People think they can convince others through debate; I used to think so too. However, with time I have realized that debate is largely useless. If you have a receptive mind, like Max Planck, then when you get a shredding, like he got from Boltzmann, then you may see the light. Most others are going to be caught with their cherished beliefs, e.g., “no AIT” among many H. They might take it to them with their graves & live in a make believe world like that of shrI Jawaharlal Nehru.
One may explore the question for oneself & put out the findings in case it helps others on the journey. Beyond that, there is utterly no point debating with those who might have profound foundational issues with respect to how knowledge is apprehended. It is not even interesting & certainly worthwhile cleaning up convoluted contra-evidence claims.
The debate on some topics is not worthwhile because the other party is not going get it no matter what the weight of the evidence staring down at them is. Opinion conversion is a strange process – it is almost like physical learning, e.g., like learning to ride a bike. When most people start, it is v.hard to balance. Once they get it, you don’t even think about how you do it. So also with hypothesis acceptance, you may present evidence but the unconvinced will be blind to it until that flip suddenly happens in some. AIT denial is one such topic that IMO is not worth debating because if you are not getting it now you’re probably locked willingly or due to some mental blocks in the preacceptance state. Hence, I’m not going to try to win you over: you may flip someday or not that is personal journey.
I don’t discourage you in any way from exploring your way in that regard. But of course engaging in ridicule of a solid hypothesis by supporting nuts or by creating false strawmen & triumphantly knocking them down is only going to dilute your quest in this regard. It will be an emotional journey because it relates to ones identity but one has to be conscious of that clouding ones thoughts.
Moreover, one has to also develop a proper framework to answer scientific questions & scrupulously stick to the empirical results. In its absence, the paths you take might be more likely to yield false results