forgive me, i was unaware this was a semantic argument<p>i thought your issue was with coherence &#x27;resolving&#x27; multiple routes simultaneously, specifically the simultaneous aspect<p>by using the word &#x27;search&#x27; i was anything but suggesting that we should anthropomophise lightning, 
but i&#x27;d argue the article failed to do the same for light<p>i created an opportunity for you to lash out by using a vague term to simplify a description and i apologise to posterity for that<p>but you&#x27;re derailing any substantial discussion on the science with a strawman<p>if you read the study the words: &#x27;think&#x27;,&#x27;choose&#x27;, and &#x27;search&#x27;; are completely vacant from the paper.. you&#x27;re projecting