Hi Welcome
No matter how much you say this, it still won't be an argument.
Rambling Wall of Bitterness
This is your amazing response to the fact that you ignore anything that contradicts you? Well played sir, I couldn't have said it better.
- didn't incorporate the part that is inaccurate (you didn't read what I said, again)
I always read what you say. But you change what you say on a regular basis, from claiming to be basing your opinion on the dictionary, to implying you only meant the Oxford dictionary, to stating that the dictionary definition wasn't sufficient. So, which of your contradictory points are you now referring to?
- you ignore evidence that runs counter to your claims
That would be you. For example, ignoring the part where D&D defines what being "more powerful" means. But feel free to point out what I'm ignoring that's actually counter to my claim.
- my argument has always been that "growing more powerful" and "advancing through age categories" means the same thing, but again, you're not really reading anything
Except that that's not established anywhere in the rules. To be "more powerful" in D&D includes simply having higher stats (see the section on point buy, previously quoted earlier, that you earlier ignored). Advancing through age categories does not mean this (and I suspect what you actually mean is "Advancement: By Age" which is an entirely different thing). So, you have now established that your argument has always been a faulty claim, even when given direct evidence against it.
- yourself and TML quote rules out of context all the time and claim they create definitions out of thin air, pot meet kettle
If we do it all the time, then surely you can show a few examples. Should be trivial, right?
JaronK