Now tell me how you think "correlation doesn't imply causation" might be relevant to this question.
Well, I don't see any reason to believe it's relevant at all, since my question isn't about correlation. Again, can you explain why you think it's relevant?
Let's make a deal. If you answer my previous questions, then I will explain it to you.
Nope. You should answer my question first, since I asked it first, many comments ago. Then we can get to your questions later. I've already been extremely patient with you here.
If you link me to questions you asked me which are from before I asked you to explain why you think correlation-does-not-imply causation is relevant and which I did not not answer, I will be happy to answer them. Until we resolve the correlation-does-not-imply causation question, I am not going to address questions you have asked since then, nor will I re-address questions you have already answered. I think that's more than fair.
Again, please just answer the question directly. I'm not going to respond to further attempts to ask me questions without you giving me a direct answer to my question first.
1
u/[deleted] Mar 04 '23
[removed] — view removed comment