Again, since African countries are not literal latrines, describing them as "crapholes" is an opinion and not a fact.
Considering that their website rivals the sophistication of a geocities page, let's just say they're no Wall Street Journal.
It's interesting to know that you prefer to "judge a book by its cover" than on its merits. Needless to say, dismissing an idea based on its packaging alone is not an intellectual argument that would be considered "reliable by any academic standard."
Since it took you two weeks of evasion before you even produced specific numbers, it is fair to say that you had great difficulty with those requests.
It's possible to say that I had difficulty, but it would be more accurate to say that I did not have the specific numbers your requested at hand.
Given the abundance of raw sewage in many African cities that's a very debatable assertion. The Niger River looks and smells like a giant toilet. Lagos looks and smells like crap. So who's to say that places like Nigeria are not what they look and smell like?
It's interesting to know that you prefer to "judge a book by its cover" than on its merits.
That presumes the book you were handing out even had a cover. We're not comparing the WSJ website with a less sophisticated but nonetheless clean website of a small town U.S. paper. We're comparing ANY reputable newspaper website with geocities. And yes, when a "newspapers" website gives no reason to conclude that it is more reliable than 99% of all the other junk on the web, I will remain skeptical and demand better sources.
It's possible to say that I had difficulty, but it would be more accurate to say that I did not have the specific numbers your requested at hand.
Except that you also harped about your original unsourced claims for two weeks and responded to my reasonable requests for better numbers with overt hostility. Such behavior is a sign of a severely diseased mind, thus further supporting my contention that you ingest water from the Niger River.