When you can revisit these ideas with a scientific manner, then I can respond. Until then you are just spinning narratives.
Ironic that you would level a criticism like this while touting "non-empirical science," whatever that is.
> You chose to make a narrative claim using No Child Left Behind
Do me the courtesy of paraphrasing my claims accurately. I said the drop in test scores you're attributing to phones could more plausibly be caused by NCLB, which is a carefully couched statement that doesn't actually draw any concrete conclusions.
I'm gesturing broadly at the absence of conclusive evidence, and you're telling me you don't need conclusive evidence to make definitive statements. I'm hardly the one spinning narratives here.
Gesturing broadly at a lack of conclusive evidence is simply naysaying the connections that educators, child development experts, neuroscience researchers are detailing. If you can't counter their connections and simply sit on the ledge of denial, you ain't thinking, you're in denial.
Stay in storytelling.