The point he's responding to is about epistemology - how the conclusion is come to, not what the conclusion is. And 'wrong side of history' (bandwagon fallacy)

The point he's responding to is about epistemology - how the conclusion is come to, not what the conclusion is. And 'wrong side of history' (bandwagon fallacy) and references to 'cruelty' (appeal to emotions) is really, really bad epistemology.