Rejecting an argument does not make said argument invalid. An actual, concrete counterargument that has a better basis for comparison and also has concrete proof of its evidence and facts makes an argument invalid.
And no, I doubt very much that you can win this argument either, since the counterargument you provide is not a counterargument at all, it is in fact a statement used to get out of the necessity of creating a concrete counterargument.
Two years of reading up on my psychology helps a bunch.
Here's my counter argument. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Have you checked every dictionary of every library in the universe (or the other universes that may be out their). Unless you have, you can't really make the claim that the word does not exist, because it may well be that it does. Not to mention, language is incredibly fluid and in some ways a living thing. Some words go extinct, some adapt new meanings entirely, sometimes new words are born, and sometimes two words synthesize into a hybrid word, as is the case with "adorkable."
I believe that I already get it. It is what the humans (and Pinkie Pie) call a 'bad pun'. The nature of puns or the variables required to make a pun 'bad' I do not yet understand, if that is what you meant, but I do understand the commonplace usage of the pun (bad or otherwise) "adorkable".
I just checked for the former. It is not in my dictionary. Now, I can understand the reasons behind making "selfie" a word. It is a specific term referring to a picture taken of oneself, as opposed to having a friend take the same picture. A distinction is to be made. However, instead of "adorkable", could you not just say, "nerdy", or something along those lines?
Figuring out how to convert a black and white scan into black and transparent and learning how to work the Warp tool make books a heck of a lot easier in Photoshop.
I mostly just went with simple soft brush bookshelves out of laziness to keep from having to draw a big library in detail, but you're right, it does give it a deliberate-looking depth of field in combination with the sharper focus on the book's text!