Another thing you have criticized me for is debate skills. You have tagged both of your comments with “debate skills”.
Debate skills hinge on reading comprehension. How can one have a proper debate if one can’t read or won’t read what the other is writing? I have already criticized your reading comprehension.
You wrote in your first comment, “I suggest you consider arguments put forward, not the individual putting them forward.”
Actually, I did put forward an argument in the comment that upset Svetlana. I argued that Svetlana implying that she worked as a professor at UCD constitutes a claim and not proof in the absence of evidence. That can be universalized. One shouldn’t take someone else’s word for it. They should look for verification.
So you seem to be deficient here in reading comprehension and therefore debate skills. How can one argue with another who uses strawman arguments?