Why would a debunker do this?

Why don't YOU do that?

Being a good researcher means TRYING to falsify your own argument. It means actively looking for evidence that you're wrong. It means laying out very clearly exactly how someone can defeat your argument.

If you want to defeat the theory of evolution, there are a LOT of very clear types of proof you could do that with.

For instance, you could find an example of a trait in an organism that exclusively harms its own reproductive success but helps another species.

That would be really bizarre in evolutionary terms. But nobody has yet found an example of this in nature.

And they're always looking, because the scientist that can beat evolutionary theory will literally be as famous as Einstein was for beating Newton's theories on physics.

You don't need to wait for some debunker to get around to doing this. You can do it. You go out, find a random symbol, and start digging into it with the same fervor that you dug into this one.

See what comes up.

Then do it again, for a few others.

Look for deltas between Q and Cardi B, or Trump and Neil deGrasse Tyson, and see if there's anything interesting there.

You're allowed to try to falsify your own argument. It'll not only prove that you have a non-faith-based argument (that it's falsifiable and therefore scientifically valid), but you'll also get to the truth of the matter much faster than waiting around for people to do your research for you.

You should know EXACTLY how to defeat your own beliefs in literally everything. And you should be advertising how to do it. And you should actively be trying to do it. Because that's the only way you can arrive at the strongest possible argument (and belief).