> Data is mismeasured, misinterpreted, misremembered, or simply made up in studies all the time.
Scale matters. You're basically arguing that because evidentiary errors occur in scientific studies, that all evidence from all sources is therefore equivalent. That's simply not the case.
However, if you insist on maintaining this stance - we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I am simply saying that a single counterexample is sufficient to disprove a universal statement. That is logically unassailable.
The only discussion then is around the credibility of the example. Scale is completely irrelevant to disproving a universal statement with a counter example.
Scale matters. You're basically arguing that because evidentiary errors occur in scientific studies, that all evidence from all sources is therefore equivalent. That's simply not the case.
However, if you insist on maintaining this stance - we'll just have to agree to disagree.