[kybernetikos]

It's inevitable that even good faith counterarguments will occasionally mistake exactly what the original argument was. Especially when the participants start with such different viewpoints and on topics that they obviously feel strongly about. The way to continue the argument (if that's what you want to do) is to point out what the stronger (and perhaps more correct/original) version of the point being countered is and how it differs from the version that was countered.

Simply dismissing counterpoints without engaging to make sure you understand them runs the risk of falling for the exact thing you're criticising.