The person to which you are responding isn't asking a bunch of questions that, presumably, was answered by the author in the OP. You were. I'd suggest reading

The person to which you are responding isn't asking a bunch of questions that, presumably, was answered by the author in the OP. You were. I'd suggest reading the article again as I think you've missed the critical point: the data points in one direction, and he has provided mountains of it. It doesn't align with what you've been told all of your life, so instead of looking at the data you argue from the basis of ignorance by engaging what you feel to be "common sense". In doing so, you are doing the exact thing the author is writing about.