Take Down the Bird Feeder!

[Alate_One]

Oh be fair. He might have an honorary one in 'Call Of Duty'!

This of course would make him an expert on war...

Maybe it was playing Pokemon* that made him think he was an expert on evolution . . . :think: :rotfl:

*disclaimer - evolution in pokemon is actually more like metamorphosis, individual organisms can't "evolve" in the biological evolutionary sense.

 

[Crucible]

Well, I can only presume you're looking in a mirror right now cos' all you do on this forum is yap. You were pwned dude, and by a woman no less.

Man, that's gotta hurt...

How was I 'pwned'? Because a woman spoke?
Yes, because a woman spoke- because that's all she did was say women are better than men.

You're a liar just like she is, perpetuating a facade.

Pretty obvious you've never been to a university based on the language you're using, or if you have you dropped out quickly. "Minor diploma"? You mean an academic minor vs. an academic major?

My undergraduate degree was in botany as was my graduate degree (though also, biochemistry, bacteria and soils), where I performed genetic modification of bacteria and plants. Plus I've been teaching general biology (among other courses) for some time now, so let's see if you actually know anything. I'll give you a quiz:

Do you know what modern evolutionary synthesis is? Can you tell me what the central dogma of molecular biology is? Maybe you can tell me how and why genetic modification works? How about the names and genome designations of wild ancestors of wheat and corn and where they originated? If you're such an expert on things biological and I'm an uneducated person, I'm sure you know all the answers to these questions.

A "proper professor"? have you ever even met a professor? Gotten a degree? I think not. Not based on your statements.

You never answered about having a female significant other or not. Sounds like we don't need to worry that your cultural and genetic deficiencies could be passed on to the next generation. :chuckle:

There's nothing you have stated in any of that which shows you are an authority. You're trying to compensate, is all, slewing up technical terms and red herrings.

You can't fool everybody :rotfl:

 

[Arthur Brain]

Maybe it was playing Pokemon* that made him think he was an expert on evolution . . . :think: :rotfl:

*disclaimer - evolution in pokemon is actually more like metamorphosis, individual organisms can't "evolve" in the biological evolutionary sense.

I say there Alate, it's just as well you provided that disclaimer as otherwise I'd have sued ya...

:nono:

 

[Arthur Brain]

How was I 'pwned'? Because a woman spoke?
Yes, because a woman spoke- because that's all she did was say women are better than men.

You're a liar just like she is, perpetuating a facade.

Because she knows what she's talking about and you don't. If Alate was a man it would be the same thing in essence, you'd have been pwned just the same where it comes to the science. You're just a daft kid who needs to vent on an internet forum and with a very unhealthy hang up with women.

There's nothing you have stated in any of that which shows you are an authority. You're trying to compensate, is all, slewing up technical terms and red herrings.

You can't fool everybody :rotfl:

Hey, if you're clued up as you claim to be then you'll address those scientific questions one by one. So get on with it dude!

:thumb:

 

[Crucible]

Because she knows what she's talking about and you don't. If Alate was a man it would be the same thing in essence, you'd have been pwned just the same where it comes to the science. You're just a daft kid who needs to vent on an internet forum and with a very unhealthy hang up with women.

I said that social constructs are part of evolution. This has gone completely unchallenged beyond a denial by a feminist.

That's what the headline reads, not 'she is Darwin II and I'm just lowly internet guy'- she's not all what you've presumed of her, which you did easily because she's a liberal woman.
Deal with the fact that I called it, instead of denying the inevitable :wave2:

 

[Arthur Brain]

I said that social constructs are part of evolution. This has gone completely unchallenged beyond a denial by a feminist.

That's what the headline reads, not 'she is Darwin II and I'm just lowly internet guy'- she's not all what you've presumed of her, which you did easily because she's a liberal woman.
Deal with the fact that I called it, instead of denying the inevitable :wave2:

The fact is you have issues going on and aren't fully right in the head man. I actually don't mean that as an insult either. You've had a monumental chip on your shoulder since your first incarnation here and venting away on an internet forum isn't going to cure that. You can't argue science when you don't have a clue about it. If it winds you up so much that a woman is an accredited professor of biology then you should question why that is. You're not taken seriously dude, and that you should question also as it's not just 'liberals' who take you with a pinch of salt. You 'clang' a lot but that's about it.

 

[Alate_One]

There's nothing you have stated in any of that which shows you are an authority. You're trying to compensate, is all, slewing up technical terms and red herrings.

You can't fool everybody :rotfl:

Translation: "I have no idea what you're talking about". You're like my students that put IDK LOL on their essay question answers, and no that doesn't earn you any points. I grade this post an "F".

 

[Town Heretic]

You both assumed she was a professor

Quote me commenting in any way on the point. I'll wait while once again you stand there and look goofy. I don't know and haven't asked for credentials with anyone I can think of around here. I've only presented my own when they were relevant to the topic of the law.

and reality just came crashing down- social constructs are a mechanism of evolution, it is not a separate entity.

Again, not following your conversations with others and I'm not particularly interested in whatever it is you're attempting there.

And that pretty much damns the notion that she is anything more then maybe a minor zoologist or something who spent just as much time being brainwashed by liberal propaganda as the next college student.

Supra, though I see you're back on the green train again. Let it go. Better yet, get the education you spend so much time obsessing over. It will likely change your life and definitely your mind on a few realities you mostly assume from a want of real understanding.

Just another example of the giant lie you all perpetuate, really :wave2:

Are you high?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Quote me commenting in any way on the point. I'll wait while once again you stand there and look goofy. I don't know and haven't asked for credentials with anyone I can think of around here. I've only presented my own when they were relevant to the topic of the law.


Again, not following your conversations with others and I'm not particularly interested in whatever it is you're attempting there.


Supra, though I see you're back on the green train again. Let it go. Better yet, get the education you spend so much time obsessing over. It will likely change your life and definitely your mind on a few realities you mostly assume from a want of real understanding.

Are you high?

High?

In his particular case that might actually equate to sober...

lain:

 

[Arthur Brain]

Translation: "I have no idea what you're talking about". You're like my students that put IDK LOL on their essay question answers, and no that doesn't earn you any points. I grade this post an "F".

Hang on, I thought you were tough on your students where it came to accuracy? You're giving this guy an 'F'? That's at least fifteen letters of the alphabet too short a grade...

Granted, he probably thinks the word 'alphabet' should end at the second 'a' but still...

 

[Stripe]

That's a larger judgment I didn't make.

You didn't call me ignorant?

So when you said: "No, just my interest in suffering nonsense from people who don't even understand what they've jumped into with a temper and schoolyard behavior. Worse, when caught at it instead of owning the error you do this," you were just blowing smoke?

You weren't aware that Clete didn't write the thing.

Are you on drugs? Of course I was aware Clete didn't write it. And what difference would it make if he had?

Then you waded into a critique aimed at an absent author's work as though personally offended and determined to offer offense. Worse, when I pointed that out to you instead of owning the mistake you compounded it by insisting I was calling him a racist for reposting.

Nope. I took you to task for your ridiculous analysis.

And I haven't made a mistake. Not one that you've picked up on anyway.

I obtained an undergraduate degree in literature.

Great. Start using it. :thumb:

An allegory can have imaginary characters for a start. And you do it a disservice by attributing motive where there is none described.

Nothing in that recognition of form in any way impacts a single point I made criticizing its ham-fisted construction and false premise.

Begging the question is a logical fallacy no matter how many times you do it. There is very little wrong with the construction of the story and that you think it has a premise shows that you do not understand allegory. Where did you get your degree, out of a Weet-bix packet?

Why you don't understand that is anyone's guess. Why you think offering school yard, low insult is a necessary part of your pitch is less of a guess. People throw punches when that's what they have left. Some just come out swinging.

Since what follows is essentially you ignoring all of the challenges you face, I'm going back to not bothering with it.

But we still don't know whether you are a racist.

 

[Arthur Brain]

You didn't call me ignorant?

So when you said: "No, just my interest in suffering nonsense from people who don't even understand what they've jumped into with a temper and schoolyard behavior. Worse, when caught at it instead of owning the error you do this," you were just blowing smoke?

Are you on drugs? Of course I was aware Clete didn't write it. And what difference would it make if he had?

Nope. I took you to task for your ridiculous analysis.

And I haven't made a mistake. Not one that you've picked up on anyway.

Great. Start using it. :thumb:

An allegory can have imaginary characters for a start. And you do it a disservice by attributing motive where there is none described.

Begging the question is a logical fallacy no matter how many times you do it. There is very little wrong with the construction of the story and that you think it has a premise shows that you do not understand allegory. Where did you get your degree, out of a Weet-bix packet?

Why you don't understand that is anyone's guess. Why you think offering school yard, low insult is a necessary part of your pitch is less of a guess. People throw punches when that's what they have left. Some just come out swinging.

Since what follows is essentially you ignoring all of the challenges you face, I'm going back to not bothering with it.

But we still don't know whether you are a racist.

Oh give it up Stripe. You've been pwned as much as that misogynist adolescent Crucible and your behaviour is pretty much on par. Go back to your dumb mantras...

The entire OP was flawed from the outset and was indefensible. Heck, my family had a birdfeeder in the back garden and we weren't overrun by birds. We had quite a few blackbirds that knew they were going to get fed and became tame enough to come into the house and it was cool. Nobody regretted it and the allegory in regards to the government taking away welfare support was damn well obvious.

Stop being such a pompous blowhard for a change.

:thumb:

 

[Town Heretic]

You didn't call me ignorant?

Of course not. Doing that is nothing more than name calling in most cases. Rather, you jumped in with insult and hostility that I'd ascribe to your believing a) Clete penned the bit I said rested in part on subtextual racism and that b) I was then asserting that Clete was a racist. In point of fact he didn't write it, your demonstrated ire was misplaced, and I never though anything of the sort about Clete.

That's why I phrased my irritation the way I did, while noting your inability to regroup once committed and a nearly bizarre attempt to argue me into a position I simply didn't take.

So when you said: "No, just my interest in suffering nonsense from people who don't even understand what they've jumped into with a temper and schoolyard behavior. Worse, when caught at it instead of owning the error you do this," you were just blowing smoke?

No, I meant every word of it, as I note above.

Of course I was aware Clete didn't write it.

Then it's a worse mark against you, because you wrote:

You're calling Clete a racist.

Which I gave the more charitable reading of, meaning you simply didn't realize that he copied the thing. Because I never said or intimated anything about Clete in that regard.

And what difference would it make if he had?

Well, when I spoke to a subtext of racist nonsense it would have meant it was his intent instead of the author's.

Nope. I took you to task for your ridiculous analysis.

I know you believe that's what you did, but it isn't. You noped and name called and tried to pigeon hole the conversation into a discussion of the narrative form, which wasn't contested or of any particular interest to me, instead of its function, flaws and presumptions, which were.

An allegory can have imaginary characters for a start.

Birds aren't imaginary characters, but I don't see that it matters. What does is what they represented, or rather misrepresented.

And you do it a disservice by attributing motive where there is none described.

The motive is clear. I even told you where to find it. The author builds to it, even with the side bars he can't help but interject.

Begging the question is a logical fallacy no matter how many times you do it.

It is a logical fallacy, but you've simply declared it, not connected it to anything I've actually written.

There is very little wrong with the construction of the story and that you think it has a premise shows that you do not understand allegory. Where did you get your degree, out of a Weet-bix packet?

I just left that to illustrate what you spend most of your time doing instead of engaging.

Why you don't understand that is anyone's guess. Why you think offering school yard, low insult is a necessary part of your pitch is less of a guess. People throw punches when that's what they have left. Some just come out swinging.

You also could use a lesson in the quote function.

Since what follows is essentially you ignoring all of the challenges you face, I'm going back to not bothering with it.

Supra.

But we still don't know whether you are a racist.

Then "we" don't know much about me worth knowing.

:e4e:

 

[patrick jane]

birds are like minorities

 

[Stripe]

Of course not.

Then you shouldn't write those sort of things.

Doing that is nothing more than name calling.

You jumped in with insult and hostility that I'd ascribe to your believing a) Clete penned the bit I said rested in part on subtextual racism and that b) I was then asserting that Clete was a racist.

OK, so it's you who made the errors then.

And given that I explained how it didn't have to be Clete who was the author for you be calling him racist, it looks like you're just looking for things to say.

I never though anything of the sort about Clete.

I don't judge your thoughts; I judged your words. You leaped on the attack calling OP racist. To do so was utterly ridiculous.

That's why I phrased my irritation the way I did, while noting your inability to regroup once committed and a nearly bizarre attempt to argue me into a position I simply didn't take.

No, I meant every word of it, as I note above.

Well, maybe you need some lessons on how to communicate, because it looks like you're calling me ignorant.

If that's not what you're saying, you're going to have to dumb it down a little.

Then it's a worse mark against you, because you wrote: Which I gave the more charitable reading of, meaning you simply didn't realize that he copied the thing. Because I never said or intimated anything about Clete in that regard. My chief criticism of him as the forwarder is one I noted in a past response, speaking to the impact of bias and a level of immaturity in response when challenged.

You've had this explained to you numerous times. When people post stuff supporting Darwinism, we call them evolutionists. That you think Clete's post is racist reflects poorly on Clete, regardless of who wrote it.

And all of this is just a side issue. OP is not racist. You made that up.

I know you believe that's what you did, but it isn't. You noped and name called and tried to pigeon-hole the conversation into a discussion about who wrote what. Your contributions are question-begging nonsense.

Birds aren't imaginary characters.

Seriously? You can't be this dense.

"The story is a simple description of a perfectly normal person; you're trying to turn a perfectly reasonable imaginary character into a monster."

You were accused of ascribing malice to the person in the story when there is no justification for such a move. The story describes a perfectly reasonable person acting in a perfectly reasonable manner.

What does is what they represented, or rather misrepresented and the author's point in distinctions, which I discussed for a good bit.

English, dude. English.

Calm down, think through what you want to say and just say it plainly.

The motive is clear.

Nope. You ascribe racism where none is involved.

It is a logical fallacy, but you've simply declared it, not connected it to anything I've actually written.

Nope.

Right here:

"Asserting that government programs can be better regulated than the image painted in OP is just asserting that OP has no value, while you have shown nothing that indicates it is not accurate. You're begging the question. It's a logical fallacy; you should give those up."

No, where did you get your manners? Wolves?

I don't think you have any place talking about manners after your contributions.

You also could use a lesson in the quote function. Supra. If we start talking about what you don't know we're going to be here a while.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Stripe, do you even know how to use the quote function properly?

This is the third post in a row where you've mixed up TH's responses with your own...

:AMR:

 

[Crucible]

Translation: "I have no idea what you're talking about". You're like my students that put IDK LOL on their essay question answers, and no that doesn't earn you any points. I grade this post an "F".

Nothing you've stated on here warrants anything you're saying now. You're basically just being trumpeted by people on here who have every single reason to venerate a female liberal with a very over-exaggerated claim of education in biology.

It's that simple- you forming some sort of litmus on vocabulary or speciation, or whatever salad you tossed together is something I've seen atheist teenagers do. You're not convincing me of anything, you just want to insert your feminist fantasies into reality is all- this conversation went from that to you being heralded as Darwin II in a flash because you're all a bunch of liberal loons.

When you want to show that social constructs are not a part of evolution, go on and do it. I don't mind waiting forever, because that's what it will be. Because you're not a authority on evolution :chuckle:

 

[jgarden]

I bought a bird feeder. I hung It on my back porch and filled It with seed. What a beauty of a bird feeder it was, as I filled it, lovingly with seed. Within a week we had hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food.

But then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue.

Then came the poop. It was everywhere: on the patio tile, the chairs, the table…. Everywhere!

Then some of the birds turned mean. They would dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket.

And other birds were boisterous and loud. They sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.

After a while, I couldn’t even sit on my own back porch anymore. So I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio.

Soon, the back yard was like it used to be ….. Quiet, serene…. And no one demanding their rights to a free meal.


Now let’s see. Our government gives out free food, subsidized housing, free medical care and free education, and allows anyone born here to be an automatic citizen.

Then the illegals came by the tens of thousands. Suddenly our taxes went up to pay for free services; small apartments are housing 5 families; you have to wait 6 hours to be seen by an emergency room doctor; your child’s second grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn’t speak English.

Corn flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to ‘press one ‘ to hear my bank talk to me in English, and people waving flags other than ‘Old Glory’ are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties.

Just my opinion, but maybe it’s time for the government to take down the bird feeder.

If you agree, pass it on; if not, just continue cleaning up the poop.

Maxine

View attachment 25139

President-elect Donald Trump should be first in "Clete's" list of "freeloaders" - he's made $billions, enjoyed the benefits of the "American Dream" but hasn't contributed a cent in taxes for years.

 

[Crucible]

If it winds you up so much that a woman is an accredited professor of biology

I'm not wound up that a woman is an accredited professor of biology.
She's simply not a professor of biology

I didn't want to rail on someone's profession, it's really you and TH's fault. You both attempted am 'auto win' by declaring she knows all and I know nothing, which she clambered to because she wasn't about to admit she was wrong :chuckle:

My argument is still uncontested, and will remain that way- I would suggest that you stop acting like a tool when the subject is brought up that woman are not actually goddesses among men.

 

[Clete]

President-elect Donald Trump should be first in "Clete's" list of "freeloaders" - he's made $billions, enjoyed the benefits of the "American Dream" but hasn't contributed a cent in taxes for years.

He's paid more in taxes than you'll earn in your entire life.

You stupid liberals just believe anything any other liberal tells you and you haven't the faintest idea what this country is supposed to be about nor that the policies you propose, implement and defend are the cause of every problem you think needs fixing.

Even if it were true that Trump has not paid a cent in taxes (which it isn't) it would have been because of the tax laws that YOUR SIDE put in place! You guys screw everything up and then when you've thoroughly broken it you jump up and down wailing away about how you're the only one's who know how to fix it.