And I thought your reading comprehension was better than that. I never "seemed to claim" anything other than the numbers was based on information they had but that information was incomplete and it is impossible to get complete, accurate numbers in all categories to make a true and accurate outcome. Did I explain it in a better way so you understand?

You said I was wrong and the implication was that I had no clue wtf I was talking about and now all of a sudden you say the numbers are fuzzy because YOU found an article saying basically what has been said before and are claiming that I "seemed to claim".

I know how to call bullshit when I see bullshit. You were playing your little game with AZ.