Chess will never be solved, here's why

https://images.chesscomfiles.com/uploads/user/193832315.6bfc2963.78x78o.0f977f3bd26b@3x.jpeg

Bah! Now hark, a bumbling barefoot blindside, cast with brazen and bilious bombast betwixt the bellicose brain-bandying of these Boolean belligerents. Hark, and beware - becalm this Ben-besetting blizzard of banal barking, before my garrulous inclination becomes the bereft and booming bane of blandation, and bark and barker both are banished beyond the blithe bedpan of their bunk-bloated Baronies, to bemoan, with bourgeoning bewilderment, the black Balrog boon of a buried, biding, belittling bite. - B

Punctuation is altogether harder.

This twisted twaddle turns temperate threads tumultuous. 

Don't know about "tumultuous", but with @fatswaller, who claims to be an Ozzie, coming over all Oscar Wilde and @Silent_Tears breaking out into purple prose, it doesn't do a lot to keep the thread on topic. 

I thought I would ask the trending AI, ChatGPT:

Elroch - What does a flower smell like?
ChatGPT - The smell of a flower can vary depending on the species of flower. Some flowers have a sweet fragrance, while others may have a more earthy or musky scent. The scent can also be influenced by factors such as the age of the flower, the weather, and the time of day.

Elroch - What is the best smelling flower? And the worst?
ChatGPT - The best smelling flower is subjective and can vary greatly from person to person. Some of the most popular flowers known for their fragrance include roses, jasmine, lavender, gardenias, and freesias.

Similarly, the worst smelling flower is also subjective and can depend on individual preferences. Some flowers, such as the corpse flower (Amorphophallus titanum) or the skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanus), are known for having an unpleasant odor.

Elroch - Shall I compare you to a summer's rose?
ChatGPT - As an AI language model, I do not have emotions or physical sensations, so I cannot be compared to a flower or anything else in that sense. But I'm here to assist you with any information or questions you have. How may I help you today?

Elroch - You can straighten out my Shakespeare.

Maybe this earlier discussion will help:

Me - "Can you translate Hamlet's soliloquy that starts 'To be or not to be' into Danish?"
ChatGPT - "At være eller ikke at være, det er spørgsmålet: Skal vi tage til takke med at lide alle livets slinger eller tage kampen op mod dem ved at tage vores eget liv? Åh, hvor tærende og bittert det er at tænke på, at man skal lægge sin hærdede hånd i en ukendt fremtid, men at frygten for det, vi ikke ved, gør livet så uudholdeligt, at det ville være et dristigt spring fra en bro for at slippe af med den uvished og angst, der plager os."

Me - "Can you translate it back into English, but as a comedy version?"
ChatGPT - "To be or not to be, that is the question: Should we accept all the miserable things life has to offer or fight against them by ending it all? Oh, how annoying and bitter it is to think about, having to put up with all the ups and downs of life, but the fear of the unknown future makes it unbearable. It would be a bold move to jump off a bridge to escape the uncertainty and anxiety that plagues us."

ChatGPT is going to shatter the illusion that human beings are more than biomechanical machines reacting to their environment with predictable formulaic responses .

Removing one and just one of the same piece or pawn for each side, should almost surely end in a draw.

Such as this;

Or this;

Seems like 1 tempo is winning here.  I guess tempi must actually be variable in value?  Oh no!  

Nope, that is not just One.

There I updated it, man.

I'd say that was dubious.

I'll play black.  @tygxc assures me you need three tempi to deserve an extra pawn and exactly one pawn is a winning advantage (and your diagram clearly has no assymmetries to worry about).

I did not put down enough stipulations.

     It seems to me there are three basic schools of thought here concerning the original question:   

     1)  The OP is incorrect, chess has already been sufficiently demonstrated to be inherently drawn, there is no room for doubt. This camp is divided into those who feel their strongly-held opinion is sufficient "proof" and those who seek a quick and "cheap" way to demonstrate that their opinion is correct.

     2)  The OP is incorrect, it is possible to solve chess but present-day techniques and technology make the time-frame for a solution something none of us can hope to live to see.

     3)  The OP is correct, the game too complex or the methodology too cumbersome for it to be analyzed to an irrefutable solution in all lines. 

No. Neither did you prove any of your positions were drawn.

But this one's definitely drawn.

Re, MAR;

The above is surely not a Draw.