you're giving so little information
In fact, I've given you thirty pages of information
here, and I'm constantly providing more. If you feel that some information is missing (note: the fact that you disagree with something doesn't make it missing. Of course, I welcome debating that too, but you've claimed that I provide little information, not incorrect information [even though you likely think of both]), just ask. Make sure you've checked that the information really wasn't provided, though - you not trying to find it is not equal to me not having provided it.
If you have a look at the thread I've just linked, you will notice that there are three distinct type of RE'ers: the good ones, such as Nohlekh, who can discuss the problem with respect and understanding. He may very well think I'm a complete nutcase, but he's making valid points and actually makes the discussion challenging, since he evaluates what I say, rather than just blindly dismissing them; then there are the ones that just don't care enough, like markjo. They'll hop into a thread, ask a question that's only just been answered, and then either not post again or argue the topic for a while, only to eventually say that "they don't care" once they run out of arguments (see: The recently concluded debate about Rowbotham's education); and finally, the ones that have come here to troll, such as EmperorZhark. I've already described his behaviour in this post. It's up to you which one you'll be. However, don't expect me to cater to you if you just keep saying "nope, not enough", rather than asking specific questions and addressing what I say. This, of course, works both ways.
This just makes you look like a terrible debater who doesn't really know what he's talking about.
What makes me "look like a terrible debater" is called confirmation bias - if you try to see beyond it, you'll notice that EmperorZhark has been asking the same question over and over, dismissing all arguments as "no science here", asking if "someone could explain this guy <X>" [sic], and never even mentioning a single counter-argument. He has
no case whatsoever, and yet you tell me I provide little information.
I appreciate the anecdote about your brother's and your unfair debating practices, but I believe you've targeted it at the wrong team. With what I said in mind, if you still disagree, please explain why.