Please specify your argument. I do not get what you are trying to argue about. Also, having a PhD doesn't make you omniscient, you still have limits and don't know about everything. This literally is not a valid debate subject and is more like a fast fact than a debate.
Having a PhD doesn't make me omniscient. It means that I can bend the rules of space time to make it to where anything I say is a fact and 100% correct. Just ask my professors. Anyway we are off topic, you accepted to debate about spray painting a banana.
I don't see how I could get off topic on a debate that I don't even know what it's about. If you can warp space and time, then you are suggesting that you are omnipotent. I highly doubt this, seeing as this is simply impossible for a human being. You don't have any evidence for this?
Which professors? Please specify this?
What am I supposed to argue about. You just stated that you like to eat spray painted bananas, there's literally no argument going on. You have the Burden of Proof.
Don't just assume everyone is human, I am not human, I am a troll. I'm an omnipotent troll. Well you can't really contact my professors unless you're a troll. The topic was about spray painting a banana, and since you're con, you must think it's wrong.
I'm noticing a paradox here. After first, you literally said "Just ask my professors" and now you are saying that I literally CANNOT contact them. These two statemenst don't go together, so since you have a hole in your logic, this means that your statement is illogical and thus invalid. If this statement of yours is invalid, then you can't be right every time, meaning your statement about being omnipotent is invalid. Also, you didn't specify the debate, it's unfair for me to refute the claim.
I just disproved your statement, and in return, you only give a weak assertion that terribly fails to defend your case. You have no proof and have no logic, so we'll let the voters decide who makes more sense. Also, you didn't specify what the debate was really about in the 1st round, thus, I didn't know what the debate was about. Instead of giving me an argument to contrast to, you literally just stated a fact. It's unfair for you to tell me what I have to debate at this point.
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided valid arguments while PRO was just trying to troll around. PRO's claims of him having Phd's and him being able to warp space and time were not grounded and this was pointed out by CON so necessarily, CON gets points for arguments.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.