BUT first of all this topic is still not closed even in the physics community and second even if Lady Error was very defensive and therefore begged for bashing your side wasn't that convincing either.
What would have been convincing? Quoting articles like
this one for example.
After reading that I know that my claim that what she wrote wasn't falsified was in fact wrong.
And after reading that she should have only 2 possibilities left, either call the scientists involved liars or rethink her understanding of the Copenhagen interpretation (which includes nonsentient observers if you don't prefer outdated and disproven interpretations from the 1920s only because they fit your beliefs).
Btw, I also didn't learn anything about decoherence or that this theory as well as the many worlds and consistent histories interpretations didn't even require something as arbitrary as a wave function collapse at my hippie university. ^^
They were all about the Copenhagen interpretation (meaning wave function collapse was a given) and about "shut up and measure".