 So you're saying it's not possible for anyone to speak on a subject for many years and not have incongruence It's not possible for humanity. No for a human being to stay talking about a subject and not contradict himself It's not possible and this is a different presentation. You're wrong You're wrong, but that's all right because you're just going to keep asserting stuff as true without demonstrating it Well to you anything that does align with the reality and truth is just an assertion because you want imperative No, sir or something that's very no sir and stop pretending that you're actually going to be addressing My model of the world at all. We're here to address yours, but you haven't presented anything Do you have you haven't given us a mechanism? You've barely done anything definition wise and when I point out a fallacy You just accuse me of a straw man and then pretend that it's not a fallacy when it is It's the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Well, it's obvious to anybody