/sci/ - Science & Math

Why is it that when you are arguing with a pseudo intellectual, and you post a rational argument that serves as the philosophical structure of your side of the debate, they will write "citation needed" (or something akin to it) as though that is in any way relevant to the debate or the argument?
Where does this absolutely misguided idea come from, where any assertion in an argument must be taken from some other academics published work, and you can't make normative statements from empirical data or rational arguments and logical connections between patterns of data in an argument.
There is a great image that I don't have saved of a picture of a bald guy with greentext going "do you have a source for that? You can't make normative statements from empirical data. Do you have a bachelors degree? In that field?" That perfectly encapsulates the type of pseud I'm talking about.

>>9517201
>Theres a study that estimates that the biosphere has enough mineral nutrients to grow food for 1 billion people.