However, I've noted again and again people dont' want their preconceived notions challenged so I don't bother backing it up unless it's a direct quote or something.
And even then, people ignore it, say it came from some source they don't trust, or cherry pick something from it and claim it debunks the whole argument.
@SumKindaMunster yes that does happen a lot here, but the cherry picking does give some credit to those people they at least read or looked into it. I know there are those here who live in their own little bubble of reality and nothing anyone says or does will pop that bubble.
@Thecollective It happens everywhere. I dunno, I've noted the "cherry picking" only happens to dismiss the argument, I would say this helps them ignore and deny further evidence that might change their mind.
It was up to Copernicus (actually his notes) to prove the earth and other planets orbited the Sun since our common observation showed the sun circling the earth. When the solar center advocates made their claim it was against everyday observation but the prevailed by showing what they saw and also showing how it was a better explanation that the geocentric universe.
Human conversations aren't scientific journals requiring citations.
Each individual makes choices on what to hold as fact, which might be part of a larger truth.
Nobody has the market cornered on knowledge and truth is far more difficult to obtain than simply listening to someone elses feelgood and usually half baked information.
if you want to make a claim, be taken seriously and have a real discussion about a topic...you will back up the claims you make with sufficent evidence to support the claim.
Otherwise it is just a bullshit session and a waste of time.