The difference in this debate is that I have been arguing on the basis of what I believe to be true, and doing my best to explain why I believe it. Kevin, by way of contrast, claims to be able to literally ‘prove’ his case beyond any doubt whatsoever by recourse to detailed statistical data.
Kelly argues on the basis of his fantasy world. Kevin argues on the basis of real world data which of course cannot hope to have any effect upon Kelly’s imaginary world. And he admits it. There is no point in engaging him. Only reality itself will be able to connect with him when it bites him in the ass.