The thing about having any strong opinion on any subject whatsoever is this...

That opinion will tend to strongly influence which facts a person seeks out in the first place, which references that person consults in marshalling those facts, and so on.

This is why people of opposing opinions sometimes get involved in deluging each other with competing facts, while not really caring to give much weight to the facts that don't support their position.

It becomes very subjective.

Then there's another phenomenon I have personally witnessed on a number of occasions:

A person who is a good talker or a good writer can appear to win a debate with someone who is not so good at either...and yet...can still be wrong! Yes, wrong. Despite the numerous facts that he has just peppered his argument with. Mind you, I'm not saying that his facts are wrong. No indeed. I'm saying that the conclusions he draws from his facts may be wrong in the greater context.

Not speaking of you specifically here, Teribus, just about what sometimes happens in a debate. A person who is wrong can easily win a debate if he has superior debating skills.

I am more concerned about people's inner intentions at this point than I am about their debating skills. Some people are of good intention, some are not. Some people are just out to win. I prefer not wasting too much of my time on people who are basically just out to win. It doesn't matter anyway if they do. It's meaningless.