Trump crying about Stephen Curry... lol

[hillelslovak87]

I came for the silly-billy beta racists deflecting..... but I stayed for the evolution debate.

Debate=humans debating what is apparently a chimp on a word processor

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

I addressed the points of your previous post, something you have failed to do with every question and every proof from everyone you have been arguing with in this thread.

Go ahead, compile our argument, make a poll thread here on sherdog, and ask people who of us sounds like an utter moron, incapable of assessing evidence. I dare you.....

You argument is as simple as Steve Harvey's, you just flailed way longer.

I've been responding to everything. I'm telling you now, I won't respond to that kind of post again. Im here, interested in discussion, let's not stifle it

 

[hillelslovak87]

I've been responding to everything. I'm telling you now, I won't respond to that kind of post again. Im here, interested in discussion, let's not stifle it

We cant have a real discussion when you have not educated yourself on the issue in any manner, and still feel the confidence to dismiss the evidence, and claim at every point that it's not good enough to satisfy your absurd criteria. Criteria, mind you, that you dont apply to your own candidate belief.

The mere fact that you uttered "Show me a species becoming another species" shows you have zero interest in an honest appraisal of the evidence.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

We cant have a real discussion when you have not educated yourself on the issue in any manner, and still feel the confidence to dismiss the evidence, and claim at every point that it's not good enough to satisfy your absurd criteria. Criteria, mind you, that you dont apply to your own candidate belief.

The mere fact that you uttered "Show me a species becoming another species" shows you have zero interest in an honest appraisal of the evidence.

You finally showed some pictures and we didn't even discuss them further then 1 post. You've made 10+ posts stating how obvious it all is, and 1 half attempt at showing evidence (which i questioned) And you disappeared on it.

I don't believe I uttered that. If you're gonna put quotations, they should be an actual quote

 

[m52nickerson]

Ruh roh

He's mistaken, the egg came first.

He's in the same book though, you're coloring in crayon. Muh gooooooooooood.

Are we talking about the egg in a general sense or a chicken egg? The egg as a reproductive structure obviously came first. The first chicken egg would have come from the first Gallus Gallus (species) considered to be G.g. domesticus (subspecies)

 

[Falsedawn]

Are we talking about the egg in a general sense or a chicken egg? The egg as a reproductive structure obviously came first. The first chicken egg would have come from the first Gallus Gallus (species) considered to be G.g. domesticus (subspecies)

Well, I was thinking about the initial egg that birthed the G.g. domesticus subspecies. Even if it came from the ancestral population, you would almost have to consider it a chicken egg since the chicken is what came out.

I'm not dogging you on that, believe me. You clearly have enough understanding of evolutionary theory to comprehend the semantics of that argument.

 

[Strychnine]

Who's made peaceful protests impossible?

I think that the ability to protest and having a protest that is meaningful, focused and calls to a specific action and result are two different things. This protest is not only unpatriotic and disrespectful, but, worse than that, it has no meaning, no goal, no endgame. I mean I heard frigging Max Kellerman (yes I know he's a joke) talk about how we wanted to change mindsets about social realities and how slavery, yes the legacy of slavery was the root cause of all the evil that the protest is about.

Does anyone realise how disenpowering this ideology ultimately is? Not for white people but for black people. Which is why people like Kellerman and Gregg Popovitch are the biggest racists.

What President Trump is insinuating is that if someone protests the Flag/Anthem, they should be penalized/fired.

Spoiler

You can't penalize/punish someone for exercising their constitutional right to a peaceful protest. I may not agree with them taking a knee during the Anthem, but I'm not going to hate them/call for their heads either. Because if we do...

It's no longer America.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Well, I was thinking about the initial egg that birthed the G.g. domesticus subspecies. Even if it came from the ancestral population, you would almost have to consider it a chicken egg since the chicken is what came out.

I'm not dogging you on that, believe me. You clearly have enough understanding of evolutionary theory to comprehend the semantics of that argument.

Since evolution happens between population species and not individual organisms there was really no first egg. There was a population that we refer to as chickens and there was likely both eggs and fully grown chickens within it.

 

[Falsedawn]

Since evolution happens between population species and not individual organisms there was really no first egg. There was a population that we refer to as chickens and there was likely both eggs and fully grown chickens within it.

Well, we're not talking about a "first" egg per se, moreso which came first in the grand scheme of things, but particularly with respect to chickens.

The amniotic egg definitely came first so any species that came into existence from those ancestral populations is being born into that egg. That's why it's kind of a semantic argument. The egg came first, but whether or not you consider that egg a product of junglefowl populations (leading to chickens being born), or a product of chicken populations (being that chickens are what was born from that egg) is a matter of perspective.

The question itself is somewhat nonsensical because in the grand scheme of things, the amniotic egg far predates modern chickens anyway.

 

[TheStruggle]

I'm sorry is this thread still about Curry not getting invited to the cool kids table?

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

What President Trump is insinuating is that if someone protests the Flag/Anthem, they should be penalized/fired.

Spoiler

You can't penalize/punish someone for exercising their constitutional right to a peaceful protest. I may not agree with them taking a knee during the Anthem, but I'm not going to hate them/call for their heads either. Because if we do...

It's no longer America.

I was strongly against it until I heard a player who's also a SEAL (if I recall correctly) explain that his teammate wanted to protest but show it in a way that specifically doesn't disrespect the flag or soldiers.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Well, we're not talking about a "first" egg per se, moreso which came first in the grand scheme of things, but particularly with respect to chickens.

The amniotic egg definitely came first so any species that came into existence from those ancestral populations is being born into that egg. That's why it's kind of a semantic argument. The egg came first, but whether or not you consider that egg a product of junglefowl populations (leading to chickens being born), or a product of chicken populations (being that chickens are what was born from that egg) is a matter of perspective.

The question itself is somewhat nonsensical because in the grand scheme of things, the amniotic egg far predates modern chickens anyway.

Definitely eggs came way before chickens, tou·ché

 

[Only Here for Attachments]

Someone needs to get Trump off Twitter, this is getting very embarrassing

 

[hillelslovak87]

You finally showed some pictures and we didn't even discuss them further then 1 post. You've made 10+ posts stating how obvious it all is, and 1 half attempt at showing evidence (which i questioned) And you disappeared on it.

I don't believe I uttered that. If you're gonna put quotations, they should be an actual quote

First off, I've seen you bring up Darwin, and say he did not believe in his own theory. This alone, an old rickety argument, has been used by the faithful since right after his death. All of these deathbed recantations were shown to be forged by religious figures, and were exposed by Darwin's daughter. The mere fact that you state such absurdities shows you have zero interest in actually being truthful in regards to this issue.

"Show 1 thing becoming a completely different looking thing gradually."

You are simply not engaging with the information on natural selection in a rational manner. There is no first mammal or first reptile. We have supremely discordant populations of reptiles in different environments developing hugely discrepant mutations in their genes, and adapting to the environments they live in. It's not a reptile shitting out a dog, or whatever you seem to believe.

You are displaying a stunning lack of mental maturity with your lines of non reasoning. you have been presented with an incredible amount of evidence, even parred down into wiki form, and when presented, you pretend as if it does not exist.

The rest of us could be convinced mammals came at the same time as reptiles if you could show us a mammal sharing common timed genetic markers with reptiles, and find it in the geological strata alongside reptiles. All the evidence points to a clearly understood evolutionary line from reptiles to mammals and avians, but if you could disprove this, you would be a superstar with unlimited funding.

You, on the other hand, have been presented with the evidence, and routinely insist that you are open to the evidence, whilst at the same time not reading it and dismissing every example that people have brought forth, despite knowing absolutely nothing about which you speak.

You know how everyone knows this? By the terms you use, by the elementary 19th century arguments, and the arrogant and ignorant dismissal of information provided.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Someone needs to get Trump off Twitter, this is getting very embarrassing

His base loves it.
He only plays to them, and they wouldn't stop loving him even if he personally threw widows and orphans off the ESB.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

First off, I've seen you bring up Darwin, and say he did not believe in his own theory. This alone, an old rickety argument, has been used by the faithful since right after his death. All of these deathbed recantations were shown to be forged by religious figures, and were exposed by Darwin's daughter. The mere fact that you state such absurdities shows you have zero interest in actually being truthful in regards to this issue.

"Show 1 thing becoming a completely different looking thing gradually."

You are simply not engaging with the information on natural selection in a rational manner. There is no first mammal or first reptile. We have supremely discordant populations of reptiles in different environments developing hugely discrepant mutations in their genes, and adapting to the environments they live in. It's not a reptile shitting out a dog, or whatever you seem to believe.

You are displaying a stunning lack of mental maturity with your lines of non reasoning. you have been presented with an incredible amount of evidence, even parred down into wiki form, and when presented, you pretend as if it does not exist.

The rest of us could be convinced mammals came at the same time as reptiles if you could show us a mammal sharing common timed genetic markers with reptiles, and find it in the geological strata alongside reptiles. All the evidence points to a clearly understood evolutionary line from reptiles to mammals and avians, but if you could disprove this, you would be a superstar with unlimited funding.

You, on the other hand, have been presented with the evidence, and routinely insist that you are open to the evidence, whilst at the same time not reading it and dismissing every example that people have brought forth, despite knowing absolutely nothing about which you speak.

You know how everyone knows this? By the terms you use, by the elementary 19th century arguments, and the arrogant and ignorant dismissal of information provided.

The rest isn't worth responding to as you opened up with a lie. I never said he didn't believe his own theory. I explained he realized it had it's issues.
You claimed God was wrong in Genesis 1. You haven't even come close to proving that. You did kinda give up in favor of evolution discussion though. We can go back to talking about actual evidence if you like?

 

[hillelslovak87]

The rest isn't worth responding to as you opened up with a lie. I never said he didn't believe his own theory. I explained he realized it had it's issues.
You claimed God was wrong in Genesis 1. You haven't even come close to proving that. You did kinda give up in favor of evolution discussion though. We can go back to talking about actual evidence if you like?

I guess you're right on Darwin, by means of you writing "The phylogenic tree of life is backward engineered. You cannot trace one present day complex animal to its original single celled form with certainty. The whole macro side of the theory is a fragile house of cards"

The facile nature of your claim was made fun of, then you wrote
"The founder of the theory himself admitted it"

You display your ignorance even on the level of the man who created the theory. Do you know that Darwin made a lot of predictions that were disproven by evolutionary biologists? He says what it would take for him to change his mind. This is an honesty that you cannot stoop to.

Darwin said that if one could find a mammal within a strata we know mammals did not exist during, or if he saw some animal not conforming to it's environment, it would cast doubt on his theory. NONE OF THAT HAS HAPPENED.

Your bible simply has mammals before reptiles. You have refused to look at the myriad proofs that multiple people provided you that show conclusively that the biblical claim is false. Your ignorance and arrogance is astounding to me, and I guarantee it is astounding to the other people you have put your head into the sand against.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/06/human-hair-bird-feathers-came-reptile-scales
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2009-09-genetic-link-reptile-human-heart.html

https://news.ucsc.edu/2014/12/crocodile-genomes.html

Inb4 "Too much evidence, so I'm not gonna read any of it."

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

I guess you're right on Darwin, by means of you writing "The phylogenic tree of life is backward engineered. You cannot trace one present day complex animal to its original single celled form with certainty. The whole macro side of the theory is a fragile house of cards"

The facile nature of your claim was made fun of, then you wrote
"The founder of the theory himself admitted it"

You display your ignorance even on the level of the man who created the theory. Do you know that Darwin made a lot of predictions that were disproven by evolutionary biologists? He says what it would take for him to change his mind. This is an honesty that you cannot stoop to.

Darwin said that if one could find a mammal within a strata we know mammals did not exist during, or if he saw some animal not conforming to it's environment, it would cast doubt on his theory. NONE OF THAT HAS HAPPENED.

Your bible simply has mammals before reptiles. You have refused to look at the myriad proofs that multiple people provided you that show conclusively that the biblical claim is false. Your ignorance and arrogance is astounding to me, and I guarantee it is astounding to the other people you have put your head into the sand against.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/06/human-hair-bird-feathers-came-reptile-scales
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2009-09-genetic-link-reptile-human-heart.html

https://news.ucsc.edu/2014/12/crocodile-genomes.html

Inb4 "Too much evidence, so I'm not gonna read any of it."

I was referring to the macro side being built on a house of cards. He admitted as much in different words.

I don't care if he changed his mind. I never said he did. His cognitive dissonance had nothing to do with your evidence being compelling or not

I don't need to disprove evolution. I never intended to. You're attempting to use it as a proof the Bible is wrong. You haven't been very convincing with all your fluff and ad hominems. Your ego prevents you from having an edifying discussion

 

[hillelslovak87]

I was referring to the macro side being built on a house of cards. He admitted as much in different words.

I don't care if he changed his mind. I never said he did. His cognitive dissonance had nothing to do with your evidence being compelling or not

I don't need to disprove evolution. I never intended to. You're attempting to use it as a proof the Bible is wrong. You haven't been very convincing with all your fluff and ad hominems. Your ego prevents you from having an edifying discussion

And Darwin was proven wrong
https://www.wired.com/2014/12/fantastically-wrong-thing-evolution-darwin-really-screwed/
Weird what happens when you're a scientist, and dont rely upon revelation, and actually do the scientific work.

Yes, it's everyone else who's arrogant. It's everyone else, who have actually learned about earth sciences, we're the wrong ones. The Bible, that places mammals before Reptiles, is right despite the clear evidence.

Once again, you fail to address, or reflexively dismiss the information provided.

You are patently dishonest, and Jesus would be ashamed of your action.

 

[Bargey]

What President Trump is insinuating is that if someone protests the Flag/Anthem, they should be penalized/fired.

Spoiler

You can't penalize/punish someone for exercising their constitutional right to a peaceful protest. I may not agree with them taking a knee during the Anthem, but I'm not going to hate them/call for their heads either. Because if we do...

It's no longer America.

Whats that got to do with anything i said? I asked what the protests are attempting to accomplish. And you waffled on about rights. The Constitution has very little to do with this.