That's a bit rich! You post a dialogue without any hint of the source and then you have the temerity to attack a fellow member when they confess to being confused. Some up front honesty from you in providing source and relevant context could have avoided that. I am disappointed, but sadly not surprised.
Now to the meat of the matter. Anecdotes are great to relate over a beer with friends; they can add a bit of colour to an otherwise drab discussion; however, they are not especially effective at providing convincing evidence to challenge a position arrived at by extensive and diverse research. If you had not an anecdote, but a rigorously constructed poll that showed a significant proportion of the relevant scientific community echoed the sentiments expressed in your anecdote, then it would be worth sitting up and taking notice. Without that you just have an anecdote.