Anecdotal Evidence

[RoadRunner79]

I may have responded to someone else.

I don't think that there is anything non-convincing or unbelievable in the anecdotes.   However cherry picking data, or making a hasty generalization about what is normal based a  limited accounts is not correct either.

This is your idea of an adequate response to my post? If they are not "non-convincing or unbelievable" are you saying that you now believe? Or is this basically double talk so that you can maintain your thread position with a non answer?

What cherry picking data? What hasty generalization? What limited accounts" More double talk?

Go and believe your anecdotes, for your own reasons. Don't expect others to find those reasons rational or acceptable. Much the same as I find your reply.

It appears, that you are trying to argue for me, in order to attack some position more easily.   If you have a point, then perhaps you would be better off to state it plainly, rather than trying to focus on me.   I'm not trying to dance around anything, and I think that what you are trying to get at, was covered in the OP and hasn't changed.   I don't know what you mean by the double talk. 

And if you want to convince me of anything, you will need to provide some reason or argument.  An incredulous stare isn't going to cut it!