Your response is a combination of reductio ad absurdum:
Hell, if that's the approach you want to take, why even have a computer? It solves pretty much the same problems that pencil and paper had already solved. Why have pencil and paper? It pretty much solves the same problems cuniform tablets had already solved.
and ad hominem:
I assume you really can see the difference between a new display server and antiquated X, but maybe not. I'll chalk it up to the state of the school system in today's world.
It's very weak and emotional filled response. It makes me think you more of a Wayland fanboi who can't handle the competition than someone who has anything important to add to the conversation.
While I do think it's detracts from the efforts being made by Wayland, I don't see anything wrong with Mir's existence. We always said competition is good. We said this when Linux went against Windows, to justify the multiple desktops available (e.g. Gnome, Qt, XFCE, OpenStep, etc.) and I can see the same argument said for Mir versus Wayland.
Wayland is competing against X windows. They are offering the promise of improved performance and maintainability by jettisoning the legacy code of X. I don't see Mir any differently. I see what the AC is going for and agree. Wayland may have some of the same programmers of X, but that doesn't necessarily mean X is abandonware.