I have already gone through all of your previous comments, explicitly quoted every substantial question I can find in them, and then directly responded to those questions, and I am presently in the midst of doing so for your latest comment.
you did not reply to my long comment parts 2 or 3 (divided due to reddit character limit and clearly labeled), despite my request. those aren't my latest.
http://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/2y4ir0/kant_objects_conform_to_our_knowledge_and_vice/cp6u6gq http://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/2y4ir0/kant_objects_conform_to_our_knowledge_and_vice/cp6uhfn
Yes:
from what you say, it's now clear to me that you have no idea what my thought process is and reasoning is, so you were replying to the wrong thing. your mental model of my thinking is a very simplified conclusion-focused thing, which contradicts things i stated, and which doesn't mention the kant text i kept quoting. so this clarifies the issues to me: you don't know what textual analysis is, and don't deal in details. i skipped too many steps when trying to talk to you and you never asked about the stuff you didn't follow. we're kind of talking past each other because you're unsophisticated, and i didn't recognize the full degree very quickly, and the blame for that is shared. you didn't do textual analysis (your reply to OP contains none), and then say over and over you already did it, which is such a common tactic of people with nothing substantive to say. you mix up conclusions and reasoning/arguments. you only give conclusions when you talk, and don't know what else there is. you're also mixing up having a standard position many people agree with vs. having knowledge where you can explain or argue anything well. you also made a bunch of assumptions specific to your subculture, and acted like everyone else should or would know them. you're irrational, immoral, and intend to stay that way.
you have nothing to say or teach wrt Kant. on the flip side, i gave you more than enough chances in the discussion. you aren't interested in learning anything from me or Popper. i think we're done. i hope this criticism helps, but fear it won't help you (it may help some audience members though). oh well.
following Ayn Rand, I think it's important to pronounce moral judgement and say clearly where one stands. now i've done so.
thanks for taking the time to talk with me and clarify what you're like. i recognize you're a pretty typical representative of a larger class of people, but most of them don't want to talk as much.