The yellow rat snake that may enjoy some human contact.

[DOBERMAN]

Look mikoh. I'm not here to get into a pissing match with you. I have offered some insight and opinions as to why either side of the coin, whether it be science or philosophy, both have merit in topics of this nature. I haven't taken a side. It looks like you have though, and are expecting me to do the same. My intuition is that you would rather banter than explore.
And as far as being pseudo-intellectual, I have already beaten you to the punch. If you look at my prior posts, I included myself into that statement.
You suffer from "confirmation bias". You will only recognize and appreciate evidence that supports your position. All other ideas to the contrary will be ignored. It's like a virus mikoh and it limits your ability to learn. In fact it is a plague run amok on most internet forums including this one.

From Wikipedia
Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts.