I'm not getting defensive, my friend. I was merely challenging you to think through the logical implications of hypercomputation. What many people miss is this: hypercomputation leads to living paradoxes. They might then have to bend over backwards to explain why these paradoxes are not possible, but that leaves the question of why some things are hypercomputable, and some are not.

I wasn't even talking about hypercomputation specifically. I was talking more in generalities about computer science and things we hold to be "reality/absolutes".