The rhetorical tactic of demanding sources from an opponent and then dismissing every
single source provided, regardless of
quality or relevance, without engaging with their content. The goal is not to evaluate
evidence but to exhaust the opponent, create the appearance of skepticism, and avoid conceding any point. Common dismissal phrases include “that source is biased,” “that’s not peer‑reviewed,” “that’s too
old,” “that’s from a partisan outlet,” or simply “I don’t accept that.” Sourcedismissing often follows moving the goalposts: the first source is dismissed, then a second, then a third, ad infinitum. It is a form of attrition argumentation.
Example: “She provided a peer‑reviewed meta‑analysis. He dismissed it as ‘funded by industry.’ She provided an independent replication. He dismissed it as ‘underpowered.’ She provided a
government report. He dismissed it as ‘political.’ Sourcedismissing – he
never intended to accept any
evidence.”