I apologize for being unclear and imprecise. Evidence is not the word I should have used. I'm just talking about perspective. What the OP stated was
not evidence, and neither did I have that confused. Those were judgments based on Bayesian reasoning. They are efficient and correct, by probability, in his life. I defended him because in asking "how dare you," you seem to think his opinions violate a basic right of dignity (or something?), when I maintain that it is perfectly reasonable and understandable to have those opinions.
Rather than "evidence" I should have said something like, please provide us with priors that may reinforce the opposite belief. That isn't to say that you didn't already provide some, but it was also obvious that you took this personally, which detracts from what we are looking for (balanced priors).
Also, from a purely pedantic point of view (which I often take for its own sake, nor am I really partial to a particular viewpoint), I don't think any of those census numbers debunk anything, if we're talking about how a marriage may be a bad decision.
Nevertheless, there is only one kind of spurious claim going around here: blanket statements. Whomever believes them makes a fool of themselves, but we -- at least I am -- are still interested in hearing more perspectives :)
