Guano (3)

Dirty penguin

Comments that seem to me to be in violation of the game rules will be moved here, and closed to further comment. Do not regard having your post moved here as a reprimand, merely as a referee’s whistle. 🙂

Feel free to comment on them at any other peanut gallery of your choice.

[New page as links no longer work properly on Guano (2)]

Post n° 56711

464 thoughts on “Guano (3)

  1. Entropy:

    You’re asking a guy who thinks that the moon and a virus are indistinguishable from each other.

    Are you questioning his intellect?

  2. Alan Fox: I don’t think anyone here considers what Corneel writes equivalent to what you write. 😅

    You’re illogically jumping from genetics to “evolution”. I’m not.

    You’re persistent in your wrongness, aren’t you? Genetics is the beating heart of evolutionary biology.

    Are you questioning his intelligence?

  3. Alan Fox: I’m still struggling to see the particular connection between me getting a vaccination and “an Israeli soldier taking potshots at Palestinian toddlers!”

    Because you are dumb. Very dumb. Not that this is an insult. Some people may take it as a compliment. But that’s why.

  4. Corneel,

    That’s your explanation?

    Let me ask you a serious question. Are you as much of a scumbag as Jock? Because Jock knows full well he is wrong, but his ego is so pathetic that he will say virtually anything to avoid admitting it. He just can’t do it. So he is making shit up over and over. I have proven he is wrong. I have shown you the quotes. His own graph-as fake as it is-shows he is wrong. But in life he doesn’t care about how he deals with people. He is probably the same in his work. Protecting his ego comes before anything-so he just can’t stomach being honest. He is profoundly wrong. Exactly what I said is true is true. He has been weaseling since day one. You just aren’t sharp enough to notice.

    So are you the same as Jock? I have shown you the wikipedia page that shows he is wrong (and when I wrote this post I didn’t even know a wikipedia page existed. But I still knew I was right. I just got lucky that Wikipedia confirmed it for me? That’s your contention?). I have shown you in the video where the person in the video says he is wrong! Oh, but, but, but, he can make graphs. Wow! Aren’t you impressed?

    So, are you the same character as Jock?

  5. Corneel,

    So just so you know how wrong you are, and what a gutless person Jock is, let me just remind you how and why he is wrong. If we were to believe Jocks little fake graphs, I should be able to turn the rubber band into a loop right? An Ant starts at the north pole of this loop (it doesn’t need to be a sphere, a loop will do just fine). What Jock is claiming is that no matter the expansion, as long as the ant keeps walking in one direction he can always make it back to the other end of the circle. Now put that in your mind. Think that over, and then tell me if you believe this? Because if you think this over, and you STILL don’t get it-maybe its not that you are the same scumbag as Jock-maybe you just don’t get it. THIS is why the paradox relies on securing one end, and stretching the ant “forward” on the other.

    Still lost Corneel? Or is it an ego thing?

  6. Since everyone by now must know, other than DNA-jerk, that the gene altering injections called vaccines against covid-19, were never, ever tested for transmission, and it is a relief to know that the dead viruses are not as deadly as the Spanish Flu…
    The point:
    The EU commissioner must have known that the gene therapies will be useless against covid-19 since she ordered 10 doses per head in EU. Can you believe her luck of prediction?

  7. Thanks for this, Erik. Recently, I got caught in the crossfire in another venue. It did have the benefit of my rethinking my attitude to the issue. I don’t have direct third-person experience of trans issues, never in my seven+ decades have I knowingly had contact with a trans person. How hard then for me to understand this from a first- person perspective. I will have more to say.

    I found this article insightful:

  8. I don’t have time currently but I disagree very strongly with several of your points.

  9. Alan Fox: I don’t have direct third-person experience of trans issues, never in my seven+ decades have I knowingly had contact with a trans person.

    Yup, they are so few that it is hardly even possible to form a good empirical-based opinion about them. Which should lead to the question: Should we work towards increasing their numbers in order to gather more empirical data and only then try to arrive at an informed opinion?

    I think that this is one of those topics where metaphysics, logic, and prior empirical knowledge do all the sufficient work of yielding a competent conclusion. You do not need to castrate the population to empirically support the conclusion that castration is bad for society. Okay for some individual self-castrations by mature people who should know better, but certainly not good in any larger scale.

  10. Erik,

    So Erik, have you any third person experience? My encounter elsewhere made me realise how ill-equipped I was to offer any useful input. And reading your OP again confirms my opinion that you are equally if not more ill-informed.

  11. Alan Fox:

    So Erik, have you any third person experience?

    Yes. But here’s the thing: In pretty much all other topics, the correct move is to address the argument, not the person making the argument. But somehow in the gay-and-trans debate the common move is to address the person and invariably suspect he is ill-informed. Sorry, but I am way over-informed on this topic, and if the discussion continues, you will see it proven. Or not, considering that you are self-admittedly ill-informed.

    To keep it cool, I will refrain from typing (much) longer answers than the questions are.

  12. Due to views expressed in this OP and the abhorrence to them expressed by our site owner, I’m closing comments for now.

Comments are closed.