Because “intellectually bankrupt” doesn’t mean anything. It means baseless. The point has only a semblance of a basis. "Ooooo, 50 years seems like a long gap."

Because “intellectually bankrupt” doesn’t mean anything. It means baseless. The point has only a semblance of a basis. "Ooooo, 50 years seems like a long gap." If you try to make relevant historical comparisons, no, that's way too little data with way too little relevance. Otherwise “wrong” will suffice. No, you can be wrong, but still have a basis. Just having a semblance of a basis, relying on naive impressions doesn't cut it. That's “intellectually bankrupt.” If we’re not arguing in good faith, then “intellectually bankrupt” is fine Not addressing the point and claiming offense isn't arguing in good faith.