This is an excellent analysis of a bogus argument, and demonstrates the proper way to deal with its ilk. When an 'argument' is constructed from innuendo, when it nominally concedes its failings where they butt against inconvenient truths, but then continues as if it had not, then there is little point in arguing against it with the facts - that is how you conduct a dialog with people who are honest in their opinions. Instead, the best response to this sort of thing is to expose the inconsistent, fallacious and possibly deceitful form of the argument itself.