All I can say is ... Wow !!!
It is impossible for me to imagine having a ‘meeting of the minds’ with someone who is willing and able to publish such gobbledy-gook and EXPECT to be taken seriously.
You must get really dizzy spinning yourself around in circles like that all the time.
I tried — I Really TRIED — to translate enough of what you just published into a sensible form that might be refutable. However, I confess I have failed. We do not appear to share enough common ground to support further discussion — it would appear to be pointless.
At this point, I’ve lost all interest in trying to respond, so ... Buh ‘Bye !!!
21stCenturion
The post you call “gobbledy-gook” is clear, straightforward and logical.
You are unable to show which part deserves your name-calling, because none does.
Every time you reply to me, your post is emotional with personal attacks. I challenge you to remove this kind of gobbledy-gook from your thought process, and have a logical discussion.
For starters, do you understand what is meant when I say that empiricism comes under the umbrella of logic, and not vice-versa?