VVilliam wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:14 am
It is promising that you concede by backing off,
But I have NOT 'backed off' AT ALL.
I STILL WAIT what your ANSWER TO my CLARIFYING QUESTION IS, EXACTLY. When, and IF, that ARISES, THEN we can CONTINUE.
VVilliam wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:14 am
perhaps realising that you needn't have made your "correction" and could have simply accepted the gist of what was written in respectable spirit.
It WILL BE NOTICED, if NOT YET ALREADY, that WHEN I CONSIDER poster's here write some 'thing' that is NOT Correct, then I WILL, if I CHOOSE TO, Correct 'it'.
EXACTLY like I DID when you CLAIMED that 'They 'mirror' so-called 'human intelligence'.
Now, what STILL STANDS IS there is NO ACTUAL so-called 'human intelligence'. Unless, OF COURSE, 'you' CAN and WILL PROVIDE 'us' WITH AN EXPLANATION of 'what' 'human intelligence' IS, EXACTLY.
VVilliam wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:14 am
Perhaps in future when you are tempted to "correct" another you might accompany such with explanatory evidence in support of such claims.
I Corrected what you SAID and WROTE, which IS BEING REAFFIRMED by you CONTINUING TO IGNORE ANSWERING what you MEAN by 'human intelligence'.
SEE, the EXPLANATORY PROOF, and NOT 'explanatory evidence', I USE, commonly, throughout this forum IS the ACTUAL INABILITY of 'you', posters, here TO EXPLAIN what 'you' ACTUALLY MEAN and ARE ACTUALLY REFERRING TO, EXACTLY, WITH and BY the words that 'you' USE.