Certainly. But there has been very little of that in this thread. As far as I can tell, only in your post #35.

However, it is not clear, at least to me, what exactly you think these quotes show.

In Dot #1, Forester does not assert anything, so there is nothing to debunk.
Dot #2 is really a semantic complaint, that it's inappropriate to refer to cyclists who are overly concerned about potential hazards from the rears as "victims". That is not debunking.
Dot #3 is an assertion from Forester. Your comment about it is your opinion, implying at most that you seem to disgree, but it's hardly a debunking.

So I'm not sure what you think this shows.