justify and prove matters existance. You as the Pro need matter to justify all of your arguments. Matter is a constant. A constant needeth not need faith to believe in as never changes, never has changed and never will. Matter exists and I acknowledge its existence without question. - Now to be fair, you do say one intelligent thing in your third argument. " Your limited frame of the universe. .. " This is true, I am not aware of every aspect of the universe. However, if you attempt to validate this by the use of your simulation argument, then you have lost again because of the "Original" which must be present to create a simulation. Finally ladies and gentlemen, you should vote for the Con for the following reasons: 1. I have successfully proved that matter needeth not faith to believe in because it is a constant as proved by quantum physics and logic. 2. I have contested every argument that the Pro has presented extensively. 3. The Pro continues to attempt to win this debate on how one obtains their information. As I imagine that the Pro intends to stand next to this argument, all of his information must not be taken literally in which case the Con wins for proving that matter needeth not faith to believe in because the Pro provided no credible arguments. If not, then the Con still wins for the previous two reasons. 4. For explaining to the voters the true limits of this debate, educating them further on the topic and providing arguments with warrants (mostly provided by the Pro) to support them. Thank you all for taking the time to read my arguments.