If This House had a time machine it would kill Emily Bronte

WHAT?! What part of 'no forfeiting' is beyond these people? Excuse me while I cry. *cries* I will now discuss the two points of clash in this debate (PoCs), before wrapping up and passing you back to Con. I remind Con that he cannot post any new arguments.PoC1: Is this house qualified to go back in time and kill Emily Bronte?Pro have easily proven this beyond reasonable doubt. Con have tried to assert that I am a manipulative, power-crazed madman who should never be let near a time machine and would cause global historical havoc given half a chance. Pro have successfully refuted this: we have pointed out that nowhere in this resolution does it say that I, personally, will go back in time - an assumption conjured up entirely by Con. We have offered up a detailed plan for how this would work - sending a pre-trained robot back in time, putting the time machine's instructions in Korean so that nobody in England would understand it - and Con has yet to refute any of it. We have demonstrated that, because Bronte had little family at the time of her death (and all the family she had died soon afterwards anyway), so we will avoid any sort of 'grandfather paradox' when we go and kill Bronte. Therefore, we have conclusively proven that Pro takes this point. Pro is perfectly qualified to send this robot back in time (remember that this debate assumes the existence of the time machine) and Bronte's death is the only change that would be enacted in time. PoC2: Is Wuthering Heights a force for sheer evil? Again, the answer to this point is a resounding yes and a win for Pro. Con has pointed out several opportunities which have come about because of Wuthering Heights but has not refuted the point that, since the book wouldn't have existed in the first place, nobody would miss the book or its associated spinoffs. Pro has given a list of elements which feature in Wuthering Heights which we consider to be bad and should be hidden from public view where possible - such as incest, lynching and necrophilia - whereas Con has, via their various assertions, made it painfully obvious that Con has never read the book. Con may have accused my arguments of being subjective, but since Pro has read the book and Con has not, surely his assertions are less valid than mine? Moreover, Pro has cited several sources regarding the effects of this book - both at the time and in the modern day - whereas Con has yet to cite a reliable source (or put up a decent argument in defence of Wuthering Heights). Pro have pointed out why it would be beneficial to humanity as a whole if this book were forcibly wiped off the face of the Earth and Con have not provided a decent counter-argument (and now it is, in essence, too late). Therefore Pro take this point too. So, to wrap up... We have conclusively demonstrated the rock-solid case for the assassination of Emily Bronte, and Con's arguments have crumbled. Con have come up with various assertions about the lucrative films of Wuthering Heights but has not responded to Pro's criticisms that those films are also sheer evil. Pro has not detailed the merits of the book or defended why Bronte should have been allowed to write it. Therefore, the resolution stands resolutely affirmed, that if This House had a time machine it would kill Emily Bronte.