It’s similar in that you presented a position that was not backed up by a reasonable interpretation of the data you also provided.

What you did was different, in that is was a brief misunderstanding of the wording rather than a fundamental misunderstanding of causation and correlation.

it didn’t seem defensive as much as dismissive.

Honestly i could have just been reading tone in your response that wasn’t there, i get that wrong more often than i would like, if so i apologise.