Fresh "anti" talking points TL;DR

Fresh talking points: "stealing" and "pencil" are out, "commissioning" and "AI doesn't exist" are in.

To save yourself some time, instead of figuring out variations of the same basic tortured argument, here's the gist:

1. Premise: You claim AI art is art.

2. However, AI art is created entirely by prompting.

3. Prompting is equivalent to commissioning an artist.

4. Therefore, you are not the real artist.

5. Therefore, the real artist must be the AI (that you worship).

6. However, because [random definition here], art can only be made by something with [X].

7. Therefore, you must believe AI to have [X].

8. However, AI does not exist.

9. Since AI does not exist, it does not have [X].

10. Conclusion: You are delusional for believing you really made art when the art really doesn't exist because it was really made by something that doesn't exist and that you worship and think is an artist but it can't be an artist because it can't make art, so lol gotcha.

Where [X] is some property such as "creativity", "mind", "humanity", "soul", "self-awareness", etc.

(2, 3, 5, 7 and 8 are factually wrong; 4 and 6 are arguably wrong; 9 and 10 are irrelevant because they rely on 2-8 being correct)