People can deploy falsehoods so easily that they have no choice but to fall back on emotional tactics if challenged. If someone says something in support of their overall position, but you think that thing is untrue, you need to be prepared sometimes to be attacked.
This is true even if you agree with the position! I agree, for instance, that we jail non-violent offenders too readily. But if someone says “Police in this country jail non-violent offenders over a million times per week for an average of fifteen years,” I would point out that this probably isn’t true. I would challenge it, ask for sources, etc. And the speaker might say something like, “What are you, in favor of the police state?! Why are you making such a big deal about this?!”
That’s an old trick. My desire to be accurate and know the truth isn’t the same as support for one position or another. How can I even know what positions to take if I don’t know the truth? That has to be upstream.
If you’re getting upset because someone wants more information, then that’s a sign that you need to reevaluate. And if someone gets mad at you for wanting it, then that’s a sign that they’re not a source of truth.
The Opportunity Machine 