It has been pointed out to you on several occasions that your understanding of evolutionary theory is incomplete and when suggestions have been made that you need to review in order to constructively rephrase questions or before raising another question, you have been combative and denied there was a problem.
If you are not willing to take the recommendations of experienced members with a high degree of training in the subject, it shows an unwillingness to evaluate the information they are providing. That is not the model that the site wants to take.
If your only reason is to post to advance your way of thinking and have no intention of learning from the answers that people are providing, then your questions are wasting the time of the community and are overshadowing legitimate questions from people who are looking for answers that they can learn from.
You have also been asked to provide sources for your questions, which you then do not. When someone, especially a moderator asks you for a reference, go back and find it and provide it. There is often a good reason to ask for it. It can help people trying to answer your question clarify what you are asking and address the answer in the context of the information you are basing your question off of.
Where did you hear it? – Chris♦ Nov 14 at 10:42
@Chris I forgot. Maybe a book or an article on the web. – Makoto Kato Nov 14 at 10:44
While this example is for a rather elementary question, it outlines how a question can be well structured, providing relevant information and how the OP was thinking through their understanding. It allows those answering the question a framework to understand where the confusion was coming from and address the points that would help to clarify the problem for the OP. The only change I would have suggested, though I let it slide, was that a book and author citation should have been provided for the quote.
Here is an excellent example of a somewhat speculative question on Evolution and Natural Selection that provided an excellent opportunity to provide an outstanding answer. Your questions did not live up to this kind of standard and unlike Viziionary, you handled yourself in a way that did not show that you had an interest in hearing what others had to say on the subject.
Transcript of Comments
"It has been pointed out to you on several occasions that your understanding of evolutionary theory is incomplete" I think a question should be evaluated only by the content of it. It is absurd to delete a question just because the questioner is an amateur in biology. – Makoto Kato 1 hour ago
"You have also been asked to provide sources for your questions, which you then do not." I edited the question and included a source for my question. However, I don't think a lack of a source can be a proper reason for the closure of a question as long as it is a valid question. – Makoto Kato 1 hour ago
You are only continuing to prove the point that you are combative and unwilling to take constructive criticism. There is plenty of room and patience on this board for 'novice' experience. But you have demonstrated no intention of actually learning from your questions or the answers given, and for that, rightly so, the community has decide for that there is no room. This is a volunteer run site where you decide to either become a part of the community and abide by the rules or face being ostracized. The people who gave you the warning make the rules. If you continue to fight, then goodbye. – AMR 52 mins ago
You provided it after 8 days, only after your other questions were closed and after I pointed out to you that you had not done it. You had more time to post this argument than to provide the reference first. If you were serious, you would have taken care of all the criticisms leveled before you ever wrote a meta post. And you deleted your comment to Chris, so as to make it seem like you were only just getting around to it. – AMR 46 mins ago
"You are only continuing to prove the point that you are combative and unwilling to take constructive criticism." You seem to misunderstand me. I think mutation and natural selection are important factors of evolution. However, there might be other unknown important factors. Who knows? In any case, a question should be judged only by its content. Whether the questioner is an amateur or not should not affect the judgment. – Makoto Kato 35 mins ago
Biology is an objective fact based science, and "well I think" questions/answers fall under philosophy, even if the subject is biology. The only thing that actually helps is to formulate a hypothesis, then test it experimentally, if it is not generally accepted fact. Otherwise "what-ifs" and "who knows" are not productive, especially here. If you have an idea that you think can be verified by the experiment, then go formulate the hypothesis, do the experiment, and if you have exceptional data, then prove it. Plenty of top caliber scientist have tried to disprove Evolution and failed. – AMR 19 mins ago
StackExchange Philosophy is to limit subjective questions and based on the estimation of the community, your questions do not live up to the standards that allow for outstanding subjective questions that are rarely, but sometimes welcomed. blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective – AMR 16 mins ago