Again do not derail the thread or take jabs at someone or their family, enough is enough.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The problem. Is that Larry is a condescending , egotistical , narcissistic asshole.Greetings,
What's your problem, John?
Aron asked you a series of yes-or-no questions to try and find out where your acceptance-level ends, that's all. You didn't answer his earlier yes-or-no question, despite his asking it several times, and even when I asked you to answer it, you didn't.
Now you behave in a defensive manner when given a questionnaire to answer.
I think Spar was right earlier when he said that you don't want to give up your cherished beliefs, hence your reaction when faced with an either-or scenario.
I think you should apologise to Aron for your ad hominem, it's quite unbecoming of someone who complained about profanity.
Kindest regards,
James
When you went off like a fanboy pussy defending your beloved Larry. You opted right out of my engagement with any conversation of the topic.And thus all the concern trolling about profanity is exposed as being the manipulations of an intellectually bankrupt lying little shit-eater who wouldn't know honesty if it was fucking him up the arse. Show yourself out, there's a good twat.
I appreciate what you're trying to do. But Larry is just an unreasonable douchebag.Greetings,
Might I make a suggestion before I go to bed?
If John deletes his ad hominem post, and follow-ups, the rest of us - or the Mods - will delete our responses, including this one.
John can then answer Aron's questions.
As there are three sections to Aron's questionnaire, he only has to answer three questions - one from each section, with a "No", the ones where his acceptance-level breaks down.
Does this make sense? Is this acceptable to you, John?
Good night.
Kindest regards,
James
Hey, we agree on something. You are a douche.Your mother told me I was a douche.
I said I thought it was a little harsh, but it did explain why she smelled better after I fucked her.
When you went off like a fanboy pussy defending your beloved Larry. You opted right out of my engagement with any conversation of the topic.
Nothing was said to you. It was between me and another member.
I have zero interest in answering any of his questions.
A long jumper can train and add inches to his jump (micro) however even if he trains for years he will never be able to jump a mile (macro).
I never came here to address the phylogeny challenge.That's precisely what we've been saying for this entire thread: you have absolutely no interest in answering any questions.
What makes that even more difficult to grasp is that you supposedly came here to address the Phylogeny Challenge which literally requires only 1 thing of you - to answer questions.
What makes you think those two are mutually exclusive? In fact, those two are pretty much intertwined. He invited you to have a conversation to convince you of common ancestry. In order to do that, he must ask you which organisms you think are related, and which are not, and WHY you think that. How did you make that determination? That's the phylogeny challenge.I never came here to address the phylogeny challenge. Larry made a claim in another group.
"In 12 exchanges I would totally accept universal common ancestry and realise how ridiculous creationism was and that I would not be able to believe that I ever considered creation"
No. The challenge /claim was made and the 12 exchanges were supposed to be with Larry.asking
P.s. who the fuck is Larry?I have yet to receive answers to my questions as well...
...or do you think anyone who is asking questions to you is a an "unreasonable, condescending, egotistical, narcissistic asshole"?
What makes you think those two are mutually exclusive? In fact, those two are pretty much intertwined. He invited you to have a conversation to convince you of common ancestry. In order to do that, he must ask you which organisms you think are related, and which are not, and WHY you think that. How did you make that determination? That's the phylogeny challenge.
What you are doing now is analogous to accepting a conversation on the existence of forests, but you refuse to answer questions about trees.
You don't get to ignore relevant questions after accepting to have an interactive exchange with someone.
P.S. Who the fuck is "Larry"?
No. The challenge /claim was made and the 12 exchanges were supposed to be with Larry.
It should have been done in a private message setting. I suggested this to Larry. He wanted it public. I was not here for a group discussion.
You don't know Lawrence Nelson. Aka Aron Ra. Aka Absolute abrasive tool.
This is still the most fundamental error you're making, and you don't seem able to get past it.
You never need to have long-jumped in your life to jump a mile, assuming you're allowed to make a series of jumps (generation by generation) of any size, they will eventually add up to a mile.
That's analogous to the scientific theory of evolution, whereas what you're contending is actually how Pokemon works.
Populations evolve, not individuals. If you can't grasp this, then you literally have no hope of ever understanding the cornerstone of modern Biology.