By arguing the literal use of "since", it allows for smarmy rationalization and plausible denial of the statement's implied meaning.

The "implication" is a subjective interpretation. The objective meaning is clear.

This thread reminds me of the "definition of is" issue from a number of years back.

The objective meaning is clear only in a totally objective (ie, unrealistic) scenario. I've read plenty of Rekna's writing here and I've no reason to believe that Rekna meant the statement in a literally objective sense. And I've certainly no expectation for anyone to take it as such. Your argument is bordering on the pedantic.

You can't justify projecting your unsupportable interpretation on Rekna. My argument is somewhat pedantic, but it's still correct.

The interpretation is totally supportable as is evidenced by the majority of reactions to it here, not to mention the reactions that prompted the OP. And I'm not trying to pin anything on Rekna. I'm saying that he/she is not in more of an objective bubble than anyone else.