On May 3, 7:58=A0am, "~sappy*graceless~" <veron...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> whined:
> "Kelsey Bjarnason" <kbjarna...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> skrev i
meldingnews:m0jme5-2s8.l=
n1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
> > [snips]
>
> > On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 05:10:29 +0200, ~saba*gracile~ wrote:
>
> >>> But wait, how can that be? =A0He's saying such things _do_ work,
_are_=
> >>> useful, whereas you quote him in such a manner as to make it appear
> >>> he's saying just the opposite.
>
> >> Look, noone denies hard science, like evidence of adaptation or
biology=
..
> >> It's precicly in these things you find that evolution theory is only
a
> >> theory
>
> > Once again, you shout from the rooftops that you are an uneducated,
> > drooling mouth breather. =A0Why do you enjoy exposing your ignorance
to =
the
> > world? =A0Do you gain something by announcing your lack of a clue?
>
> > Let me fill you in, since you don't seem to grasp even the most basic
> > concepts involved.
>
> > Evolution is not a theory. =A0It is a process. =A0Or, if you prefer,
it =
is a
> > side effect of a process. =A0Either way, it's as real as a punch in
the
> > nose, just as gravity is real, or electricity.
>
> > Evolution theory is a theory - actually, several theories - attempting
t=
o
> > explain how and why evolution works, just as a theory of gravity
attempt=
s
> > to explain how and why gravity works.
>
> > Evolution theory is not the same thing as evolution, despite the fact
th=
e
> > challenged and vacuous entity you so laughingly think of as your brain
> > thinks otherwise.
>
> > It's not like you haven't been around these parts long enough to grasp
> > this distinction.
>
> >>, but not what it's made out to be by your ranks, an overexpanded
> >> dogma built on wishful thinking from these hard facts.
>
> > Er, that's not what our side is making it out to be, we're making it
out=
> > to be science. =A0The whining about it being dogma, about it being
wishf=
ul
> > thinking, is *always* your side's issue - as in, you folks are the
ones
> > making it out to be a dogma built on wishful thinking.
>
> > It's a nice try, but you're not even bright enough to figure out what
> > side is saying what, which really doesn't argue well for your ability
to=
> > say much of anything on the matter.
>
> >> Then gradualism
> >> doesn't work, has never worked, or will ever work or be found to have
> >> happened.
>
> > Who said gradualism doesn't work, has never worked, will never work?
=A0=
Oh,
> > wait, that's you, but then, you're sufficiently devoid of clues on the
> > matter as to make pronouncement after pronouncement, not a one having
> > anything to do with reality.
>
> > You really should consider getting an education before spewing off
your
> > nonsense.
>
> >> That is the reasonlable and grounded theory founded and
> >> supported by biology and hard science. Evolutionism takes off and
lands=
> >> somewhere completely unfounded, that's what these folks are admitting
> >> to.
>
> > No idea what "evolutionism" is, nor how it applies. =A0Nor do I have
any=
> > idea how your muddle-headed nonsense is supposed to apply to evolution
o=
r
> > evolution theory, as you seem unable to even figure out what the
> > processes, theories and surrounding evidence are, meaning your
> > criticisms, if any, are aimed at a target you apparently cannot see,
let=
> > alone hit.
>
> > Care to eat a book and try again?
>
> What the fuck are you rambling about, say something of substance
> all you have is your arrogance.
And all you have or will _ever_ have is your ignorance.
"I care not much for a man's religion whose dog and cat are not the
better for it". (Abraham Lincoln).
>
> S
>
>
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
