First: I did not know that this was a board that needed statements that are written for a much younger audience.
Dangerous talk for a third rate poster in his second post on his first forum. There are individuals here who will disassemble you and your arguments while generating farts that are more explanatory of life than your own written efforts.
I'll look on this warning to you as my good deed for the day.
Second: I did not know that reading was a problem or that people needed to have a break between words to rest up for the next word to read.
Well that just tells us how ignorant you actually are.
If you take any well written text book, any journal article, any novel (except perhaps
Ulysses), any newspaper, any advertisement, you will find that the text is conveniently broken up in to segments by line breaks, etc. This matches well with the way the human brain performs the trick of reading. It is something that is well known, implicitly, even by schoolchildren in their first years of education.
Since this structuring of a post makes it easier to read, then failure to do so is, in essence, rude. It conveys a sense that what you are saying is of such importance that the rest of us are obliged to put out the (small) additional effort required to wade through the morass of your thesis. Here is another piece of advice for you - most people can't be bothered. Most people won't appreciate what a great gift to the world your thoughts are.
Third: If that small amount of information is too much for you to understand and digest in one sitting then why are you trying to debate a subject.
You are missing the point. Do you wish to provide maximum reasonable aid to convey your message in an effective manner, or do you just like the sound of your own keyboard?
To believe that throwing a rock at a building did more that break a window and maybe some interior damage and was the cause for the roof to fall in, the basement to flood, and the second floor collapse but does not touch the first floor is ridiculous.
So we have identified one unique talent! You can generate irrelevant, inapplicable metaphors at the drop of bolide.
Now to something of substance:
If only. :shrug:
Your concatenation of disparate facts with poorly established assessments of their relevance; a total absence of either an opening claim, executive summary, or conclusion; abominable grammar and abhorrent spelling; failure to include a single citation - other than a popular documentary; all these together render any effort to debate your points .....pointless.
Perhaps you would like to try again, this time with clarity. Or maybe you will prefer to run away with your tail between your legs.