Plus you have agreed with the list of geniuses that were vegan / vegetarian.
This is not a constructive argument. A list of geniuses who were not vegetarians could be made as well and would actually be longer.
Why did they adopt this lifestyle? That's what's relevant.
I agree it's not constructive argument when used without context. But I'm bringing up the fact that he literally disagreed with the entire list because he 'thought' one person didn't belong.
I have shown that he has belonged, and then he begins to mock me.
That shows how closed minded moron he is by refusing to accept factual information that doesn't support his beliefs.
I did not disagree with the entire list, I'm saying you lost your credibility when you added false information to it ( Hitler was the only one I knew whether was vegetarian or not, having discussed it multiple times ) and therefore I reacted to it. I'm accepting whatever facts you throw at me, but I don't agree with your technique of embedding unproven theories and non-scientific research results when constructing arguments.