"if you took a human and raised him in a parasite-free biosphere free of any possible parasites, according to Clark it would be impossible for him to get any diseases, which is incorrect."
Hold on, why is the logical sequitur to this situation that the human would still get ill?
As to your last paragraph, I'm not asking whether the Clark protocols will help (which I am already testing out), or whether the Morgellons is caused by parasites (because I'm fairly certain it is (that belief is part of the Morgellons syndrome, duh)). The issue I am trying to debate, sir, is how true Clark's statement is that all diseases are caused by parasites (I realise now I may need to edit the motion, because she does indeed take into account toxins and malnutrition).
Bother, how about getting specific. Why not take cancer. If my memory serves me, she thinks that cancer is caused by parasitosis.
So the new motion is:
"Clark's assertion that parasitosis is at the root of cancer is true."