Re: Why the Fermi Assumption matters

  John Harshman wrote:

I offer

Oh, yeah, I totally believe that you're a sincere person and not
a massively disordered twit hiding behind rotating sock puppets.
After all, you did sincerely express confusion over what might be
meant by the "LCA"...

 > But it's not the relationship, as I pointed out. It's mere the
 > conventional means of categorization.
 It's not the name that counts; it's the existence of a clade that

Again, not nature. Human convention. Also not the point, but you
being a narcissist can't recognize points...
Calling humans "apes" is a barrier to communication for some
creationists. So when you come up against this fact, and it's happened
here many times, you don't do it. Speaking rhetorically. Because
people who aren't raging narcissist the way you are would like to
communicate ideas, concepts, and don't obsess over control.
And I raised this fact because the same issue -- communication --
arises when you insist on incorrectly using the term "Fermi Paradox."
It's an assumption. It's actually the expression of an assumption:
Not seeing aliens can't be a paradox unless you are supposed to see
aliens. And there is no authority or force in nature that requires us
to do that.
None.

includes humans, chimps, gorillas, orangutans, and

Again, you are a narcissist. The point I made and was illustrating,
and you're confirming with the expression of your disorder, is
that the words you chose can be a barrier to communication.
Well, to be fair the barrier here is your disorder and not the words.
An even more recent example is the use of the word "Groom" You
"Groomed" a young person for leadership, for example. Now days many
companies have -- past tense -- instructed people to not employ the
term, and it remove it where found, as a modern connotation can
(and, let's face it, will) trigger some people.
In the 1990s a woman born in a man's body was transgendered. Today you
can stop a conversation and create a (f)Lame war by leaving the 'ed'
on the end.
Or saying LGBT instead of LGBTQ... though even the idiots who insist
on that can't give a non-contradictory reason for the distinction of
'Q'.
So we're not having a conversation. I'm pointing out a fact, that the
language one chooses matters, AND in almost all cases is fundamentally
unnecessary, and you're parading your massive personality disorder as
you always do.
To any neurotypicals who may be lurking:  You really can talk about
human evolution without once stating "Humans are apes." If someone
can't, they're either not smart enough or not mentally healthy
enough to speak on the topic.
No excuses.
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5