I believe that careful and proper use of language facilitates communication. Obvious? I would have thought so, yet many people seem to delight in their inability to comprehend, or at least use, basic language conventions.
I'm not talking here of persons who are posting in a second, or third language. They have my admiration for
any language abilities they bring to the table. I mean native or at least fluent English speakers. What especially disturbs me is when they use this sloppy English to wriggle out of what they have said.
Here is an example, lifted from another thread. You will not be surprised to see that I have used our old friend archie to illustrate my point.

Originally Posted by
archaeologist
evolutionists here prove they are worse than christians

Originally Posted by
John Galt
So you admit Christians are bad. The sequence is bad, worse, worst. If you say evolutionists are worse (a comparative) then that requires that Christians be bad.

Originally Posted by
archaeologist
distortion. said no such thing. did your english class teach you to do that as well/ i am just writing very simply so you all will be able to understand it.
I can assure you of this archie, your English skills are average, but they lack the precision required for meaningful discussion.
Are you unaware that adjectives come in three forms?
- Basic
Comparative
Superlative
Examples would include big, bigger, biggest. Mean, meaner, meanest.
Where a distinct word does not exist for the comparative and superlative forms the words more (or less) and most (or least) are used. For example, gullible, more gullible, most gullible.
The basic form of the adjective is used to describe a singular instance. It was a large house. It is a blue flower. I would like to go on a nice holiday. In these examples there is only one house, one flower and one potential holiday.
The comparative form of the adjective requires at least two instances, though there could be more. It was a larger house than his brother's. (Comparison with one other house.) It was a bluer flower than the others in the border. (Comparison with several other flowers.) It was a nicer holiday than the one he took last year. (Comparison with one other holiday.)
The superlative form of the adjective requires two or more instances. The described word possesses the decribed characteristic to a greater (or lesser) degree than any other. It was the largest house in the street. It was the bluest flower in the vase. It was the nicest holiday he could imagine.
So, unless you are using the basic form of the adjective you are automatically making a comparison of the degree of the characteristic defined by the adjective. Your sentence was "evolutionists here prove they are worse than christians."
To remind you, the adjective is
bad and its comparative is
worse.
The comparative and superlative of
bad are
worse and
worst respectively. For evolutionists to be worse than Christians, Christians
must be bad. Otherwise there is nothing for the comparative to compare with within the sentence. Therefore, the meaning of your sentence is that Christians are bad (but evolutionists are worse).
This is not, as you claim, distorting your words, but reading them accurately as they have been written. Now I know you did not intend them the way you have written them. But that is my point. Your written English is substandard. Substandard writing skills are often associated with poorly formulated, illogical thought processes. Those, I suspect, lie at the heart of your problems.