Natural Selection Seems Insufficient

[Ravenshire]

It needed pointing out because you based part of your ideas on shit you simply don't understand, making them self refuting.

Let me put it this way. I know something about coding, mostly in AutoLISP for use in AutoCad and in Python. I know fuck-all about coding in C#. In other words I'm completely ignorant of how to code in C#. You will never find me on a coding forum spouting ideas that require an understanding of C#, but that's exactly what you've done here. If you wan't to base ideas on the sciences, or refute some part of them, you have to understand them first. You clearly don't. It's not an insult, it's an observation based on your own presentations.

Let's consider your C# example. Suppose a C# developer said that he was hardcoding all his settings directly in the code instead of a configuration file.  You could reasonably offer some advice here, I think?  Or suppose that, instead of writing a static method called from 50 different places, he duplicated the method 50 times.  Might you possibly have some helpful suggestions here?  (I'm not saying you're suggestions would be authoritative, but they would be worth listening to). 

I've seen briliiant, doctorate-level coders write code like this:
    var result = processThisID(strID)
I don't have to be a C# expert to tell them it's more clear to write it like this:
   Customer c = processThisID(strCustomerID)
Yes, a newbie can sometimes give excellent correction to an expert.

You have to consider the CONTENT of what the newbie is saying, not simply disregard him for his lack of credentials.

You'e comparing apples to oranges, coding strategies (apples) to coding a specific coding language (oranges). I could, perhaps, recommend a strategy, if i knew enough about C# to know if that strategy is possible. Since I don't, I'm not going to offer advice on the subject because I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH UNDERLYING UNDERSTANDING! Much like you in the sciences.