It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Are you sure this was form me LOL.
Actually I was listed with a borderline genus IQ. But you on the other hand, is one that should worry. Not properly assembling questions and to top it all off not using correct punctuation, then turning around and trying to condition people to accept that as ok, tells me you seriously have something wrong with you
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by idmonster
Wow, how emberassing for Katie Perry, Looks like you guys just want to prove everyone wrong. Like I said every one else is wrong and your right. Of course depending on the definition you find, you will also learn that a synonym for this is unearthy. Sorry but I don't know any other clearer definition for aliens.
LMAO Katie Perry
Stick that up there with the bible as "proof"
su·per·nat·u·ral (spr-nchr-l)
adj.
1. Of or relating to existence outside the natural world.
2. Attributed to a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces.
3. Of or relating to a deity.
4. Of or relating to the immediate exercise of divine power; miraculous.
5. Of or relating to the miraculous
I'm assuming you meant Them, you guys really need to clean up your spelling. Anyhow, no your wrong, and I already cleared this up. According to wiki on speciation, they have only witnessed speciation in some aquatic life, viruses, and bacteria, and some insects. Now anything else is your imagination.
If evolution has been seen in then it exists you steaming genius.
Where are you getting said evidence from?
So you say. Shame the evidence says your wrong.
I posted applicable links the first few times than after you refused to accept them I posted the main ones that require further work. It's not my fault you don't know how to research things.
Every link you have provided are you sure? The few links you have provided are all wrong and most you did not bother to read past the title and they showed you to be wrong as well.
What are the details?
Stop sitting on your genius and look back at the lies and drivel you have spewed. You seem to be the only one unaware of them. Which means your a deluded liar.
Dismissing me with nothing needed means the opposite genius.
I am not surprised and they probably really said your beyond help
That would be because I wasn't asking a question, DUH.
You did not end your rubbish with a question mark?
And like I said it all depends on weather or not you consider domesticated animals as part of the wild. So as soon as you answer, then I can answer as well.
No really. One contradicts the other so if you maintain one is the truth then the other is a lie. In one you offer backup from your historical document, the bible. So again. Answer the question which one is the lie.
Nope your wrong.
You failed Pinocchio
Now I don't know what your talking about because everything is a lie to you.
Because now you say it is incorrect. You did not look up what a definition was did you genius.
Oh that would be any food that doesn't naturally grow in the wild.
You have failed to explain it. Which is why you do not try. Provide the definiton of 'unnatural food'.
I understand evolution obviously a lot better than some of the other people on here, Geez some people actually think it involves humans, how messed up is that.
Who else would I be refering too? You have not got a clue about anything have you.
Well I'm not on here to talk about my personal life, I think its embarrasing enough some of you have the gall to admitt you believe in evolution in humans. How sad.
Your obsessed with this counselor thing and now let slip yours is a 'SHE'. You got a thing for yours? Does she visit your ward often?
I do know what the difference is between drugs and meds, duh.
Another lie. here it is
This is where I'm convinced that you were abused as a child. So convinced that I'm lying about something when I'm not. To the best of my knowledge you had made a statement about ants using chemicals in there harvest of food. I don't recall the full details, but just that. Nothing more, nothing less. There is no lie, there is no conspiracy, there is no delusion on my part and there is cover up. It is what it is, and I have repeated to you several times now what has happened. Sorry if you having such a problem understanding this but its actually pretty simple.
The huge excuse for not answering this question does not cover your lie.
Well then I will clear things up for you, IF ants harvested chemicals, which they apparently don't, but if they did, I'm not aware of any unnatural steps the use which would cause it to be unnatural, which is why I said they do it naturally. If you assuming I did a bunch of work and determined that the chemical ants work with is all natural, your false.
You dismissed ants by saying that harvesting chemicals is natural to them when they dont harvest chemicals. I have asked you to explain how you managed to conclude this was natural behaviour when it is not. The fact you have done everything but answer it tells me you lie all the time.
Geez you don't have to talk me up and call me genius, I'm borderline genius, there is a difference you know.
You being confused by something you thought I wrote does not answer how you came to the wrong answer about ants. Again genius, just in case you are confused. Explain how you came to that conclusion.
Well that depends on how you look at it. The way I see it is that if ants had unnatural abilitys, we would surly know about it, and it would be a hot topic for sure. I wasn't aware of anything out of the ordinary aside from them being super strong. So it was a good assumption on my part as I was right.
Edit
Shall I answer for you? Because ants do not fit your fantasy and show it to be false you reject the evidence they offer out of hand as you do for anything that does not suit your argument.
You based your conclusion that ants harvesting chemicals is natural for them on an ignorant assumption with no thought or consideration for the evidence being offered. In anyones book that is being dishonest and incredulous and is how you have approached this thread in general. It is also why you refuse to answer this question
Well since its a single word, thats going to be pretty hard to rearrange. But here it is...
www.talkorigins.org...
words 15 amd 17 if you need to know where they are exactly.
Well its not based on anything provalbe by our standards. Look at it just like how macroevolution is impossible to prove, its the same problem.
I prefer the term understanding.
Well again I have never seen evolution addressed as a scientific theory, but I have found where it is addressed as a theory in addition to a hypothesis.
And compare that to the rest of the species here on earth and find any others that need oxygen aids.
Thats right and the only reason that word is there is because the theory of evolution is the combination of a lot of different theorys. Thats the only reason embraces is there.
When you read...do you simply read the words, or do you read things in context? You missed the word "embraces".
Well when something is listed as a hypothesis, its doesn't have to magically turn into a hypothesis, it allready is one.
And of course it embraces various theories and hypothesis because they are still researching in that field. But just because there are a number of hypotheses related to the theory (!!) of evolution doesn't mean that theory somehow magically turns into a hypothesis.
I see so what your saying is if half of evolution is fake and the other half is proven, its ok, and its all real and proven. I'm sorry I don't see it like that in fact I see it the other way around which is if ANY of it is listed as a hypothesis, then the main theory can't stand as fact.
Imagine some scientist studying the historical migration of some salamander species. This squarely falls into the field of evolution. So he puts forward a hypothesis stating that the salamander travelled from NYC to Florida in a few thousand years. He hasn't proven it yet through objective evidence, it's not a theory until he brings forward evidence...so yeah, it's a hypothesis, one that is embraced by the theory of evolution. But no matter the outcome of this salamander hypothesis, it won't somehow turn the THEORY of evolution into a hypothesis.
I agree and when ANY part of it is a hypothesis, then the theory as a whole can't stand up to argument.
Again, reading things in context is important
Thats right speciation has been observed in some viruses and bacteria.
No it's not. One has been observed both in the lab and in nature...and is used to create modern meds.
With the one little pesky problem of there being a plethora of documentation about it.
The other, aka your intervention theory, has ZERO objective evidence behind it. And that's why speciation is a scientific theory and intervention is at best a hypothesis.
Neither, its just not something I simply believe in, its something I have come to understand. Thats like asking a rapist if he believes in what he has done to others, while a third party can understand but not necesselary agree with the events that have taken place, or at least what they stand for.
What's the difference in your mind? Are you saying this because you believe your "understanding" is factual or rational?
My post before this one gave you a specific link explaining in detail why it is a scientific theory. And no, it's not a hypothesis, you simply didn't read those words in context
Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by SplitInfinity
But why is there no proof that single cells turn into multi cells.
But you can run an experiment that will take days that will change a single celled organism into a Multi-cellular ANIMAL. You can run the experiment or research WIKI....like you just did to prove this. Knowing this is a fact myself and knowing YOU can run the experiment...shows that given specific enviromental conditions, chemistry and exposure to other single celled organisms....again....EVOLUTION can be seen with your own eyes as a Single Celled animal will evolve into a Multicelled animal and continue to evolve to a larger and more complex Multicellular animal.
This is how all animal life...including Humans and Plant Life evolved. If you want me to describe the experiment I will or you can check WIKI....but it is EVOLUTION BABY! LOL! Split Infinity
I see your new and lowest tatic is to pick up on typo's. That is a very unwise move for you genius as you make many and many more from you just make no sense at all.
I'm assuming you meant Them, you guys really need to clean up your spelling. Anyhow, no your wrong, and I already cleared this up. According to wiki on speciation, they have only witnessed speciation in some aquatic life, viruses, and bacteria, and some insects. Now anything else is your imagination.
Well beyond your capability to understand when you cannot even provide definitions for your made up terms
Where are you getting said evidence from?
You must be a genius because for the life of me I cannot see what you get out of constant lying for no reason
I posted applicable links the first few times than after you refused to accept them I posted the main ones that require further work. It's not my fault you don't know how to research things.
As you are too bone idle to look back for your lies here is the one from the post you are replying too
I posted applicable links the first few times than after you refused to accept them I posted the main ones that require further work. It's not my fault you don't know how to research things.
or
Well I never said that all or even most others have target food, especially since it even tells us in the bible that a lot of species were brought here, means they probably won't have target food.
No confirmation on which is the lie as you are so dishonest you refuse too. Here is another from the same page
Aside from humans, most things here have target food.
You refuse to explain how you reached your incorrect conclusion. This is just from one page but is enough to prove my point. Of course we wont even bother with how you can live in a whale by magic or how you are a science major or even a borderline genius
You never answered: It does not matter if you were confused or not. YOU CLAIMED ANTS HARVESTING CHEMICALS WAS NATURAL WHEN ANTS DO NOT HARVEST CHEMICALS. AGAIN I ASK
HOW DID YOU REACH THAT CONCLUSION???????
Mindless drivel. Wipe the drool off your chin genius and try again
Dismissing me with nothing needed means the opposite genius.
And neither was I when you insisted on avoiding any issue you could not face. But talking of lies
That would be because I wasn't asking a question, DUH.
That looks to me as if you thought you were asking a question. See genius we can all play your game.
I'm not sure if your just outright lying or hiding here, by not answering.
While we are on typo's and gramma. What has the weather got to do with anything? Bringing domesticated animals in to back up your lie is just another lie but no matter.
And like I said it all depends on weather or not you consider domesticated animals as part of the wild. So as soon as you answer, then I can answer as well.
or
Well I never said that all or even most others have target food, especially since it even tells us in the bible that a lot of species were brought here, means they probably won't have target food.
You may as well answer because it costs me nothing to keep asking the question.
Aside from humans, most things here have target food.
That very poor attempt at avoidance fails. Please supply your revised definiton version of target food.
Now I don't know what your talking about because everything is a lie to you.
First that is nothing to do with unnatural as ID supplied you the defintion of it and you cannot even understand that.
Oh that would be any food that doesn't naturally grow in the wild.
Clearly demonstrating you dont have a clue genius.
I understand evolution obviously a lot better than some of the other people on here, Geez some people actually think it involves humans, how messed up is that.
So why keep telling people here that you are a 'science major', 'a borderline genius' that you are being or have been asessed by a councilor but they could do nothing for you. 'What your step father, the cop said' and who can forget 'what your imaginary friends think'
Well I'm not on here to talk about my personal life, I think its embarrasing enough some of you have the gall to admitt you believe in evolution in humans. How sad.
Nope. Give a definition
I do know what the difference is between drugs and meds, duh.
Your the one that is fixated about being abducted and anal probes by aliens. What damage in your past resulted in that? No dont answer.
This is where I'm convinced that you were abused as a child. So convinced that I'm lying about something when I'm not. To the best of my knowledge you had made a statement about ants using chemicals in there harvest of food. I don't recall the full details, but just that. Nothing more, nothing less. There is no lie, there is no conspiracy, there is no delusion on my part and there is cover up. It is what it is, and I have repeated to you several times now what has happened. Sorry if you having such a problem understanding this but its actually pretty simple.
You have just lost your genius title. That has to be the most half witted reply that you could have come up with.
Well then I will clear things up for you, IF ants harvested chemicals, which they apparently don't, but if they did, I'm not aware of any unnatural steps the use which would cause it to be unnatural, which is why I said they do it naturally. If you assuming I did a bunch of work and determined that the chemical ants work with is all natural, your false.
Very apt when applied to you and your apparent half wit views on what can be classed as natural.
But thats what you get for assuming.
Well that depends on how you look at it. The way I see it is that if ants had unnatural abilitys, we would surly know about it, and it would be a hot topic for sure. I wasn't aware of anything out of the ordinary aside from them being super strong. So it was a good assumption on my part as I was right.
Well when something is listed as a hypothesis, its doesn't have to magically turn into a hypothesis, it allready is one.
If your referring to the same link I re posted, then you are the only one taking it that way as I have had other people read it as well and they all agree that evolution is obviously not fact.
What are you talking about!?
I just told you and I even offered to spend the time to document the Experimental Process of how to....within a certain amount of days would allow you to see for yourself how a Single Celled Organism can EVOLVE into a MULTICELLULAR ORGANISM....or as you refered to in a previous post...you said you didn't need to spend the money to run an experiment when you could look it up on WIKI.
Nope I agree with it, but again within the constraints laid out in wiki under speciation.
It seems as if you have TOTALY ignored your own statements and either have no desire to either run the experiment or verify that there is various experiments that can be done to show this EVOLUTIONARY CHANGE.
WHY? Unless you just want to remain ignorant of the truth? Split Infinity
And I also told you from our last reply about this, that I have already confirmed and agree with this part of speciation. Scientists know that viruses and bacteria can change, I have no problems with this. I'm trying to figure out who got the hair brained idea to assume that this also included humans and all other life.
Nope I agree with it, but again within the constraints laid out in wiki under speciation.
Well I never claimed to be perfect with my spelling. Some of which is typos and others that are just wrong spelling. And I wasn't the one that thought it would interesting to entertain the idea of using it as a ploy in this thread. Once again its all the others that are so incredulous and not willing to accept the fact that they aren't necessarly winning in this debate, so they once again try something else to see if they can win that way.
I see your new and lowest tatic is to pick up on typo's. That is a very unwise move for you genius as you make many and many more from you just make no sense at all.
I'm not the writer of the words, and I am using well no ones at that. So if you have a quest to know what they mean, and you honestly don't know, then you seriously shouldn't be on this thread. These are words that any high school kid would automatically know about. If your questioning my use of them then I also suggest you check out the synonyms, as some can be helpful.
Well beyond your capability to understand when you cannot even provide definitions for your made up terms
If you weren't able to correlate the definitions I posted with the usage and meaning, thats also not my fault. And why are you the ONLY one complaining? I know exactly what your doing, your simply questioning everything to the fullest extent to just refuse to accept it, which is what you have done umpteen times before.
You must be a genius because for the life of me I cannot see what you get out of constant lying for no reason
As you are too bone idle to look back for your lies here is the one from the post you are replying too
Well that was my own fault for not clarifying that I had not included domesticated animals and later did.
Well I never said that all or even most others have target food, especially since it even tells us in the bible that a lot of species were brought here, means they probably won't have target food.
Now your lying because I already told you it depends on weather or not you included domestic animals into the equation. And I'm still waiting for an answer on that as well.
No confirmation on which is the lie as you are so dishonest you refuse too. Here is another from the same page
And your lying again, sad man, I already told you I thought I was quoting you.
You refuse to explain how you reached your incorrect conclusion. This is just from one page but is enough to prove my point. Of course we wont even bother with how you can live in a whale by magic or how you are a science major or even a borderline genius
No it doesn't it means I didn't need any meds like you do genius.
Mindless drivel. Wipe the drool off your chin genius and try again
Well at least at this point I know you have proven to understand the term redundant, as you have redundantly repeated yourself in the hopes of being more incredulous or possibly proven me wrong in some case. None of which has happened. Your not advancing and I have to caution you about something that is very serious. When you proceed to do the same things over and over, expecting to get different results, any counselor will tell you that is the definition of being crazy. So if I were you, I would get to a counselor quick.
And neither was I when you insisted on avoiding any issue you could not face. But talking of lies
Well it might appear that way with one exception, I usually use a question mark at the end of my questions.
That looks to me as if you thought you were asking a question. See genius we can all play your game.
Well since we are on typos, my gramma had nothing to do with this. And yes I spelled whether wrong, kudos for you colin as you are the last person I would have expected to catch that one. Could you be any better and learn how to use proper punctuation
While we are on typo's and gramma. What has the weather got to do with anything? Bringing domesticated animals in to back up your lie is just another lie but no matter.
. Now see, thats a lie because we manufacture food for domesticated animals and they are not
Even including domestic animals which of these two statements is a lie
... eating in the wild.
Even including domestic animals which of these two statements is a lie
You can ask till your blue in the face, but until you ask nicely, your not getting an answer from you incredulous old fart.
You may as well answer because it costs me nothing to keep asking the question.
Can you restate the question, and I think I already answered this one.
That very poor attempt at avoidance fails. Please supply your revised definiton version of target food
First that is nothing to do with unnatural as ID supplied you the defintion of it and you cannot even understand that. Well no its more that you dont want to accept the truth. plus I don't recall getting colins definition of unnatural.
But that aside. WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF 'IN THE WILD'
I already gave you this from wiki, and you rejected it.
From all of the links I have been given I have yet to see humans included in any of the work of evolution.
Clearly demonstrating you dont have a clue genius.
Well obviously because those are my credentials, and you have none as far as I have seen, aside from repeatedly asking the same questions over and over and rejecting all of my answers.
So why keep telling people here that you are a 'science major', 'a borderline genius' that you are being or have been asessed by a councilor but they could do nothing for you. 'What your step father, the cop said' and who can forget 'what your imaginary friends think'
One is usually prescribed by a doctor, now I'll let your genius mind figure out which one.
Nope. Give a definition
None, you have also taken it upon yourself to make things up to try to add leverage to your side. Unfortunately it just makes you look more stupid. I never claimed any of these things genius.
Your the one that is fixated about being abducted and anal probes by aliens. What damage in your past resulted in that? No dont answer.
It's called deductive reasoning, but I'm sure you know nothing about that detective repeat.
You have just lost your genius title. That has to be the most half witted reply that you could have come up with.
Nope, I was being an idiot and just took your word for it.
You claimed ants harvesting chemicals was natural. If you are entering into honest debate then you must have a reason with qualifying evidence to substantiate that claim.
It is if you use deductive reasoning, but I honestly don't expect you to understand, and I do expect you to drill me on the term, title, and definition for the next 20 pages.
You believe that it would not be unnatural is not an answer.
Well at least we are now getting to the bottom of why you are so incredulous, you thought this was just an excuse. You must have been excused to death as a child.
You make this idiotic excuse for an explanation of how you reached your conclusion and end it with this
No what this teaches me colin is that you in fact have YOUR OWN definition of these words, and have taken a personal decision to not accept the mainstream versions. This is why your questioning me on them and trying to get them entered in a debate. You feel that by rejecting the authentic versions, and flogging people with your own versions, that you can change the truth. I'm sorry to say it doesn't work that way.
Very apt when applied to you and your apparent half wit views on what can be classed as natural.
This had already been established colin, which tells me that you obviously still don't understand my reply on it and probably still think I had just conjured up an excuse.
Nothing the ant does in this reality is unnatural as per the definition suppled by ID and without a version for it from you that is the one I go by.
I'm glad to see after 7 unneeded pages that you finally decided to get to the bottom of this. So let me see if I'm understanding you correctly. Your basically saying that because we have these common endeavors with ants, we both must be in the same boat. We are either both not from here, or are both from here. I think this leads us back to square one that we were at prior to all of this, which is that I obviously don't know enough about ants to make a comment about them.
That is the whole point you complete fool. Ants farm, humans farm. Ants keep livestock, humans keep livestock. Ants use pesticides on their crops. Humans use pesticde on their crops. Ants build cities, Humans build cities.
If one is unnatural then both are unnatural. The fact is both are natural to be anything else involves magic.
Really ! Then what do you think it does, turn it into fact ?
Tooth, as has been stated dozens of times by now, the THEORY of evolution is a THEORY. However, the theory embraces a number of related hypothesis, aka stuff we're still researching. That DOESN'T turn the theory into a hypothesis.
The link you posted conflicts date with the wiki link on speciation. So there is a question as to which is correct. Your link includes humans in evolution, but I didn't see any references. The wiki link I'm referring to does.
You clearly didn't read the link I posted, because if you had, you'd realize how childish, uneducated, ignorant, and clueless your post is after being corrected soooooo many times. You're like the crazy person looking up during a nice day, replying "no it's red" to everyone telling him it's a nice blue sky outside today. The sad part is, I don't think you do it as a joke, it's a simple lack of education...and even worse, a healthy doze of ignorance that clearly prevents you from seeing reality. Really sad
This was a much better link but the problem here is when they say biological evolution is a fact, they aren't saying that each and every step has been proven, they also aren't admitting to which parts that includes. Again, and I stand my ground on this, if they are referring to speciation, no progress has been made. And from the lack of information, they could be talking about anything.
As has been said a gazillion times already, it's a FACT and theory at the same time. And it's even stated in the very same link you keep on posting: LINK
Strange but it is you that is using this cheap tactic so why are you accusing others? You are very childish.
Well I never claimed to be perfect with my spelling. Some of which is typos and others that are just wrong spelling. And I wasn't the one that thought it would interesting to entertain the idea of using it as a ploy in this thread. Once again its all the others that are so incredulous and not willing to accept the fact that they aren't necessarly winning in this debate, so they once again try something else to see if they can win that way.
Is that so? You calling me moron, ingit, in need of counseling is ok then? Another poor excuse to try to avoid the fact you cannot supply any definitions of the terms you use because they are meaningless.
Addressing me as maggot brain does not encourage me to continue listing definitions to you for one.
No they are not common sense. They are nonsense. Worse still you change them to suit your current idiotic stance, whatever that may be. So I want them defined before we try to move on.
Second, the asked terms are honestly common sense, so much so that it's seriously making me wonder about you.
Unlike you I look up anything I am not sure of. These made up terms do not exist on any search function. The only place they exist is in your head. So define them
If you want to know what they mean, which I honestly think you do, I suggest you look them up yourself. I have done my homework and don't have to prove myself to you, that isn't why I'm here.
What the hell are you on about?
I'm not the writer of the words, and I am using well no ones at that.
If any high school kid would know then define them. Stop wasting all this time you are spending avoiding doing so.
So if you have a quest to know what they mean, and you honestly don't know, then you seriously shouldn't be on this thread. These are words that any high school kid would automatically know about. If your questioning my use of them then I also suggest you check out the synonyms, as some can be helpful.
You dammed idiot. You cannot give me the definition of two seperate words when you use them together. This is why I asked for a definition of the TERMS you are using. Define them
If you weren't able to correlate the definitions I posted with the usage and meaning, thats also not my fault.
Your poor reading skills again. Everyone is telling you your terms are meaningles from unnatural food to postulated hyperphetical theory.
And why are you the ONLY one complaining? I know exactly what your doing, your simply questioning everything to the fullest extent to just refuse to accept it, which is what you have done umpteen times before
It does not matter. One is a lie and the other is not. Which one do you believe to be true?
Well that was my own fault for not clarifying that I had not included domesticated animals and later did.
or
Well I never said that all or even most others have target food, especially since it even tells us in the bible that a lot of species were brought here, means they probably won't have target food.
Are you going to answer?
Aside from humans, most things here have target food.
Again what has the weather got to go with it? I have already said even so it has no bearing on one being a lie.
Now your lying because I already told you it depends on weather or not you included domestic animals into the equation. And I'm still waiting for an answer on that as well.
And you are not answering the question AGAIN.
And your lying again, sad man, I already told you I thought I was quoting you.
Avoidance of supplying the answer is the same as a lie. You know full well what I expect but you also know it shows you never gave your verdict based on anything but your own ignorance. Answer the question.
You never answered: It does not matter if you were confused or not. YOU CLAIMED ANTS HARVESTING CHEMICALS WAS NATURAL WHEN ANTS DO NOT HARVEST CHEMICALS. AGAIN I ASK
HOW DID YOU REACH THAT CONCLUSION???????
I have never claimed to be a borderline genius, that was your lie. At title you lost because of your continued stupidity.
No it doesn't it means I didn't need any meds like you do genius.
It shows you do not understand the word redundant because there is a reason for me repeating the questions. You are not giving the answers.
Well at least at this point I know you have proven to understand the term redundant, as you have redundantly repeated yourself in the hopes of being more incredulous or possibly proven me wrong in some case.
Your the expert on those that look at your mental health. I would guess you spend a lot of time with them. The only result I expect is an honest answer from you. So yeah I must be mad. You and honesty are exact opposites.
Your not advancing and I have to caution you about something that is very serious. When you proceed to do the same things over and over, expecting to get different results, any counselor will tell you that is the definition of being crazy. So if I were you, I would get to a counselor quick.
But you didnt. You didnt need too but you use it as a ploy but seem to get upset when it is used against you.
Well it might appear that way with one exception, I usually use a question mark at the end of my questions.
Again a ploy you started but dislike when you are the victim of it.
Well since we are on typos, my gramma had nothing to do with this. And yes I spelled whether wrong, kudos for you colin as you are the last person I would have expected to catch that one. Could you be any better and learn how to use proper punctuation
Answer the question fool.
Now see, thats a lie because we manufacture food for domesticated animals and they are not
or
Well I never said that all or even most others have target food, especially since it even tells us in the bible that a lot of species were brought here, means they probably won't have target food.
Aside from humans, most things here have target food.
If you go back and read you will see that in fact someone else had brought it up and I had commented how you need help in the punctuation department.
Strange but it is you that is using this cheap tactic so why are you accusing others? You are very childish.
Aside from target food, which has been explained with a series of other definitions, they are all available through wiki and google. I see no point in opening up a can of worms for you so that you can debate the original meanings. I'm not using any odd versions or my own versions of the definitions, I'm using the english language.
Is that so? You calling me moron, ingit, in need of counseling is ok then? Another poor excuse to try to avoid the fact you cannot supply any definitions of the terms you use because they are meaningless.
Well if I was fabricating my own definitions of those words, I sure in the hell wouldn't be sending you to wiki as those are the known definitions.
No they are not common sense. They are nonsense. Worse still you change them to suit your current idiotic stance, whatever that may be. So I want them defined before we try to move on.
The only one that doesn't exist is Target food, and I have explained its comprised of these other definitions.
Unlike you I look up anything I am not sure of. These made up terms do not exist on any search function. The only place they exist is in your head. So define them
Meant to say well known ones.
What the hell are you on about?
I have already provided you with links to wiki going directly to them. If your computer doesn't display links thats not my fault.
If any high school kid would know then define them. Stop wasting all this time you are spending avoiding doing so.
The only one you wont find is Target food. I don't make up my own language sorry.
You dammed idiot. You cannot give me the definition of two seperate words when you use them together. This is why I asked for a definition of the TERMS you are using. Define them
Correct, it was suppose to be Postulate, hypothesis.
Your poor reading skills again. Everyone is telling you your terms are meaningles from unnatural food to postulated hyperphetical theory.
I believe that Domesticated animals will NOT have target food.
It does not matter. One is a lie and the other is not. Which one do you believe to be true?
And this is where you have made a mistake as you have taken the word most to mean all. Sorry it doesn't.
Are you going to answer?
Nothing, I thought you were smart enough to figure out it was a typo.
Again what has the weather got to go with it? I have already said even so it has no bearing on one being a lie.
Yes I already did.
And you are not answering the question AGAIN.
Thinking I was quoting you is not a lie.
Avoidance of supplying the answer is the same as a lie. You know full well what I expect but you also know it shows you never gave your verdict based on anything but your own ignorance. Answer the question.
Sorry I didn't not check the test myself, it was checked by a doctor.
I have never claimed to be a borderline genius, that was your lie. At title you lost because of your continued stupidity.
I gave you a link, you need to learn how to use it.
It shows you do not understand the word redundant because there is a reason for me repeating the questions. You are not giving the answers.