05-10-2016, 02:04 PM
(05-10-2016, 10:13 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Yes silly us for rejecting something from TRANSADVOCATE as perhaps being biased. We should be more acceptable of various sources. Just look how open you were to McHugh's views. A Harvard educated doctor with over 40 years of experience in the feild becomes a "shill' and a "fraud" simply because you disagree with his findings.
You quote TRANSADVOCATE and dismiss the findings of an expert in the field and insist someone else is providing the "high comedy".
I will keep in mind your "the source doesn't matter" stance. Do you use that one in court much?
Yes. All the time. Courts do not look at the source. They look at the substance of the argument.
If you went to a court and said. "I don't know what this says, but it has to be wrong because it comes from the other side. Any argument from the other side is automatically wrong because it comes from the other side." They would laugh you out of the courtroom.
The link I posted is not an opinion piece. it provides links to studies and shows how McHugh misrepresents and twists facts.
But what if I post another person fromHarvard who disagrees with McHugh? How would you respond to that?
