@matana
>I can't reason with something that hasn't been presented properly.
You could have always asked for a better explanation of what he meant, citations, etc., instead of acting like an idiot.

>but a faulty argument deserves faulty rebuttal
You still need to prove his argument is faulty. From the perspective of anyone seeing the thread, we're just gonna see your faulty "rebuttal" and no actual argument for why his position is faulty.

>Not to mention that if you aren't interested
Why should I be interested when you so arrogantly proved your ignorance. Imagine if someone basically admitted they knew absolutely nothing about how electricity works. Now would you ask this person for tips regarding how to install a sensitive electrical appliance?

>If you think I am going to present actual arguments against such pieces of comedy as "women destroy civilizations"
At least he presented something to defend that statement. All you're doing is saying: "that's just silly because I say it's silly". Do you not see how this is putting you in a position of looking like the ignorant one? Maybe you're not ignorant. Maybe you really are big brain. But saying his argument is a "piece of comedy" implies you could refute it in your sleep, and yet you don't... because what? Reasons?