Wow, you couldn't possibly be more wrong.

I don't even know where to begin explaining basic science to someone so hopelessly misguided. I'd normally suggest some readings to clarify some misconception, but I can't even begin to guess how you came to such an absurd understanding.

I don't find it funny at all. It makes me very sad. Non-credentialed science cheerleaders, like yourself, have done little other than harm to the public understanding of science.

You're causing harm. Please stop.

I'm sorry, but that's simply delusional. All observation is theory-dependent. This is not controversial, it's basic science.

You're forgetting that what you're calling "truth" is theory-dependent.

I understand that the fact that science does not deal in truth is deeply uncomfortable, particularly for non-scientists. It is not intended as a criticism, it's just reality. Further, that fact does not (in any way) diminish science. What is harmful, however, is confusing what science is with what we want it to be. Those sorts of beliefs breed dogma, which (as we've seen) hinders the progress of science.

Unfortunately, it can't seem to maintain compatibility between minor versions, it's syntax is so fundamentally broken that anonymous functions were crippled, and only in the less-popular new versions does something as basic as the print function usable.

The world was better off with VB.

So you believe that causing harm to others, merely for the pleasure of causing harm, is ethical?

You're going to have a difficult time getting anyone to agree with that.

Because you apparently haven't read the post to which you replied, I'll quote it here:

That's so racist! Not all undocumented extraterrestrial immigrants are Martians, neither are all Martian immigrants undocumented.

Really?

Come on. You know, as well as I do, that it's the intention, not the action, that's relevant here.

It only gets better with time

Okay, then no one is a programmer because what they do doesn't cross my imaginary demarcation line! You've convinced me. There are no programmers!

I've taught plenty of intro programming classes. You're likely just a terrible instructor. I've not found a single student that was incapable.

Citation needed. What backwater pay-to-publish journal did you find someone that denies that 1/3 of the population fails to reach the the formal operational stage of development?

I have a few teaching tricks I've picked-up for that. I have little doubt I could teach your otherwise normal child the basics of vectors in an evening. Well, at least well enough to get her through calc.

Teaching, like programming, is a skill. If you want to better help her, do some reading on formative assessment.

Why would someone spread the obvious myth that programming requires a 'special mind' or 'in-born talent'? It's clearly delusional, so there must be some other motivation.

That explains it! It's just good old fashioned fear and insecurity.

Probably because of the countless "mediocre" programmers who are successful.

But most of them are mediocre. The world keeps on turning.

Okay, now you're just trolling. Sorry about that. Carry on.

The best advice I ever received: "There are no good writers, only good re-writers."

Why is it that when you see delusional distinctions like these the dividing line always seems to be at the level of skill of the person offering it?

Creating an artificial distinction might make you feel more important, but it's still just self-delusion.

The truth is that anyone can learn to program. Even better, like all skills, they can improve with practice. It doesn't require a 'special mind' or some mythical in-born talent, just patience and practice.