Well apparently I know what you don't understand...what a strawman argument is. I've posted the definition of a strawman argument. It is indeed exactly what your Kampman example is. You just admitted that your argument was a strawman. What part about the definition that I listed about it being a strawman argument don't you understand? I'm honestly getting quite amused at your Baghdad Bob 'refusal to admit the obvious' mindset, and chuckle out loud at it. The fact of the matter is, I called your argument a strawman argument that proves virtually nothing. You refuse to admit it, even after other members here have backed me up on it. I guess we're all stupid, right? There's really nothing else I can say about it. Everything else you posted is moot and there's no further need to argue against it, as it is about as productive as debating with say, a stump; or a brick wall; or my 3 year old female Boxer dog; or my mountain bike. Have a nice day!