A captivating emulation of Quantitative vs. Qualitative models

 I had this following conversation involving myself @bigcanadiano vs. @tbonnar. It is self explanatory.

Everything I state is identified which begins with my psuedonym @bigcanadiano,
Tim's responses begin with his psuedonym @tbonnar.
The purpose of this discussion is to examine the relationship between Quantitative assessment vs. Qualitative reasoning
==========
@bigcanadiano: so stats do not represent the same type of "fiction" you have in mind. No logic.
==========
@TBonnar: The fiction is that my opinion is less valid because I can back it with evidence. #Nologic
==========
@bigcanadiano: I see where you are coming from, however the qualitative/quantitative debate is one of fictional representation don't you think.
==========
@bigcanadiano: We both want the same thing and use different methods to get there. If you cannot understand that, god help us all.
==========
@bigcanadiano: re; qualitative vs. quantitative/ if you read my last tweet relating (words & #'s) THE CAUSE is the same = manipulation.
==========
@TBonnar: Qualitative and Quantitative are very different things.
==========
@bigcanadiano: they are not different, conceptually, both result with the same basic principles aimed theoretically what the other cannot explain.
=========
@TBonnar: They are different conceptually. Very different. One is measurable, on isn't.
=========
@bigcanadiano: @TBonnar you are wrong, or either deliberately skewing the information. What you said has absolutely nothing to do with my main premise.
=========
@bigcanadiano: both CONCEPTS are a matter of verification of what the other cannot provide 1- assesses measurement 2- dictates reasoning.
=========
@bigcanadiano: Re; reasoning does not REQUIRE measurement, THEREFORE = NEGATED that which measurement CANNOT EXPLAIN.
=========
@TBonnar: You make it sound like reasoning can't be wrong, which is silly.
==========
@bigcanadiano: okay tim, easy. Is that what I said. No. Read it again bro.

(End.)