> I used the person's own source to display the cherry-picked nature of their data, try again.
Or you know, you could use a reliable source of information to counter their argument instead of using the same crap to try (and fail) to prove a point..
I empathize with being mad at this subthread, but, respectfully, I think you're aiming at the wrong guy. Because, rhetorically, "you aren't even supported by your own source" is pretty powerful.
Also keep in mind that troglodytes like the racist in the room exist to waste the time of decent people. Doing actual research to beat on them means that they win.
If this was a good faith argument, I would agree 100%. More likely, would be me finding a reliable source, then the original poster arguing about the reliability of that source and it going back and forth. This way, we can show them that their own (admittedly horrible) source disagrees with the assumption.
