However, you and a lot of people have a very layman attitude towards science which is mostly the school system's fault.

So now it's my turn to explain and then be exasperated. Or, I could choose not to be, and simply explain. I'll go with the latter. This is a conscious choice made in spite of, and not because of, your short-order characterization of me in lieu of a dearth of evidence. I.E. you made up your mind before you adequately assessed the evidence, and I don't want to be mad, so I won't be.

I asked for more information because it would assist me in developing a framework wherein I could cement the idea in my mind. That way, I would be able to consider it in a context becoming my current understanding. I was hoping that you would accept that I was forthcoming in my limitations and be able to help me without making me feel like a was "tell me drugs good so I can be the smart" kinda person - frankly those kinds of people need knowledge just as much as the rest of us, if not more so, anyway. If this is something you're unable to do, then I accept that limitation and empathize. I won't ask you for this kind of help again, because it bothers you to provide it.

I very well understand the importance of papers like this. Which is why I thought it was neat. This is the bread and butter, and I'm grateful that papers outside of my own limitations exist so that I make broad connections irrespective of any author's intentions.

Anyway. You've educated me, so thanks.