It is not incorrect, as always, politically motivated people ignore context when quoting. I was replying to someone calling everyone other than those on the spectrum “aliens”, as they argued that every person on the spectrum was more “logical” (whatever that means, it’s its own can of worms).
So as I replied to them, I explained that whatever they were trying to say, the alien in question would be the one who made up the smallest % of population, as I was following the definitions of “alien” which say:
“strange and not familiar” as well as “coming from a different country, race, or group”, which you conveniently ignored. (same link as yours, btw, so don’t bother arguing a lack of source)
So stop trying to be intellectual, it’s clearly a failure.
Anyway, if you can’t connect the dots between “coming from a different […] group” as well as “strange and not familiar” with autism being a smaller % of the total population than those not on the spectrum, I’m afraid your dishonesty goes even further than I thought it did initially.
for me it’s more like being a robot or alien that can’t relate to neurotypicals
Have you watched Resident Alien? You should, it’s so spot on.
And for the robot (technically Cyborg) front, The Murderbot Diaries. The main character is a cyborg who has trouble relating to humans.
spoiler
But also has no desire to be human itself.
Yup. That hits too.
Nah. They’re the aliens. We’re the ones on this planet approaching things logically.
We’re all humans, just with slightly different parameters. Your statement is bordering on aspie supremacy.
If only they’d understand…
If you’re the minority, you’re the alien.
E: downvoting the truth is petulant and childish. So much for being the “logical” ones.
The double-down is so much worse than the original statement.
Neither is wrong. Deal with it or not, what do I care.
The first one is factually incorrect.
The second one is factually incorrect because it relies on the correctness of the first one.
You could perhaps argue common usage/colloquialism, then you’d be subjectively incorrect, but that would be my opinion not a fact.
It is not incorrect, as always, politically motivated people ignore context when quoting. I was replying to someone calling everyone other than those on the spectrum “aliens”, as they argued that every person on the spectrum was more “logical” (whatever that means, it’s its own can of worms).
So as I replied to them, I explained that whatever they were trying to say, the alien in question would be the one who made up the smallest % of population, as I was following the definitions of “alien” which say:
“strange and not familiar” as well as “coming from a different country, race, or group”, which you conveniently ignored. (same link as yours, btw, so don’t bother arguing a lack of source)
So stop trying to be intellectual, it’s clearly a failure.
And as posted in the link, the definition of alien has nothing to do with % population.
If something doesn’t align with the facts, its factually incorrect.
I’m not sure how I’m politically motivated by point that out.
I didn’t ignore them, strange and unfamiliar also don’t have anything to do with % population.
It seems you want to ignore logic and facts to complain about people ignoring logic and facts.
That seems exhausting to me, but you seem to enjoy it, so have at it i suppose.
also: something …downvotes…childish…something
Yes, apparently downvotes are childish, who knew.
Anyway, if you can’t connect the dots between “coming from a different […] group” as well as “strange and not familiar” with autism being a smaller % of the total population than those not on the spectrum, I’m afraid your dishonesty goes even further than I thought it did initially.