We got off on the wrong foot and I'm sorry that this happened (my fault entirely). I stand behind what I've said, as do you. Peace offering: here's some elfnips. It's quite tasties.
As for patience and questions and so on, yes, you've been fairly patient. I have an example, though, that might be helpful. This past summer, I studied abroad in Italy (and disliked almost every moment of it, but that's a story for another time). I ended up talking at great length to one of the two American professors (the one I didn't have as a teacher) and we came onto the subject of tests and assignments. She told me that she just had an assignment returned in which none of the students did what she had wanted. As with many other teachers I've met, she was of the opinion that if a good portion of the class does not understand an instruction, then she hasn't explained it well. On the other hand, if a good portion of the class understands but there is one student who still doesn't quite get it, that student can be taken aside for more instruction.
Most of the repeat questions, as far as I've noticed, have been from many people between your posts - that is, we're essentially asking the same questions at the same times. A few, such as the question about energy in relation to order/chaos, have been asked a few times. In this case, there's still something we don't quite understand.
To put it another way, I don't believe you. So what? The fact that I'm still asking you questions about your belief is, from my point of view, the most respectful thing I could do. Then again, I'm really enthused by Socrates and one of my majors is in Philosophy. If I come upon something "new" and I don't have a question, it either means that I'm uninterested (which is disrespectful) or I've grasped it entirely, meaning it really wasn't all that new. In general, I have a few ways of tackling arguments: the glowing approach of enlightening joy on one end of the spectrum, the anger at someone misusing logic to make an affront against some value on the other, a middle ground of stern faced "please try again" in the middle when encountering someone's argument that isn't up to snuff but could be with prodding, and to outright ignore it because it's not worth my time/energy. I've gone across the spectrum in this, but as it's progressed it's drawn closer to the bright and shiny end. I can't say that I'm going to be overjoyed at discussing this topic, but I am sincerely interested in hearing (at great detail, with metaphysical [philosophical sense] and physical [scientific sense] theory) what you have to say. A good number of arguments (jargon; layman's term would be discussions) I've had and have observed (in print and in voice) have been mainly "nitpicking." Generally, if everyone understands all terms in exactly the same way, logic prevails fairly quickly. Few do.
Point being, yes, we might be asking the same questions and "nitpicking" on those, but we'd expect the same from others (especially if we thought they cared) and in asking the same questions we're wanting more details (as much as you can provide). It can be frustrating, but I find the best things in life require effort and thus a modicum of frustration. I agree with the Greeks: pain and suffering is also experience (the word "paschw," from which we get our word "paschal," means both "I suffer" and "I experience).