We should be careful about the "it's the best we got" phase of the argument. It usually doesn't add information, but pushes the convo as though it does. Present

We should be careful about the "it's the best we got" phase of the argument. It usually doesn't add information, but pushes the convo as though it does. Presenting numbers is additive, questioning those numbers relevancy can be additive. Of course the "best we got" might not be good enough to make a call. In this argument, the sides are something like crime is down, crime is up, and don't have enough info. Roughly speaking, you're arguing for the first over the second whereas the responder is arguing for not enough info. Even in situations where maybe you have to make a decision and don't have great data, if you don't feel great about the best info you have, then it might be better to use something else like the wisdom or gut instinct of the team or what's cheapest or what you're most able to walk back later. Data tends to make us lazy about digging deeper, it's okay when the data is good, but worse no data when it's not so relevant.