First, you say that I am a child if I do not provide evidence to refute your calculation.
Let's just say intellectually incapable of both following and appreciating a good physical 'back-of-the-envelope' calculation. You would fail most of my interview questions. Unless you are just being deliberately rude and disingenuous to someone who has put in serious effort to first produce his argument and then document his sources for you.
The precision of his answer is irrelevent - he has deliberately chosen the lower bounds on all of his variables to favour your position, and thus his error bars, which are large, are heavily skewed in the direction that makes the actual answer almost certainly even more detrimental to your position. His accuracy is perfectly good enough to make his point. It is now dowm to you to refute the calculation. If you do not have the time nor inclination, then politely decline and submit to his calculation for now. Otherwise you are simply yet another rude troll.
™ Version 4.2
