Quoting the Bible is one of the more common methods of arguing against it or beliefs [purportedly] based on it, and certainly a better way of arguing against the coherence of the Christian model of salvation than writing an article about "the ritual of salvation" that makes a lot of disparaging comparisons to sun gods and talks a lot about Abraham but seems unaware that the Christian model of salvation actually revolves around Jesus
I do often think the best way to convince people to not be Christian is to have them read the Bible. Most Christians have no idea what they believe in, and don't know what is in the Bible (like in US where they think Jesus was pro-Gun, kill thy neighbor). Just reading the Bible is enough to convince people to not be Christian.
So, if I take this reasoning back to Economics. Maybe people do have a lot of false beliefs about Economics, and if they would study it, they would realize it is bunk, and turn away from it?
[EDIT POST] Changing bit more. Because it really is where the person is at in their learning. There are plenty of Christians that want to persecute Trans Kids, and reading the Bible is not going to convince them they shouldn't (even though Jesus). But maybe when they learn more about Jesus they will stop wanting to kill people.
It is about the learning. If you indoctrinate kids into a cult at Bible School, how are they supposed to know it is wrong? They a fresh young minds to be imprinted.
Same with Econ 101. Freshman, just starting out, they are learning. They are not already experts, so going to study Economics and immediately see through it all as bunk.
So guess you need some expertise in the bunk, to refute the bunk. But that all takes a lot of energy.