Sorry for confusing you with logic China, but you wrote, "An intelligent mind is always searching, learning, never concluding; the moment it concludes, it stops being intelligent." Then we had this exchange:...not lately Dexter; you do such a good job.
Me: That sure looks like a conclusion to me.
You: It sure is Dexter Sinister; and an intelligent mind avoids this predicament.
In other words, you claimed that coming to a conclusion is unintelligent (so presumably we could fairly say it's stupid), then agreed that you'd come to one. You've created a self-referential, self-refuting paradox: by your own logic, you stopped being intelligent when you came to the conclusion that coming to a conclusion is a predicament the intelligent mind avoids. Do you really expect anyone to take seriously an argument that self-referentially claims to be stupid?