Board Thread:False Info and Speculative Discussion/@comment-192.230.165.112-20140420035210/@comment-4091815-20140619032207

You're really just talking - not listening.

You have piece of information 1+1 = 2

It makes perfect sense because you understand 1+1 = 2

Later you find out that you were seeing just part of the equation. Instead of 1+1 = 2, the full equation is (1+1)-1+5-4 = 2. The original equation was correct - but there was more to the story that you got later.

At one point Scott lived with his dad.

That is the original equation. When you thought that was all there was to the story you assumed (and not implausibly) that he was living "only" with his dad.

Later you find out that there was more to the equation and that Scott was living with his Mom and Dad at the time. The only thing missing from it now is your perception (the not implausible one) - the other parts of the equation remain the same.

You don't have a problem with the information being correct. You have a problem with the phrasing.

You would have like it better if Scott had said "when we lived with my Dad" because that would have clarified it immediately for you as opposed to allowing you to misunderstand (but not implausibly) Scott's living situation.

So putting aside the phrasing (since that's your only problem with the scene) the information provided, that Scott lived with his father for a time, is still correct.

Scott lived with his father until his father moved out. You just don't like the way he said it.

It doesn't make it incorrect - just poorly phrased in your opinion.