[JasonFruit]

Because, frankly, your article rambled and lacked a coherent point.

[TBF-RnD]

That doesn't really answer how you can fail to parse a formulation and still draw a conclusion regarding it's logical validity.

[megablast]

This is definitely what you should be arguing about in defense of your article.

[TBF-RnD]

Apparently the article was not written in a way that can be understood by all. I can give you that.

It's good to have feedback and in the future I'll take into account that some people have problems comprehending text.

But to say that you can not parse a sentence and that it's illogical doesn't make sense. That is like saying that you read a book in Greek, didn't understand it and still claim that the content is invalid. Do you follow?