Actually, you didn't say that in #145. I guess I shouldn't ever take you at your word. it was #148.
And now that we've put to rest the issue of that particular exchange's historical periodization, what exactly is so "dishonest" about saying that we can reasonably assume 20 generations over six centuries? Or that the Moors had been in Iberia for six centuries at the time Khaldun was writing? Or that the Reconquista was not yet complete? Do you question the veracity of any of these?
If so, I'll ask you these:
How many human generations do you expect over 600 years? I believe the convention is that a "generation" is roughly equivalent to 30 years, if not less.
How long had the Moors been in Iberia in the late 14th century?
When did the Reconquista end, if it was over by the 14th century?
Depends on the timeframe and technology. Medieval lifespans were notoriously short by today's standards. It was often death at 40, with marriage and childbearing being commonplace at about age 15, conceivably placing a European generation's length then at about half what it is today.
Of course that wouldn't necessarily apply in the mahometan world, where the precedence of their paedophiliac pseudo-prophet seems to have permitted intervals of as little as 9 years on the female side.
How long had the Moors been in Iberia in the late 14th century?
Too long. Which is why the last ones were dutifully booted in the 15th.