RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (256) < ... 162 163 164 165 166 [167] 168 169 170 171 172 ... >   
  Topic: Joe G.'s Tardgasm, How long can it last?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,18:14   

reminder:  jojo don't givea fuck about all that.  he be purely on some look at me type same old bullshit.  

pic related




--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,20:35   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Aug. 12 2012,20:06)
Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 12 2012,19:45)
As for the "discussion" about whether water and ice are the same material or not, that strikes me as a disagreement over word usage rather than being about the underlying chemistry, i.e., I don't see anybody saying that water and ice aren't made of the same kind of molecules.

Henry

errrr, Henry you are always too nice. †and punny

LMAOOOOO

Joanne is a water essentialist. Ice, water, two different baramin. †In other words, Joe don't know what the fuck you are talking about LOL

It's so cute when he talks about stuff!


Either Joe is the stupidest person on the Earth, or he backpedals faster than anyone I've seen in a long time. †I think the "logic" (or trainwreck of thought) goes like this -

1. Hail is made of ice.
2. Ice melts to become water - before that it isn't water, it's ice. †Two different words with two separate meanings. †Water is only a liquid.
3. †When it evaporates it becomes water vapor or steam, different words again, meaning it isn't water.
4. †All of those things are H2O, which is not water, since that only refers to the liquid form.

I wonder how he asks for something to drink? †"Can I have a glass of H2O?"

ETA - sorry, missed it.  All that twisted logic just to not admit he made a mistake.

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 14 2012,22:21   

Joe says: "Erik- YOU don't get through because you are a proven lying and ignorant fuck. I don't want to waste my time nor blog on your spewage."

In the comment section of the opening post where he sad this: "OTOH I post all on-topic comments and comments that follow my meager blog rules."

Ah yes, thanks again for proving my point.  You do not allow all on topic comments through.  If you think the person posting the on topic comment is an asshole (even if he follows your meager rules), you don't post it.  That's one counter to your opening post.  Since all that is needed is one counter example to falsify it--you lose.

Maybe from here.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Joe G



Posts: 1384
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:21   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 13 2012,17:40)
Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 13 2012,16:05)
Kevin, you ignorant slut. My post pertained to the "random" in random mutaions ONLY.


Then perhaps you should state that explicitly.

Quote

However it can easily be said that natural selection, a result of three random inputs, is also random.


What are the 3 random inputs for natural selection? †I can't wait to hear this one.

Quote

Ya see if that virus isn't present then the organism is OK with that mutation. And if that small increase in muscle efficiency comes at a cost of lost sight, then it ain't so beneficial.


Wow, so now you need to make up stuff to make your case. †Please explain where 'lost sight' comes from and explain, in detail, the genetic linkage between increase in oxygen transport efficiency and development of sight.

Of course, you can't do that because you're just making shit up... as usual.

But let's get to the crux of the matter here. †In your first statement you admit that some mutation are harmful and some mutation are neutral. †In your second sentence you state that some mutations can (indeed) be beneficial.

Which pretty much goes against the entire group of intelligent design notionists. †Ya see, if mutation can generate beneficial effects, then there's no need for a designer. †Oh and you might talk to that clown on UD who's always spouting off about genetic entropy, because you jsut refuted everything he's said on the subject.

Thanks BTW.

And at last, we keep demanding why we stay on the subject of the OP, because whenever you talk about one thing, you invariably destroy the arguments used before on other subjects.

Ya see, unlike ID, science is this vast interconnected framework. †Everything from fossils, to genetics, to distribution of animals and geology supports the principles of evolution. †On the other hand, one post might support some small part of ID, but it refutes 4 or 5 other arguments.

Quote

What is beneficial one day isn't beneficial the next- ecosystems change.


Which, is what evolution has been saying all along. †You really need to explain this to the other IDists. †They have it all bass ackwards.

Quote


AND as I have supported with actual references, according to the theory of evolution ALL genetic changes are random/ happenstance. YOU don't get to tell me I am wrong and then not support it. I have supported MY claims you fucking moron.


You have quotemined people. †That's not support. †

My claims are so fundamentally basic that they aren't even discussed anymore. †You're about 50 years behind the times here dear boy.

Quote

All that said your spewage about your position being "evolution", that your position is NOT the blind watchmaker and ID is anti-evolution, is exposed as ignorance for the mere fact that the ONLY way ID could be considered anti-evolution is if "evolution" is defined as the blind watchmaker thesis!


True, but then, that's what all the ID people (including you) define ID as. †So, that works out now doesn't it.

The only time you don't define evolution as the blind watchmaker hypothesis is when you start trying to talk about science.

Quote

IOW Kevin- you are one confused and ignorant fuck.

No Joe. †I'm not. †You haven't done anything, ever, that might even suggest that.

Do we need to go over our debate again? †Have you forgotten the sound drubbing you got... so sound you didn't even bother with a conclusion?

But let's get back to this idea of randomness.

What are the three 'inputs' to natural selection?

How are they random?

I am willing to grant that some aspects of selection appear to be random, but then, I'm pretty sure you don't really know what random means.

Kevin you are an ignorant fuck if you don't know the three inputs to natural selection.

1- Variation- entirely by chance

2- Fecundity- can't tell until after the fact

3- Heredity- it isn't guarnteed that even the most beneficial mutation will get passed down.

But anyways you are too stupid to understand taht the theory of evolution expects an organism- a human-like organism, with 47 chromosomes.

We need to get that out of the way before we can even begin to discuss anything else.

--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t


BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
Joe G



Posts: 1384
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:25   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 13 2012,16:17)
Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 13 2012,16:13)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 13 2012,16:10)
Joe:

†  
Quote
Kevin, you ignorant slut. My post pertained to the "random" in random mutaions ONLY.


the title of the post?



http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2012.......nd.html


Quote
"Random", with Respect to Biology and Evolution
-
People, evos in particular, seem to have a difficult time understanding the what the word random means with respect to biology and the theory of evolution. Let me see if I can help them out.


Joe works real hard at stupid


Edited for format.

Read the OP you fucking maggot:

 
Quote
People, evos in particular, seem to have a difficult time understanding the what the word random means with respect to biology and the theory of evolution. Let me see if I can help them out.

As plain as can be, with respect to biology and the theory of evolution, the word random means, happenstance, not planned, no purpose nor objective, haphazard, accidental.

That's it. So when someone says something about random mutations that is what they are talking about. (bold added for the morons)

And you do you think this helps you, Josephine?

You've clearly addressed, by your own tard hand:

Quote
Random", with Respect to Biology and Evolution


Giving

Quote
So when someone says something about random mutations that is what they are talking about


is of course:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wki........osition

You're possibly the most stupid IDer, which is quite the accomplishment!

Coming from you, possibly the biggest faggot liar of all time, that is a compliment.

Thank you

And seeing that you are ignoarnt wrt information, just how did i get spanked wrt CSI and cake?

Ya see I can't post in that thread that you spewed I was spanked. That is because this forum is run by cowards...

c-ya No use posting on a forum that censors and edits my posts...

--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t


BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
Joe G



Posts: 1384
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:29   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 13 2012,17:44)
BTW JOE:

Applied usage in science, mathematics and statistics recognizes a lack of predictability when referring to randomness, but admits regularities in the occurrences of events whose outcomes are not certain. For example, when throwing 2 dice and counting the total, we can say 7 will randomly occur twice as often as 4. This view, where randomness simply refers to situations in which the certainty of the outcome is at issue, is the one taken when referring to concepts of chance, probability, and information entropy. In these situations randomness implies a measure of uncertainty and notions of haphazardness are irrelevant.

eta:

The modern evolutionary synthesis ascribes the observed diversity of life to natural selection, in which some random genetic mutations are retained in the gene pool due to the non-random improved chance for survival and reproduction that those mutated genes confer on individuals who possess them.

from wikipedia (because it's the same source Joe appears to have used)

Kevin- whatever is "good enough" gets through the filter of natural selection. It isn't just what works the best, whuich can be any number of things any way.

You cannot predict what will be selected for at any point in time and you cannot predict what mutation will occur at any point in time.

Then there is cooperation and behaviour- behaviour is easier to change in order to adapt then to wait around for some possibly beneficial genetic change.

IOW natural selection isn't as simple as you make it out to be. OTOH you appear to be very simple...

--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t


BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
Joe G



Posts: 1384
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:30   

Quote (blipey @ Aug. 14 2012,22:21)
Joe says: "Erik- YOU don't get through because you are a proven lying and ignorant fuck. I don't want to waste my time nor blog on your spewage."

In the comment section of the opening post where he sad this: "OTOH I post all on-topic comments and comments that follow my meager blog rules."

Ah yes, thanks again for proving my point. †You do not allow all on topic comments through. †If you think the person posting the on topic comment is an asshole (even if he follows your meager rules), you don't post it. †That's one counter to your opening post. †Since all that is needed is one counter example to falsify it--you lose.

Maybe from here.

No Erik- you don't have a point and you don't have an example.

You are just a belligerent ignorant fuck. Deal with it...

--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t


BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
Joe G



Posts: 1384
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:39   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 13 2012,17:23)
Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 13 2012,16:11)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 12 2012,12:32)
Hey Joe,

Tell us, what is the difference between one molecule of water in liquid form and one molecule of water in solid form?

Oh wait, I forgot... there's no such thing as one molecule of water. †(grr... I'd put a link here, but I can't stand this system's search function)

eta: close enough

oh and BTW, I know how to determine if a molecule of water is solid, liquid, or gas... why don't you?

There isn't any such thing as one molecule of water, ice nor steam. It is the way molecules of H20 react with each other that determines whether or not you have water, ice or steam.

So no, if you only have one molecule to work with it can't be water, steam nor ice.

So the kinetic energy of the molecule actually doesn't have anything to do with it?

Seriously? †Damn son, we're going to have to rewrite an awful lot of textbooks. †Unless you don't actually know what you're talking about. †Which is much, much, more likely.

What textbooks? Please be specific

--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t


BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:49   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 15 2012,13:30)
Quote (blipey @ Aug. 14 2012,22:21)
Joe says: "Erik- YOU don't get through because you are a proven lying and ignorant fuck. I don't want to waste my time nor blog on your spewage."

In the comment section of the opening post where he sad this: "OTOH I post all on-topic comments and comments that follow my meager blog rules."

Ah yes, thanks again for proving my point. †You do not allow all on topic comments through. †If you think the person posting the on topic comment is an asshole (even if he follows your meager rules), you don't post it. †That's one counter to your opening post. †Since all that is needed is one counter example to falsify it--you lose.

Maybe from here.

No Erik- you don't have a point and you don't have an example.

You are just a belligerent ignorant fuck. Deal with it...

Thank-you.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:50   

Also, what's liquid nitrogen made out of?

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,13:50   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 15 2012,13:25)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 13 2012,16:17)
Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 13 2012,16:13)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 13 2012,16:10)
Joe:

† †
Quote
Kevin, you ignorant slut. My post pertained to the "random" in random mutaions ONLY.


the title of the post?



http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2012.......nd.html


†  
Quote
"Random", with Respect to Biology and Evolution
-
People, evos in particular, seem to have a difficult time understanding the what the word random means with respect to biology and the theory of evolution. Let me see if I can help them out.


Joe works real hard at stupid


Edited for format.

Read the OP you fucking maggot:

Quote
People, evos in particular, seem to have a difficult time understanding the what the word random means with respect to biology and the theory of evolution. Let me see if I can help them out.

As plain as can be, with respect to biology and the theory of evolution, the word random means, happenstance, not planned, no purpose nor objective, haphazard, accidental.

That's it. So when someone says something about random mutations that is what they are talking about. (bold added for the morons)

And you do you think this helps you, Josephine?

You've clearly addressed, by your own tard hand:

 
Quote
Random", with Respect to Biology and Evolution


Giving

 
Quote
So when someone says something about random mutations that is what they are talking about


is of course:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wki........osition

You're possibly the most stupid IDer, which is quite the accomplishment!

Coming from you, possibly the biggest faggot liar of all time, that is a compliment.

Thank you

And seeing that you are ignoarnt wrt information, just how did i get spanked wrt CSI and cake?

Ya see I can't post in that thread that you spewed I was spanked. That is because this forum is run by cowards...

c-ya No use posting on a forum that censors and edits my posts...

I see your post up there, CUPCAEK.

Go reread the thread. Everyone shreds you. You resort to typing "Irrelevant- all baked cakes contain the information, whatever that information was, that went into making them." repeatedly. Which is absolutely useless for measuring anything.

Go post a Link on UD if you're not utterly embarrassed!

Also, well done on going full YEC in your latest. You wont have to track so many lies moving forward. Maybe you and Sal could collaborate?

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3302
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,14:45   

All quotes are him... you know...

Quote
Kevin you are an ignorant fuck if you don't know the three inputs to natural selection.


Only if they are actually 'inputs'.  I'm going to go out on a limb and say you're just making stuff up.

For example: A search on "inputs to natural selection" results in 4 hits.  Three of these are forums, the 4th is a comment on a blog that states specifically "The randomness of the inputs to natural selection is kind of irrelevant, right? Natural selection tames that randomness by selecting only those random entries that give an advantage."

So, I don't think I'm the ignorant one.  I think you are making shit up.

Quote


1- Variation- entirely by chance


I can agree with this... up to a point.  There's some variation that will never work in an organism and some (maybe even most) variation does not influence phenotype or survivability at all.  

Quote

2- Fecundity- can't tell until after the fact


This isn't an input to natural selection.  This is a fact that encourages competition and the individual that is most competitive wins.

Quote

3- Heredity- it isn't guarnteed that even the most beneficial mutation will get passed down.


This isn't an input either.  

Here, let me help.  Inputs are things which are used to determine an outcome.  For example f(x) = X+3.  X is an input.  It's something that directly affects the output of a system.

So, let's consider natural selection. What are things that directly affect natural selection?  
1) An individuals genes.  While the genes themselves may be (slightly) randomized, the vast majority of the genes are not random.  In fact, the vast majority of the genes have a long, stable history of doing a particular job very well.  

2) The environment.  Again, while parts are (slightly) random, the vast majority of the environment is the same by day.  This is difficult, so I'll type slowly.  Today is August 15th here in Central Texas (I don't know what date it is on your world).  That's high summer here.  Weather, for example, is not random.  The temperature tomorrow will not be 143F or 32F or -34F or even 64F.  The vast majority of possible temperatures are not available to tomorrow's weather.  Is the weather random... yes, but only within a very, very narrow range (just like the genes mentioned above).  Here in central Texas, there is zero chance of a volcano appearing tonight.  There is zero chance of a tsunami.  There is zero chance of an avalanche or glacier.  I could go on, but you get the point.

That's it for the inputs of natural selection.  A case could be made for other organisms, food, etc, but I consider all that 'the environment'.

So, while random things do happen, the majority of things that would wildly affect natural selection have a very, very narrow range of possibilities.  While the temperature tomorrow may very well be random (which I would argue against and you aren't smart enough to even try and convince me otherwise), it's only going to be random between 97F and 101F and no clouds vs. 10% clouds (to be precise, this would be between noon and 3PM).

Does it begin to click yet?  no?  I'm not surprised.
Quote



But anyways you are too stupid to understand taht the theory of evolution expects an organism- a human-like organism, with 47 chromosomes.


Are we back on this.  Joe, what the normal chromosome number of living things?  Here's another Wiki page to help you /List_of_organisms_by_chromosome_count

Do you notice anything interesting about the list Joe?  Perhaps that all the numbers are even?  It's called the diploid number for a reason Joe.  TWO!!!  PAIRS joe, chromosomes are organized into PAIRS!!!

dumbass

Organisms with odd numbers of chromosomes have massive genetic problems Joe.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome_abnormality

Quote

We need to get that out of the way before we can even begin to discuss anything else.


Done and done... I did that months ago, but you're too lazy to go look up what I told you to.  

Quote
Kevin- whatever is "good enough" gets through the filter of natural selection. It isn't just what works the best, whuich can be any number of things any way.


Holy Cow.  Joe actually got it...

Not like a designer at all is it Joe?  I mean the only designer we're aware of doesn't make do with good enough, they always try to make the best possible product.  

Quote

You cannot predict what will be selected for at any point in time and you cannot predict what mutation will occur at any point in time.


Nope, can't predict mutations.  And nope, can't predict what will be selected for.

For example, the mutation that occurred a couple hundred yeas ago that conferred HIV immunity... which wasn't even a disease until the 1950s.  You know, evolution.

Quote

Then there is cooperation and behaviour- behaviour is easier to change in order to adapt then to wait around for some possibly beneficial genetic change.


huh?

Quote

IOW natural selection isn't as simple as you make it out to be. OTOH you appear to be very simple...


Yes Joe, it's very complex.  And it doesn't appear that you know very much about it.

But, what, pray tell is the point of all this?

The point is you saying that natural selection is random.  But like the quote that I pasted at the beginning of this takedown, natural selection, over time reduce the randomness.

Much like dice, Joe.  Ever play craps?  Throw 2d6 and what are the odds of getting a 7? Is that random?  

But over time, we can still make predictions about the likelihood of rolling a 7.  Even after 10 rolls or a hundred, we don't have a very good picture of the pattern.  But after several hundred thousand rolls, you'll begin to see a pattern emerge... one in which there is a statistical likelihood of rolling a 7.

One organism's survival may be random.  Maybe he just had a bad day or got lucky.  But over time and millions of individuals, the randomness tends to go away and you're left with traits that increase the survivability of the organism.

So what's your argument Joe?  Because evolution is random, it can never produce complex things?  You've just proven yourself wrong Joe.

This discussion of randomness has shown exactly what evolution predicts.  Mutations are random, but only certain mutations survive and thrive in a population.. that is mutations that are beneficial.  The environment may have random effects, but again... over time, the most effective organisms will survive and reproduce.  Those offspring will have minor variations (genetically speaking) and may have improved or decreased survivability.  It's not totally random Joe.  Just within a very narrow range.

Quote

What textbooks? Please be specific


Nice try Joe.  It's call 'a joke'... here's the Wikipedia page for you Joke

So, you really don't understand that the phase of the material is directly dependent on it's energy?  

Technically, if you could measure the motion of (and pressure on) a single molecule of water, you could determine if that molecule was in the solid phase, liquid phase, or gaseous phase.  I guess you could determine plasma too, but only from the fact that there's no water molecule left.

You really, seriously, need to understand the things you're talking about.

BTW: While we're talking about stuff... what if I copied your description of aardvark (which, in case you didn't know, is NOT an aardvark) into French, would there be more or less CSI?

I'm sorry Joe, but the annuls of your stupidity, calculating the CSI of an animal by using the dictionary definition of that animal has got to be in the top two.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3302
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,14:48   

Joe is full YEC?

Awesome.  Hey Joe, do you want to talk about Noah's Ark or Fountains of the Deep or the Age of the Universe?

Maybe you can impress us with your (ahem) wisdom on those subjects.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,23:07   

Joe, since you have no idea what liquid nitrogen is composed of, how about tackling this one:

Does your pee-pee ever hurt?

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 15 2012,23:37   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 15 2012,14:21)
Kevin you are an ignorant fuck if you don't know the three inputs to natural selection.

1- Variation- entirely by chance

2- Fecundity- can't tell until after the fact

3- Heredity- it isn't guarnteed that even the most beneficial mutation will get passed down.

But anyways you are too stupid to understand taht the theory of evolution expects an organism- a human-like organism, with 47 chromosomes.

We need to get that out of the way before we can even begin to discuss anything else.

oh, 47 chromosomes LOL this motherfucker thinks "theories of evolution" sit around "expecting" "organisms"



joe have you ever stopped to consider that your creationism is so fucking stupid that you can't see how stupid it is. †You're such a dumb sombitch, in general, that you can't even comprehend how stupid your ignorant creationist bullshittery really is.

If you had a moment of clarity you would aim it directly at a telephone pole, jojoluv

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Aug. 16 2012,00:38

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Quack



Posts: 1754
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2012,05:24   

Quote
BTW: While we're talking about stuff... what if I copied your description of aardvark (which, in case you didn't know, is NOT an aardvark) into French, would there be more or less CSI?

Or maybe Hanyu Pinyin?

--------------
YEC creationists denigrate science without an inkling of what their lives would be without it. YEC creationism is an enrageous, abominable insult to the the human intellect.
                                                         Me.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2012,08:07   

So the folks at UD now see what Joe looks like with caek smeared over his face.

I bet that thread got some extra traffic from UD eh Joe?

ROFL.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2012,10:15   

Hey Joe what's frozen water made of?

Why is Mary not the mother of God?

Joe?
Joe?
Joe?
Joe?

Anyone?

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror" DAVE TARD
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2012,10:17   

Joe,

What do you get out of endlessly humiliating yourself online? †What's the payoff?

Is it like playing the lottery? †Sure, you've been losing for years, but one of these days you just know you're going to win really, really big?

ETA: Thanks for the sig.

Edited by keiths on Aug. 16 2012,08:20

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1480
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2012,11:37   

Joe keeps the tard train rolling:

 
Quote
JoeTard: †And by eating the cake you are consuming the information- some stays with you and the rest is waste.


Mmmmmmmm! †Information!

:p:p:p

ETA:  Maybe that's why Joe is so fat.  It's all that undigested information in his bowels!

--------------
JoeG: And by eating the cake you are consuming the information- some stays with you and the rest is waste.

  
Henry J



Posts: 4058
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2012,13:06   

Quote (k.e.. @ Aug. 16 2012,09:15)
Hey Joe what's frozen water made of?

Why is Mary not the mother of God?

Joe?
Joe?
Joe?
Joe?

Anyone?

She had a little lamb instead?

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2012,00:51   

OP: rich promoting comments, jerry promoting comments, kevin promoting comments, and a host of other evoTARDS (don't promote comments)

I (JoeG) do promote comments.

Later in thread, I said:

"All of my comments have been about promoting comments--exactly the topic in the OP."

Joe's response?

"Dumbass dickface- THAT is NOT the topic of this thread."

The dumb is awesome!

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2012,07:26   

Quote (blipey @ Aug. 17 2012,08:51)
OP: rich promoting comments, jerry promoting comments, kevin promoting comments, and a host of other evoTARDS (don't promote comments)

I (JoeG) do promote comments.

Later in thread, I said:

"All of my comments have been about promoting comments--exactly the topic in the OP."

Joe's response?

"Dumbass dickface- THAT is NOT the topic of this thread."

The dumb is awesome!

Well talk about gay!

Hey meager rules belligerent and ignorant punk lying fagot dumbass shit for brains creotard raw spewage cowardly pathologically lying fuck  ignorant asshole hypocrite quote mining Joe;trick question  how much water is in one mole(ecule) of water?

BWhahahahahahahahahahah

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror" DAVE TARD
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3302
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2012,07:59   

I had to twist the knife a little and remind Joe that he's not allowed on my blog because he's a jerk, not because I'm scared of his 'arguments'.

I wonder if he'll promote it.  He'll probably hold on to it until he has the perfect comeback.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2012,08:01   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2012,15:59)
I had to twist the knife a little and remind Joe that he's not allowed on my blog because he's a jerk, not because I'm scared of his 'arguments'.

I wonder if he'll promote it. †He'll probably hold on to it until he has the perfect comeback.

dickface?

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror" DAVE TARD
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
Occam's Toothbrush



Posts: 554
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2012,08:17   

Hey Joe what is melted chocolate made of? †I know it's not made of chocolate, of course, but what is it made of?



--------------
"Molecular stuff seems to me not to be biology as much as it is a more atomic element of life" --Creo nut Robert Byers
------
"You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?" --Anger Management Problem Concern Troll "Kris"

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3302
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2012,08:19   

Quote (Occam's Toothbrush @ Aug. 17 2012,08:17)
Hey Joe what is melted chocolate made out of? †I know it's not made of chocolate, of course, but what is it made of?


And can you use solid chocolate if your cake recipe calls for melted chocolate?

Does melted chocolate (whatever it is) have more or less information than the same mass of solid chocolate?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Occam's Toothbrush



Posts: 554
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2012,08:21   

Quote (k.e.. @ Aug. 17 2012,09:01)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2012,15:59)
I had to twist the knife a little and remind Joe that he's not allowed on my blog because he's a jerk, not because I'm scared of his 'arguments'.

I wonder if he'll promote it. †He'll probably hold on to it until he has the perfect comeback.

dickface?

I think it will be "Ya know, IOW, blind watchmaker, your side has no evidence, {insert porn here}, assface."

--------------
"Molecular stuff seems to me not to be biology as much as it is a more atomic element of life" --Creo nut Robert Byers
------
"You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?" --Anger Management Problem Concern Troll "Kris"

  
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2012,08:47   

Quote (Occam's Toothbrush @ Aug. 17 2012,16:21)
Quote (k.e.. @ Aug. 17 2012,09:01)
†  
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 17 2012,15:59)
I had to twist the knife a little and remind Joe that he's not allowed on my blog because he's a jerk, not because I'm scared of his 'arguments'.

I wonder if he'll promote it. †He'll probably hold on to it until he has the perfect comeback.

dickface?

I think it will be "Ya know, IOW, blind watchmaker, your side has no evidence, {insert porn here}, assface."

Evolution IS a blind Watchmaker (HOMO!)

Fuck when will those tards get it???

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror" DAVE TARD
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2012,12:38   

Joe, what evidence did you post that they are cowards?  That they don't promote comments.  What evidence did you post that you are different?  That you do promote comments.

I addressed these points.  Unless, of course, you'd like to point out another piece of evidence in your opening post???  Yeah, I thought not.

Tough to handle teh stoopid

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
  7670 replies since Feb. 24 2010,12:00 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (256) < ... 162 163 164 165 166 [167] 168 169 170 171 172 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]