Challenging something with a question about it, is not adding to ignorance - if a statement/study/fact/belief can't hold to up to questions, from actual opposing critics, what's the point of that position existing?

Being all "PC" and "nice" about stuff that is what it is, or isn't -- THAT adds to ignorance.

I guess maybe I didn't phrase that correctly - I ask challenging questions, but don't state the things I "know" without clarification first. I meant that I don't just pop off with "yeah, but in reality it's x, y, z" because I know that I'm probably ignorant of facts. I'll ask about x, y, or z first.