> You've already called him a scumbag. Thus, you won't trust whatever he provides. If he had provided a list of references you would have accused him of cherry picking.
Good job having a conversation with me all by yourself.
> That this discussion is unlikely to be of any use or interest to me.
Mutual. (The fact that you see pointing out of a logical gap as quibbling.)
> Did you read the meta-study? Did you read any of the original studies?
My point was about the missing reference in the NYT article. Given references, I draw my own conclusions.
Good job having a conversation with me all by yourself.
> That this discussion is unlikely to be of any use or interest to me.
Mutual. (The fact that you see pointing out of a logical gap as quibbling.)
> Did you read the meta-study? Did you read any of the original studies?
My point was about the missing reference in the NYT article. Given references, I draw my own conclusions.