site banner
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

But he plays to maintain maximum optionality, not to score points in a rational debate, so even non-damning attacks must be deflected.

My reading of his view is that he (correctly) understands the inherent weakness of his position. Those attacks might look non-damning at the outset, but the moment he gives ground on them the rest of his position inevitably crumbles into dust. When you allow for a group of humans like the pygmies to exist at all, you open up a line of attack on the "scientific consensus" where the only two counters are to either give up or speak power to truth.