No no, see, they did make a bunch of claims as evidence. They may not have provided any sources for those claims and haven’t proven those claims true. But they did provide a lot of claims and say that it is evidence of something.
That we require it to be more rigorous than that is not their problem
No? I cited a broad variety of academic scholarship and primary sources, you never linked any sources to begin with.
No no, see, they did make a bunch of claims as evidence. They may not have provided any sources for those claims and haven’t proven those claims true. But they did provide a lot of claims and say that it is evidence of something.
That we require it to be more rigorous than that is not their problem
I was genuinely hoping they weren’t saying their claims were evidence, but I fear you’re 100% correct here.