Andrew doesn't seem to believe anything with out quantifiable proof... He doesn't use common sense it seems. To the point where he comes off intellectually dishonest.
He doesn't deal with hypothetical and he's not able to transpose one idea on another concept for optimal understanding.
If it's not written, he's not gonna believe it.
That's just debate 101, that's what you're supposed to do, however, that leaves a chasm between him and true understanding.
These discussions shouldn't be debates because no body wants to lose, so they won't listen to understand.