Ok this is rather simple.

My argument draws from Descartes: "I think therefore I am"

I think.Therefore I know that something exists (whatever has caused the thought or whatever medium the thought is happening in).

The reason why this is different from Descartes, is because just because I think, how do I know that it is me who is doing the thinking - if you see my point. In any case, I think my argument is simply a slightly more waterproof variant of Descartes'.

Ok this is rather simple.

My argument draws from Descartes: "I think therefore I am"

Thought occurs, therefore something exists (whatever has caused the thought or whatever medium the thought is happening in).

Descartes presupposes the existence of a thinker. In any case, this argument is simply a slightly more waterproof variant of Descartes'.