Are we writing in different languages or is it so hard to admit that you might have misspoke? First you say we said the same thing then when I point the thing I find issue with you say that I lost the plot, which is it? You basically said that the neurological aspect of stuttering is inconsequential, as hazardous as the penis's size and this shows your ignorance on the subject so I tried to explain why your opinion is wrong and how complex the reality of it is: the cause of stuttering is never a straight answer because it is a mix of multiple factors and the neurological aspect is an extremely important one. Saying that correlation doesn't equate causation is just a serious sounding cliché phrase that's very true but also totally misused in your case. Worse is you don't even try to explain your opinion further to justify what you wrote, even if we agree on some points, you clearly have a faulty understanding of the matter but you're so convinced in your words that you'd rather not reformulate them or give up on the absurd ones, you just go on like this.