[Taliesan]

The behavior-letters-behavior sequence can lend itself to a certain interpretation, which I tend to think is the case, and it is by definition *evidence*.

Exactly. This is precisely your logical error, and this error is in every list of logical fallacies going back at least to Aristotle.

The sequence is a sequence. It is evidence of NOTHING. PRECISELY NOTHING.

Do you honestly not understand this? This is not all a joke?

[cyncooper]

I think you don't understand what I am saying.