I am not surprised that you cannot dispute ANY of the five items that the article was about.I dare you to post something that demonstrates that you have read and understand the opening post. Furthermore, I dare you to post something from the article referenced that you disagree with and why.Guess again.Which of the five items referenced by the title and opening post do you dispute, and why?
C'mon Doodles. You cannot be this level of stupid.
I dare you to go find out what the fuck a Sweeping Generalization Fallacy is.
After that you can essplain to the class why you changed the title of your own link from one sweeping generalization to another sweeping generalization.
Finally, you can then connect the dots to essplain what manner of hallucinogen bribed your intellect to think either one of them ever made a point.
Welcome to Ignore, Pinhead. You'll like it there, populated with loser trolls like yourself who have nothing to say. Y'all can discuss the finer points of Nothing. Apparently all you're capable of.