The Premise of Duality is flawed

Like said, cold is simply the absence of the presence of heat. Let us use [2] to back it up. Source [2] in question: http://wiki.answers.com... The answer was given by a Matthew Darragh. What is the credibility of this Matthew Darragh? What makes him so qualified that he simply says "cold is the absence of heat" and we believe there is no cold at all? http://wiki.answers.com... This is a link to Mr. Matthew Darragh's profile. He has provided 2 answers and has 0 trust points. Zero trust points... I think that speaks for itself. Definitely, you can use that phrase. But nonetheless, cold does not exist. So are you saying that the creators of the English language and its predecessors are madmen, who simply made a phrase for something that does not exist? I hope you aren't. my brain corresponds and I will use the phrase "cold" to describe so. That statement alone attests that your brain subconsciously accepts that there is a state which can be definitively described by the word "cold". -2 -1 0 1 2 <-----------> Is a misconception and misrepresentation of heat and "cold" Is not, and I am about to comprehensively disprove it. 0 1 2 3 4 <---------> Is more appropriate and suitable. Absolute zero is where the presence of heat is completely absent. And going up is where more hot energy is transmitted to an object and/or body. The above number line "0 1 2 3 4" where Pro has considered 0 as a reference point is invalid. The point "0", as stated by Pro, would happen to be absolute zero temperature. What Pro does not know, however, is that it is impossible to achieve absolute zero temperature. This statement is in conformation with the Third Law of Thermodynamics: http://www.princeton.edu... http://en.wikipedia.org... According to the third law of thermodynamics, it is impossible by any procedure, no matter how idealized, to reduce the temperature of any system to zero temperature in a finite number of finite operations. This would mean that the datum argument provided by Pro, starting from "0", is invalid. For any valid datum point, my argument is perfectly sound: There exists both heat and cold on each side of the reference point. I hope that would leave little doubt in the minds of readers and voters as to whether cold exists or not, because a world where cold does not exist is most certainly not this one, as it would be in violation of the laws of thermodynamics. We both believe that darkness is the absence of the presence of light... That we do, but Pro believes that darkness does not exist, whereas I believe otherwise. According to Pro: 1. darkness is the absence of the presence of light 2. God did not create light to complement darkness. It was simply the absence of the presence of light. From statement 2, Pro agrees that there was a state where light was absent. Correlating this with statement 1, Pro agrees that there was a state of darkness at some point in time. As some define darkness as the opposite of light, there can only be either the absence, or presence. My opponent has failed to comprehend the possibility of the mixing of darkness and light in varying proportions to create colour. What Pro states, is that in some places there is light, and in some places there isn't. This would be the definition of a black-and-white world. What Pro has not considered, is that If there is no start(#000000), there is no colour. If there is no end(#FFFFFF), there is no colour. They are both definitely there, and are completely opposite to each other. For each and every colour, some part of black(darkness) and some part of white(light) is required. One cannot exist without the other. Darkness is the embodiment of all that we don't see. It's not that it doesn't exist. No, white is emmited onto every color, either white is present, or absent. However, black itself isn't measurable. All i have to say is this: #000000. Together with white, it forms the basis of each and every colour. Also, you spelled "emitted" wrong. Conclusion 1. By invalidating Pro's datum of zero temperature, I have conclusively demonstrated that for any valid reference point, there is a cold side, and a hot side. This axiom is in place because of DUALITY. 2. As Pro has failed to convincingly disprove the principle of web colours, by definition, the following statement is valid: Black and white mix in varying degrees to give all other colours. Hence, the perception of all colour is based on the dispersion of light in a plane of uniform darkness. Therefore, darkness very much exists, and is the co-eternal partner of light. 3. As both of Pro's hypotheses have been disproved by me, we can conclude that THE PREMISE OF DUALITY IS NOT FLAWED. 4. Pro should lose spelling and grammar for spelling mistakes, usage of non-existent words such as "Nopers", and faulty formatting in round 2. My own spelling and grammar has been better, if not perfect. 5. Pro should lose sources for referring to an answers.com user with absolutely no credibility whatsoever. I have myself provided 10 different sources(from which there are 15 different links), as opposed to 5 by Pro. This has been fun, except for an overload of incomplete statements from Pro. But then again, incomplete statements are the only way to show any "flaws" in duality, and if not for any incomplete statements, my opponent would not have had any arguments to present. I thank my opponent for instigating and spiritedly contesting this debate, and congratulations on three very exciting rounds. It is all up to the voters now. May the better debater win.