>>17842497
>They cite the Rind study as an acknowledgement that there may be limitations. This is key to the structure of any empirical study yet you present it as grand evidence that Rind's findings were un unequivocally true and all their conclusions are false.
They wouldn't cite the study if it had been "exhaustively rejected", as you claimed. Papers on astrophysics do not cite studies claiming that the Earth is flat.

>Also a Child's brain and their decision making centers being liquid is a pretty concise reason to not fuck them
This is still not an argument. Why does this fact not prohibit adults from engaging in any other activity with children? Why only sexual activities?

>I linked to an independent review, it is probably the best form of evidence you can get on the topic and you are just being intentionally obtuse
Pic rel. is an "independent review" which is much more credible than the biased webpage you linked.