Heraclitus vs. Parmenides debate

Since I was not there last week for our debate on Heraclitus vs. Parmenides, I'm going to state how I would have argued a few points for each of them.
1. The issue of change.

• Heraclitus argues that there is ever-present change in the universe, as stated in his famous saying, "No man ever steps in the same river twice".  (this idea of universal flux)
• Parmenides, on the other hand, would state that change is impossible because nothing can come from nothing, and that existence is necessarily eternal. - Existence is timeless.

2. "Unity of Opposites"

• Heraclitus believed in the unity of opposites, stating that "the path up and down are one and the same", all existing things being characterized by pairs of contrary properties.
• Parmenides would stalk about the unity of nature and its variety, as discussed in his only known work, a poem entitled, On Nature.

3. Logos -

• Heraclitus and Parmenides would actually agree on the importance of logos. Heraclitus would apply it more to his idea of universal flux, and would say that everything is in accordance with logos in a constantly-shifting world. Parmenides would say that the logos is the only true method of discovering the truth, because sensory perceptions (the doxa) can be deceptive.