Okay. My NEWEST theory really explains EVERYTHING (about everything)

Given an extant eventuality by which one may assiduously conclude that a second party is in an assumptive though inherently inperspicacious state of adequate comprehension of an outflow of verbalized articulation, there nevertheless may arise a condition in which the erroneous nature of the analysis thus established by that party may be at odds with (though in seeming alignment to, or demur from) the intended though ill-expressed content of the first party’s preliminary or seminal course of cerebral melange des milieux, which necessarily implements though admittedly in departure from any prior or established preconception on either party’s part, a further and subsequent, whether truly a consequent, condition by which the ensuing inflow-as-misapplication by the second, is in direct or indirect correlative causality of the obfuscative or ambivalent outflow-as-mischaracterization, by the first.

(Like, I know, right?)

Like what you read? Give Ron Collins a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.