That is irrelevant to my point that (in spite of you constantly casting aspersions about others’ understanding) you have demonstrated no understanding of Quantum Mechanics.
(Additionally, from memory, your articles did not support your premise, and nobody accepted it.)
The point is that you don’t “know enough on quantum physics” to make a coherent argument in the first place.
If you want to refute that claim, then please answer my previous questions:
- What is your formal background in physics?
- What is your formal background in calculus?
- What books/textbooks on quantum physics, written by actual quantum physicists have you read? (As opposed to Youtube videos by apologists.)
Let my try my own syllogism:
-
Premise @Meerkat_SK5 knows sweet Fanny Adams about Quantum Mechanics.
-
Conclusion @Meerkat_SK5’s “Universal Common Designer theory and model”, which is based on this (lack of) understanding of Quantum Mechanics is therefore incoherent. (A point that everybody on these threads but you would seem to agree.)
-
Premise Incoherent claims cannot be taught. This is because (i) they should not on principle, and (ii) because the attempt will almost certainly prove futile.
-
Conclusion “Universal Common Designer theory and model” cannot be taught.
QED. 
I see absolutely no point in engaging with you further on this subject, until you have demonstrated even a basic understanding of it.