Pro Is A Flying Pink Jaguar That Hands Out Mailboxes To Elves

Rebuttals- Contention #1- Anything Is Possible. "Anything is possible. Things that may seem impossible or things that seem like they will never happen may happen. Another planet may exist that has tons of magical creatures. Or, you may hit the up coming Power Ball lottery. And who doesnt want 1 billion dollars? Nothing ca be 100% impossible. And I mean nothing. There is a slight chance that that one thing, no matter how insane or unlikely it seems, will happen. I am not saying that there is a very large chance, but that possibility is their. [1] As Miley Cyrus states, "If you believe in yourself anything is possible. " As Afrojack states, "For me, it's a great thing to tell people anything is possible. When I was 15, people told me 'You're not going to be a DJ. '"So, clearly, if everything is possible, it is possible for me to be a flying pink jaguar that hands out mailbozes to elves. " This argument is incredibly weak for multiple reasons. The first reason for it being substantially frail is that it is made up of a bunch of groundless assertions. My opponent states the following "Anything is possible. Things that may seem impossible or things that seem like they will never happen may happen. Another planet may exist and have tons of magical creatures. ", which is really just a claim without reasoning or evidence to back it up. Nothing here shows that anything is possible, and the only possibility the argument could work is if it were word of God, which it clearly is not. The next paragraph is just Pro making examples that apply to things that are only unlikely, but not something that is believed to be impossible, which makes her point moot. The second problem with the arguments that I have quoted is that she uses popular people like Miley Cyrus and Afrojack as sources to back up her argument. Those are just people that agree with you, and quite frankly, they possibly exaggerated their quotes to make people feel good about themselves. Those people do not have the words of God, and they did not do experiments to test if anything was possible, so why should we trust them? They are making claims exactly like you are. And AfroJack's example is only one case, and that means becoming a DJ is possible when it seems like it isn't, not that everything that seems impossible is possible. I am not seeing the connection here. As for Contention Two of Pro's argument, it is just used from assertions and random images she got from websites. There are two problems with this contention. 1) Pro could still be lying considering that she didn't give any direct proof. Even if we assume that they exist, how do we know this is her, and not someone else? 2) If you really are a flying pink jaguar who hands out mailboxes to elves, why did you need to take the images separately? Why couldn't you just show 1 image of you handing out mailboxes to elves? Why does the mailbox have a white background? If you really needed to show separate images with questionable features, then how should we trust that these "sources" are reliable? Contention Three of Pro's argument assumes that I have the BoP to show that she isn't a flying pink jaguar that hands out mailboxes to elves, but since she instigated this debate, the BoP is on her to show that otherwise. And now to defend my case from Pro's rebuttals "Luckily, not. Otherwise, we would all be kept in captivity by now. But that is beyond the point. There have been no scientific studies of these. And to continue his point, on these:" So Pro just makes another bare assertion and concedes that there is no evidence to support this, which destroys her entire case because a) she has the BoP and b) she needs substantial evidence to support this, and is denying the opportunity to do so. "However, in before Columbus, there have been no studies to show that the Earth was a sphere. But was it? Oh YES it was. Before, people have never travelled to Antarctica. They never knew about polar bears. .. . But did those bears exist. Oh yes they did. " If one would have argued before the Earth was confirmed to be a sphere that the Earth was indeed a sphere, and they had no evidence, nobody could take their word for it. You haven't given any substantial evidence for you being a pink jaguar that hands out mailboxes to elves, and that's why I don't take your word for it. Just because nobody knew polar bears existed doesn't mean people thought they weren't able to possibly exist. I mean, nothing seems impossible about a white bear that lived in the cold. That makes no sense. Again, your examples don't show that absolutely *anything* is possible, just that certain animals, structures of Earth, etc. are possible, and it certainly doesn't connect to your case very well. "So why not with me? " Because unlike people who have proven that the Earth is a sphere and that Polar Bears exist, you don't give reliable evidence for your claims. "Just because the science was not there, that does not mean that jaguars can not be pink. Or that they can not have wings. Or that elves do not exist. " You have the BoP. You have to prove you are a pink jaguar that hands out mailboxes to elves, which makes this only a defensive argument, not an offensive argument. "Just because my opponent never heard of these or never surfed enough CNN, it does not mean that the things listed are not real. " Yet another defensive argument. "Think about the book Flatland. The 2-d shape did not know about 3-d and the 3-d shape did not know about the tesseract who was laughing in the corner :)" The logic of a book does not apply to the logic of real life, or at least, my opponent doesn't prove this. "He also mentions that if I am a jaguar, I cant type. However, I have managed to obtain a computer. " This argument can be simplified to "Con says I cannot type, well I indeed *can* type. " The "Yes I can" argument won't work unless you have evidence to back that up. "Finally, my opponent points out that even if these do exist, there is no proof that I am one of them. Is there proof that I am not one of them? " You have the BoP, Pro. I have stated this for the third time. I should not have to explain this again. "In fact, I have come across a mirror before and have seen my fur and wings. I have also experienced handing out mailboxes to elves. " And are you going to show us an image of that? Once again, how can I trust that you aren't lying? Overall, my opponent made a bunch of unbacked assertions, used unreliable/questionable sources, and attempted to place the BoP on me despite the fact that she never made that a rule and she instigated the debate. Clearly, Pro has not proven that she is a pink jaguar that hands out mailboxes to elves.