12 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRobbie retorics. When he doesn't have an answer, then accuse others to not answer. Result? He think he doesn't have to answer. Doesn't work when he has never asked a question.
ill take my coat and leave with pleasure! when you have concocted a 'plausible', answer to my question, then I would be glad to hear it!
Do you ask because you want to know, or do you just want to divert the hard issues that you don't understand into something else?
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasjust try to answer the question, shall you, without your usual tantrums and operatics. are you sure you dont sing opera, i think you would make a great diva.
Robbie retorics. When he doesn't have an answer, then accuse others to not answer. Result? He think he doesn't have to answer. Doesn't work.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhen you want me to answer a question then you have to put the question first? too hard to understand? Like evolution? Too hard to understand for a underqualified mind as yours?
just try to answer the question, shall you, without your usual tantrums and operatics. are you sure you dont sing opera, i think you would make a great diva.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasok Fabs, once again, if we have existed as humans for so long, why is it only recently, as recently as five thousand years that we have developed the 'ability', for written speech?
When you want me to answer a question then you have to put the question first? too hard to understand? Like evolution? Too hard to understand for a underqualified mind as yours?
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't like you call me any flimsy names, flobbie carottie! When you know how to behave, then you can ask the same question again.
ok Fabs, once again, if we have existed as humans for so long, why is it only recently, as recently as five thousand years that we have developed the 'ability', for written speech?
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by galveston75Imagination proves nothing. The vast amount of evidence that is out there if you can be bothered to read the literature goes quite a long way to proving things, though.
But imagination proves nothing and the fossil record certianly doesn't prove a thing. And the thousands of millions of fossils that it would take to represent all this gradual progression of changes that animals and humans that are alive today would have to make to get where we are now......there are none.
It amazes me with the shows they have on TV s ...[text shortened]... nimals changing from one look to another.
Yes that is imagination and that's all it is....
In addition, no alternative hypothesis has been provided that has any evidence for it whatsoever. A single fossil that suggests evolution is true is, by itself, more than any competing theory has to support it. The argument against evolution boils down to "I don't believe that could have happened".
12 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThat one's easy. It wasn't until humans lived together in large enough groups, and trade became important enough, that there was any purpose to written language. What use has it to a hunter gatherer on a subsistence lifestyle?
ok Fabs, once again, if we have existed as humans for so long, why is it only recently, as recently as five thousand years that we have developed the 'ability', for written speech?
12 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by mtthwtherefore are you saying that for hundreds of thousands of years humans had the capacity to write things down, but rather chose not to or had no necessity to?, anyone else buy this? and actually i do not think that your argument is very strong, for we are gregarious by nature and taking the time speculated upon, large groups would have readily existed, for how many would you need? next try please!
That one's easy. It wasn't until humans lived together in large enough groups, and trade became important enough, that there was any purpose to written language. What use has it to a hunter gatherer on a subsistence lifestyle?
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI think you have an inablilty to actually learn. Time and time again you keep bringing up the same points, and time and time again we go through them, only for a few months down the line you bring them up again as if it's a new idea. I'm not sure whether you're just incrfedibly stupid or have some sort of selective amnesia disorder.
ok Fabs, once again, if we have existed as humans for so long, why is it only recently, as recently as five thousand years that we have developed the 'ability', for written speech?
The short answer is the evolution of the human brain.
History of writing, learn something. Phonetic writing was developed indendently in four different civilisations in the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing
12 Nov 09
3 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobto my knowledge none has ever addressed this Nooby, perhaps you can point out where you have addressed it before? therefore our minds have simply developed more in the last five thousand years than the previous five hundred thousand years, anyone else buy this? i suggest also that you return to bed and awake in a better frame of mind 🙂
I think you have an inablilty to actually learn. Time and time again you keep bringing up the same points, and time and time again we go through them, only for a few months down the line you bring them up again as if it's a new idea. I'm not sure whether you're just incrfedibly stupid or have some sort of selective amnesia disorder.
The short answer i ...[text shortened]... four different civilisations in the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing
incrfedibly stupid , i see that its still evolving! or are you now speaking Welsh?
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieActually that is simply a case of you not understanding what I am saying. My claim is undeniable fact. Every living thing is a link between its parent and its children - unless it has no children. Every current species is a link between what it was before and what it will be, unless it goes extinct. You cannot deny this - unless you want to look stupid 🙂
all animals that have ever existed are links? dogma and postulation masquerading as science!
Whether a given animal is a link between two other animals is another matter altogether.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadok, I apologise, to you and to Fabian 🙂
Actually that is simply a case of you not understanding what I am saying. My claim is undeniable fact. Every living thing is a link between its parent and its children - unless it has no children. Every current species is a link between what it was before and what it will be, unless it goes extinct. You cannot deny this - unless you want to look stupid 🙂
Whether a given animal is a link between two other animals is another matter altogether.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOkay, you didn't want to answer my question becuase you ask me one question first that I didn't answer. Now it turned out that you didn't ask me at all, so this is black on white that you tried to lie to me, to us, in order to get a cheap retoric point.
ok, I apologise, to you and to Fabian 🙂
You lost. You lied. Time for an excuse for this one. Else I can say that christian fundamentalists creationists are all liars. Becuase you are. I'm waiting for an excuse...
12 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIn 63 yrs man went from flying the first aeroplane to landing on the moon, and you doubt what man can achieve ie. writing.
to my knowledge none has ever addressed this Nooby, perhaps you can point out where you have addressed it before? therefore our minds have simply developed more in the last five thousand years than the previous five hundred thousand years, anyone else buy this? i suggest also that you return to bed and awake in a better frame of mind 🙂
incrfedibly stupid , i see that its still evolving! or are you now speaking Welsh?
You creationists view our ancestors in a very poor light.
You and i have been through this subject before, and i am in a perfectly good mood.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasas far as i am aware i am the one asking the questions around here, your insinuations are defamatory as per usual and reek of pompousness to the hilt, i therefore retract my apology in your case! what shall you do now with your insinuations? can i suggest one or two avenues of thought that you may find interesting?
Okay, you didn't want to answer my question becuase you ask me one question first that I didn't answer. Now it turned out that you didn't ask me at all, so this is black on white that you tried to lie to me, to us, in order to get a cheap retoric point.
You lost. You lied. Time for an excuse for this one. Else I can say that christian fundamentalists creationists are all liars. Becuase you are. I'm waiting for an excuse...