@Meerkat_SK5, please CEASE AND DESIST quoting me out of context.
I explicitly prefaced that comment with:
Therefore I have already answered your question:
“What about B,C, and D though?”
What I clearly meant was that the same problem applies to those three claims that I identified with (A), the same problem I identified with your first post, the same problem I identified in your revised post, the same problem @John_Harshman has identified in your recent posts on this thread.
Your citations do not substantiate you claims.
As I said above:
So I will not provide “detailed” explanations as to why more of your endless supply of claims are not substantiated by your citations. Suffice it to say, they are of the form: “You claim X, your cited sources do not mention X.”
Finally, I would note that these are not “[MY] rules”, they are rules that appear to be understood by everybody except you on this thread, and appear to be ubiquitous in every form of scholarship I have come across. That you, an apologist, do not appear to consider yourself to be bound by these rules, I see as further evidence that apologetics is not a form of serious scholarship