I don't see this as 'worthless'. Such a harsh word.
It IS worthless though. If no one is wrong, no one is right, and the basis for a rational debate is destroyed. The point about rational debate is that we are supposed to rationally weigh up each point and asses the validity of any given theory. But if we do not assume that it is possible to asses the validity of a theory (which is what you suggest) this is impossible. Hence it renders this whole debate worthless. There's no way around it.

I don't see what you mean by rational versus parsimonious. Isn't it rational to included the fact that Rinoa is the Final Sorceress and there is no successor? Isn't parsimonious thinking to naturally assume there will "definitely" be a successor?
You must have misread me. I never stated anything about "parsimonious vs rational". It is NOT rational to state that it's a fact that Rinoa has no successor, because the game itself indicates otherwise in many ways. Rinoa herself states she will have a successor so her powers will one day reach Ultimecia, the Ultimania makes it clear that Rinoa must give up her powers before dying (which we know she must), and there are plenty of possible successors in the entire world of FF8.

It is not reasonable or parsimonious to assume Rinoa never has a successor, because it goes against the game and has no backing. Heck, according to the Ultimania it isn't even possible.

There is plenty of suggestive 'evidence' as stated in your FAQ, otherwise you wouldn't have written it. Just as people find otherwise suggestive counter-evidence to R-U.
The purpose of my FAQ was to show that virtually all the so-called "evidence" is NOT suggestive of R=U at all, and that they all make huge, shaky leaps in logic to establish R=U, when there are much more reasonable, simple steps of logic which demonstrate that the hints do not actually indicate R=U at all. In other words, the hints are not nearly good enough to count as meaningful evidence towards the theory.

You can not say that my questions are irrational, unreasonable, or worthless if it was the story itself that spawned such questions. And yes, these questions were before the R-U theory was known to me.
I've never been concerned with the validity of your "questions", only the manner in which you try to answer them.

And as of lack of 'evidence' then where is the 'evidence' to assure that Rinoa will without a doubt find a successor?
Sorry, but since the statement "Rinoa will not find a successor" is the outrageous claim (see above), you're the one who has to prove it. I don't have to prove anything, just like I don't have to prove that Squall is not a Moomba even if you believe he is.

Most people who assume there is nothing other than the Happy Ending say that she will definitely find a successor simply because that's the consensus of the plugged-in majority. Much like those that say "It has to be true, it was on TV." Or, "Our government would instigate 911! How dare you".

Basically, it comes down to taking people outside of their perspective box of the world. They don't like it. It's like getting unplugged from the matrix at a late age.
Appeal to motive, as Ryu would say. And correctly so. Stop acting as if you're only trying to "free us from the Matrix" and concentrate on showing us that it exists to begin with. Because you have not done so yet.

So I'm afraid I cannot agree to disagree. You have yet to show why R=U can be considered valid. All you have done is point out that it is possible. But "Squall is a Moomba" is also possible, yet I'm sure you would agree that is not valid.