Where did I say that I view opinions that don't agree with mine as wrong? This is one of those straw men you so eloquently lectured me about. I don't think that. And me calling you out for deliberately misrepresenting what I'm trying to say to you doesn't make me a bigot, nor does it reflect poorly on my character. It reflects on yours.
When you're arriving at the wrong conclusion about what I said, despite me saying otherwise, then yeah, I don't really have any compassion for you there if you get offended. You went looking for a problem and found one, in a self-fulfilling prophecy kind of way. So you don't get to get mad at me for a problem you yourself created.
I don't care if you're offended. You mistook what I said, or was trying to say, as a slight when it wasn't, sooo if you're offended, that's your own fault, lol.
And you don't get to enflame the situation in the first place (with your attacking essay post of how I'm some hypocritical, immature conservative hater because I used a popular saying characterizing the political ideology of people who think like we do when it comes to gender and women's rights) and then you actually have the stones to blame me for it. And if you think this is heated, then clearly you don't know me very well.
Not defensive at all. And they were peer reviewed, considering multiple of those sources arrive at the same/similar conclusions. Just because they don't correlate with the point you're trying to make doesn't mean they'e invaild.
It was not implied as an insult to you, so I'd appreciate it if you would stop arriving at the wrong conclusion for the sake of your argument with me or the thread, or in general.
And no. You have a tendency to storm into almost every thread you post in and make them incredibly heated. You repeatedly derail discussions, resort to personal attacks and rude, snide commentary, and repeatedly use straw men arguments. You also have a tendency to misinterpret what people say and jump down their throat only to find that they're more or less agreeing with you. I find it ironic that the person who resorted to calling me a type of wild onion (lol) would have the nerve to call me the immature one. So I'd advise you to cool your jets before it lands you in trouble.
Your math is pervasive because you made assumptions for "easier" math that are naturally going to correlate with the data you're trying to represent. I'm not saying that the 1/6 is indicative of the actual number by any mean--finding the actual number will be impossible.
It's also not the kind of situation where you can simply choose not to include people that weren't in your original sample group because they are still people who very much factor into the equation. If you were doing it for merely one year, then yes, you could do that. But you're trying to do show it as time passes and you can't increase one side of the equation without increasing the other.