I pointed out that I made an error quite a bit ago, was that one of the several things I said that you seem to have misunderstood?
Let's review. Here is the only comment you made in this thread regarding an error on your part: (in response to
@mdchachi's proposed sentence of 'Alkylation is a petrochemical process in which an alkyl radical is introduced to another molecule.')
The last one is quite clearly two non-living physical objects being introduced to each other. Fair enough, in some contexts it works and I was wrong.
This is obviously acknowledging you were in error with your earlier assertion:
at least one living being (or group of living beings) has to be involved when 'introducing to', and the other thing can, at least, be a conceptual thing.
In this acknowledgment of error, you didn't include anything about being in error when you referred to a 'hospital' as a non-living, physical object. Maybe in your mind you did, but not in this thread.
Any misunderstanding on my part, therefore, was due to poor communication on your part, assisted by your on-the-fly revising of your arbitrary definition of 'non-living, physical object.'
Then you doubled down on this ridiculous notion that an assembly line is analogous to a rock
If you actually bother to read what I have written, I have ONLY been comparing an assembly line to a hospital. And, again, I was just following your definition, which you then later altered.
I am puzzled why you seem to expect some kind of admission of error on my part, when, as I have explained multiple times, I was just following the ground rules that you established. You seem to expect me to have disregarded what you actually wrote, and instead inferred what you really meant.
