RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (14) < 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... >   
  Topic: JAD was banned again from UD..., Can we let him post here again?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 24 2006,02:29   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Nov. 23 2006,19:48)
Smells more like Paley to me.

It can't be Paley. This one is dead an burried.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 25 2006,12:56   

It looks like Davison is talking to himself:

 
Quote
Martin
Member
Member # 2001

 posted 21. November 2006 17:39                    
REC.

I would say that chance also play no role in polymorphism of Papilio Dardanus.

1) All males look identical, yet there are 14 different female mophs. Most of them are mimetic, but in some races coexist mimetic and non-mimetic forms. Even
quote:

The situation is different in Abyssinia where, unlike that in South Africa, 80 per cent of the females are male-like while 20 per cent are entirely distinct from them, being polymorphic and mimetic.
http://www.bulbnrose.com/Heredity/Ford/FORD4.HTM

On my opinion it is very hard for neodarwinist account for the fact that non-mimetic forms outnumbered better protected mimetic forms.

2) It is accepted theory that butterfly mimicry to be effective first step should be a "great" one to enable enough similarity to unpalatable species to confuse predator (birds with extraordinary good vision). To explain this step Nijhout(2003) proposed that polymorphism of P.dardanus evolved from P.phorcas - it is much more easily for neodarwinists assume this as assume that monomorphic P.dardanus males represent ancestral form. Yet then, why are only females of P.dardanus nowadays polymorphic?

According Darwin the phenomenon that males are rarely polymorphic as females are due the fact of sexual selection by females giving priority to ancestral males patterns. Yet if females polymorphism is advatageous for females it should not represent disatvantage for males if it occurs in males too - at least to say. So sexual preferation is the darwinian explanation of the fact. I would say that Nijhout weird conception of ancestor looking like P.phorcas is in contradiction with Darwin explanation - we should ask, why is it possible that female are polymorphic and males no? Because both of them have to undergone patterns/color changes to their nowadays "look" and females sexual preferention did not hindern males to change color/patterns. So why females admitted such non-mimetic change of males but do not admitted mimetic males change? We know that also male mimics in butterfly realm exist as well.

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/modern-science/chapter15.html

These question are of such importance that neodarwinists are forced use very untraditional explanations like "transvestite evolutionary step", "females to escape 'sexual harrasment' by males" and so on.

It is really hard work to defend darwinism in case of Papilio dardanus.

They should be rather prepare to accept fact that behind some curious phenomenon of mimicry are no random mutation/selection but until today some unknown internal factors. Proposed by Punnet and cited by John Davison in his Manifesto.

Nijhout fancy on Papilio Dardanus evolution via "transvestite evolutionary step" and subsequent "genetic effect of large magnitude":

http://www.nbb.cornell.edu/neurobio/BioNB420/Dardanus2003.pdf

[ 21. November 2006, 17:42: Message edited by: Martin ]


Javison then THANKS HIMSELF:

 
Quote
Martin

Thank you for laying it on the "groupthinkers" over at the saloon. You have them on the run and I don't think they even realize it. "Prescribed" ideologues are like that. Thank you for doing that which they won't permit me to do so I will do it here where I am allowed. I hope they are listening.

ALL of both ontogeny and phylogeny has been the result of "internal factors." The environment has played no role whatsoever in either creative evolution or embryonic development beyond the rather trivial role of allowing a milieu for the expression of those strictly "internal factors" The generation of intraspecific varieties and strains, none of which represent incipient species in any event, are all that the Darwinian model has ever been able to achieve. The experimental laboratory has made this conclusion perfectly plain. Mendelian genetics, natural or artificial selection, allelic mutation and sexual reproduction can only maintain and extend evolutionary dead ends. None of these ever played a role in creative evolution, a phenomenon of the distant past. Trust me but of course no one will. That is fine too. I wouldn't have it any other way.

How does that grab the Darwinian mystics? I imagine it smarts a little. I certainly hope so!

As for asking me to make predictions, I already have. There is little now to predict because it is all over. Creative evolution is finished and has been for millions of years at the genus level and for thousands of years at the species level. That is perfectly obvious to any serious student of the living world, fossil or extant. Today only extinction can be documented.

Darwinism is without question the biggest ideologically driven hoax in the history of science.

I love it so!


We all do, John. We all do.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 25 2006,15:06   

It ain't chance.

It ain't selection.

It ain't God (because he's dead).

What else, then? :O
:D

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1468
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2006,01:50   

Oh man!

JAD and DaveTard have resumed their pissing contest over at ISCID

ISCID

They just chase each other around cyberspace, trying to get in the most insults!

It just doesn't get any better that this  :D  :D  :D  :D

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

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2006,04:37   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Nov. 25 2006,20:50)
Oh man!

JAD and DaveTard have resumed their pissing contest over at ISCID

ISCID

They just chase each other around cyberspace, trying to get in the most insults!

It just doesn't get any better that this  :D  :D  :D  :D


And see the last comment on this thread.
Quote
Oh hi, John. I wonder where you'd slunk off to after mailing that letter to O'Leary. She forwarded it to all the admins at UD. A couple of them, even Dembski, rose up in your defense.

They rose up, that is, until I emailed them a couple dozen choice quotes from your blog "newprescribedevolution" where you'd called Dembski all kinds of unflattering names. They then went from defending you to pitying you but agreeing that me banning you was the right thing to do. I didn't want to expose you in that way but you left me no choice.

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2006,15:12   

Quote

I repeat: what determines the frequences of existing alleles in a population, if not their reproduction rates?



I wouldnt say question stands like that. Because female morphs of Papilio  
dardanus segregate clearly in given race/population it is necessary to recognize
existence of switch-gene. The switch-genes possess dominance hierarchy and determine which morhps in heterozygous female will segregate.

Question stands like this - how and when such switch-gene aroused? Surely it is hard to imagine that the switch-gene aroused after morphs were established. In other case morphs would intermingled.

Second possibility is that such gene with all genes of given morphs sprang up
sudenly by saltus hitting off the resemblance of mimetic model.

Third possibility is neodarwinian one - existence of switch-gene preceded existences of morphs.


Yet if such gene aroused then at beginning IMHO it had nothing to switch - or at least to switch between same possibilities of same patterns/colors of ancient monomorphic female. There was no selective pressure to switch-gene to exist and consequently it should cease to exist. Or at least there was no selective advantage having it and to spread over Papilio dardanus population - it was neutral. Such switch-gene at the beginning (where only one morph exist) contradicts in my opinion even to purpose of diploidy. Because the switch gene blocks expressing genes from other set of chromosomes. Subsequently such switch-gene would diminish variability and evolutionary development of wing color/patterns at the beggining when no mimetic forms exist.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2006,15:27   

Hey John, how they hanging?

Thanks for name checking me all over, but I think you kind of hurt Richard Hughes' feelings by leaving him out of that villain list. How about at least one message where you call him 'Hichard Rughes'?

Definitely keep harassing Spravid Dinger, tho. We'd all really miss that if you quit doing it.

Got that? Write it down!

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2006,15:58   

As you know John is banned here. You should better write him an email or go to Brainstorm.

If you folks here think that John and I are the same person you are at great mistake. I suppose anyway that you choose such tactic (to hold me for John even if you clearly see it impossible - I can hardly compare myself with John as to the biological knowledges) to heal your
ego that other people can hold John Davisons Manifesto for one of the best antidarwinian work. Interesting and inspiring.

M.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2006,18:05   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 26 2006,15:58)
If you folks here think that John and I are the same person

Don't flatter yourself.  No one here CARES who you are.  (shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,14:46   

Quote

No one here CARES who you are.  (shrug)


No one here cares even what the true is. (shrug)
What do you really care of is how to denigrate professor Davison with your adolescent offences.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,14:52   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 27 2006,14:46)
Quote

No one here CARES who you are.  (shrug)


No one here cares even what the true is. (shrug)
What do you really care of is how to denigrate professor Davison with your adolescent offences.

and?

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,14:55   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 27 2006,14:46)
Quote

No one here CARES who you are.  (shrug)


No one here cares even what the true is. (shrug)
What do you really care of is how to denigrate professor Davison with your adolescent offences.

So how's Vermont this time of year, John?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,15:04   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Nov. 27 2006,09:55)
Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 27 2006,14:46)
 
Quote

No one here CARES who you are.  (shrug)


No one here cares even what the true is. (shrug)
What do you really care of is how to denigrate professor Davison with your adolescent offences.

So how's Vermont this time of year, John?

I'm not so sure it's John's hand up the sockpuppet, Arden. John has never to my knowledge been able to post a link, or cut and paste. Just out of curiosity, can't someone (calling Mr Story) check the ISP. Virtual six-pack says you're wrong.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,15:39   

Quote (Alan Fox @ Nov. 27 2006,15:04)
 
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Nov. 27 2006,09:55)
   
Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 27 2006,14:46)
   
Quote

No one here CARES who you are.  (shrug)


No one here cares even what the true is. (shrug)
What do you really care of is how to denigrate professor Davison with your adolescent offences.

So how's Vermont this time of year, John?

I'm not so sure it's John's hand up the sockpuppet, Arden. John has never to my knowledge been able to post a link, or cut and paste. Just out of curiosity, can't someone (calling Mr Story) check the ISP. Virtual six-pack says you're wrong.

I already asked Steve whether 'VMartin's' ISP shed any light on this, but haven't heard back. Something smells rotten about his posts, since he can't even stay in character (watch his Borat accent go in and out), tho I agree these posts do seem to be beyond Javison's meager computer skills.

The fact of Javison being banned doesn't impress me as evidence, since, as GoP can tell you, all that means is you have to go down to your nearest library to post.

I don't think these posts are Paley, but I am sort of wondering if the ISP originates from, oh, I dunno, Austin, TX. I think we've seen this person under a different name.

I too want to know what the true is.  :p

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,15:44   

Quote
I too want to know what the true is.


You unleshead beast, you! :D

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,15:45   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 26 2006,15:12)
Quote

I repeat: what determines the frequences of existing alleles in a population, if not their reproduction rates?



I wouldnt say question stands like that. Because female morphs of Papilio  
dardanus segregate clearly in given race/population it is necessary to recognize
existence of switch-gene.

I'm not convinced. Would you care to explain precisely why you came to that conclusion? What's a "switch gene" anyway ? I do some population genetics, but I never heard of that.

Quote
Because female morphs of Papilio dardanus segregate clearly in given race/population...

I'm not sure what you mean by that.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,16:17   

Quote

No one here cares even what the true is. (shrug)


Omigod, he's saying "(shrug)"!

Maybe VMartin is actually Lenny Flank!

:O

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,19:49   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Nov. 27 2006,16:17)
Quote

No one here cares even what the true is. (shrug)


Omigod, he's saying "(shrug)"!

Maybe VMartin is actually Lenny Flank!

:O

I'm very careful what I   (shrug)   at.   ;)


But it is awfully funny to see, yet again, just how utterly incapable of originality the fundies are.  I don't think any of them have had an original thought in thirty years.  (shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,19:56   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 27 2006,14:46)
No one here cares even what the true is. (shrug)
What do you really care of is how to denigrate professor Davison with your adolescent offences.

That's right.  Neener, neener.  

JAD's a poopie-head!  JAD's  a poopie-head !!!!!

(puts thumbs in ears and wiggles fingers)

Nyah nyah nyah nyah.  Pththththttttttttttt.

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2006,23:54   

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Nov. 26 2006,18:05:

Quote

Don't flatter yourself.  No one here CARES who you are.  (shrug)


and after 20 hours:

Quote

JAD's a poopie-head!  JAD's  a poopie-head !!!!!
(puts thumbs in ears and wiggles fingers)
Nyah nyah nyah nyah.  Pththththttttttttttt.


Arent such reactions something I would call bipolar?

Btw does bipolarity aroused via random mutation too and
was subsequently preferred by natural selection?
(shrug).

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Mike PSS



Posts: 428
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 28 2006,09:38   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 28 2006,00:54)
Arent such reactions something I would call bipolar?

Btw does bipolarity aroused via random mutation too and
was subsequently preferred by natural selection?
(shrug).

Aren't you asking yourself a question?
Why don't you answer yourself?

Why don't you get a clue and read a little about bipolar in the first place?
Quote
Studies seeking to identify the genetic basis of bipolar disorder indicate that susceptibility stems from multiple genes. Scientists are continuing their search for these genes, using advanced genetic analytic methods and large samples of families affected by the illness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bipolar_disorder

If you can navigate through the facts and come up with a mechanism for bipolar disorder then please let the scientists know.  They are searching too.

In fact, why don't you spend some precious brainpower and propose a new mechanism for this disorder using JAD methodology.  The subject is wide open at present since there seems (at least from the Wiki page) to be an opening for new and various ideas.

Put up or stop whining.

Mike PSS

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2006,15:37   

O.K. Air seems to be clear, adolescent darwinists probably move to other forum (linguistic). And we may continue.

jeannot

 
Quote

What's a "switch gene" anyway ? I do some population genetics, but I never heard of that.


You should probably look into evo-devo article that address mimicry of butterflies of Heliconius. Article is from nature.com, 2006:

 
Quote

From an evo-devo perspective, the major interest lies in linking the loci underlying pattern change in Heliconius, the so-called switch genes, with the pathways involved in wing pattern development.


They use also "switch locus".I would say problem is important one while such switch gene hardly aroused after morphs were established - morhps patterns and colors would intermingled otherwise. That is also answer to your second question about "segregation". By segregation we means that morphs of given race segregate clearly, its A or B or C and seldom some hybrid between A and B. That means that different phenotyps of morhps of given species  (that often mimics other butterfly species) are switched or regulated by "switch gene". Origin of this switch gene is on my view more interesting as origin of regulated pathways and cascades it "switch on".

Problem persist as outlined partly in John Davison E.Manifesto that deals with Punnett view of role of selection on mimicry of butterflies. The problem is 100 years old and until now unresolved by neodawinists. No gradual evolution can account for such phenomenon as mimic morphs of the same species and "macromutaion" is needed. Even in that evo-devo article from nature.com 2006 they seem to admit it partly:  

 
Quote

Thus, evolution of the H. numata supergene could have involved elements of both the  'macromutationist' and the 'gradualist' positions in this historical debate.


http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v97/n3/full/6800873a.html

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2006,18:02   

I'm sorry, Martin, did you say something?  I, like everyone else, wasn't paying any attention to you.  (shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1468
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2006,23:24   

Ya know John, er, VMartin - if you'd drop that asinine pseudo-accent, people could at least decipher what you're babbling about.

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

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 01 2006,00:12   

So John, were you inspired to do this by the movie Borat? You know, the funny accent, 'care about the true', all that?

Are you using a computer at your local public library, or did you manage to get around your banning somehow, like Dave would do?

So how are you and Dave getting along these days? Better?

Do you love it so?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1365
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 01 2006,01:40   

Come on Steve. Spill the beans on the ISP source.

BTW Martin,

I glanced through your linked article. I did not see anything that undermines the theory of evolution there. As you are making the claim, perhaps you could indicate the relevant passages that I must have missed

  
Ved



Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 01 2006,12:48   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Dec. 01 2006,01:12)
So John, were you inspired to do this by the movie Borat? You know, the funny accent, 'care about the true', all that?

What do you mean? Borat's the real deal, man. I mean, he's as real as Stephen Colbert's balls are big!

Wa wa wee wa!

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 01 2006,13:30   

Occam's Aftershave
   
Quote

Ya know John, er, VMartin - if you'd drop that asinine pseudo-accent, people could at least decipher what you're babbling about.



Your problem probably consist in fact that you do not understand other language as english. You seems to have problem therefore to distinguish between analytical (e.g. german, english) and syntetical languages (as Latin, Greek and Slavonic languages).

Order of words in a sentence seems to be unsurmountable barrier for your underestanding. No wonder that only theory you are capable to comprehend is outdate darwinism from mid-19 century.

That many of folks here do not underestand any Slavonic language and not even written German is probably a fact. One of you used babelfish translator to translate Nietzsche german text with this curios outcome:    


   
Quote

... Gesammt aspect life is not Nothlage, which which sumptuousness, even the absurd verschwendung, - one fights where, one fights to hunger situation, rather the Reichthum, for power.
.
.
the weak ones become again and again over the strong ones gentleman
.


While Fridriech Nietzsche is promimenet atheist who ridiculed darwinism very I try to modify it for better underestanding:

   
Quote

Anti-Darwin: What concerns the famous struggle for life, then it seems to me meanwhile more stated than proved. It occurs, but as exception; general aspect of life is not dearthe, hunger or starvation but abundance, sumptuousness, even absurd wasting, lavishing - where fight occurs there one fights for power... One should not confound Malthus with nature. - Let us assume however, that this fight happens - and it really happens - then it runs out unfortunately in reverse as the school Darwin's wishes, when perhaps one might wish with it: indeed to detriment of the strong ones, the privileged, the lucky exceptions. The kinds do not grow in the perfection: the weak ones become again and again the masters of strong ones, - they have large numbers, they are also more intelligent... Darwin forgot the spirit (- that is english! ), the weak ones have more spirit... One must to have  need for spirit, in order to get spirit, - one loses him, if one does not need him any more. Who has the strength, get rid himself of spirit (- "go away! one thinks today in Germany - wee must keep the Reich"...). I understand as spitit the caution, the patience, the ruse, the adjustment, the large self-control and everything what mimicry is (to the latter a large part of the so-called virtue belongs).


Enjoy.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 01 2006,13:57   

Quote (VMartin @ Dec. 01 2006,13:30)
Occam's Aftershave
       
Quote

Ya know John, er, VMartin - if you'd drop that asinine pseudo-accent, people could at least decipher what you're babbling about.



Your problem probably consist in fact that you do not understand other language as english. You seems to have problem therefore to distinguish between analytical (e.g. german, english) and syntetical languages (as Latin, Greek and Slavonic languages).

Order of words in a sentence seems to be unsurmountable barrier for your underestanding. No wonder that only theory you are capable to comprehend is outdate darwinism from mid-19 century.

That many of folks here do not underestand any Slavonic language and not even written German is probably a fact. One of you used babelfish translator to translate Nietzsche german text with this curios outcome:    


       
Quote

... Gesammt aspect life is not Nothlage, which which sumptuousness, even the absurd verschwendung, - one fights where, one fights to hunger situation, rather the Reichthum, for power.
.
.
the weak ones become again and again over the strong ones gentleman
.


While Fridriech Nietzsche is promimenet atheist who ridiculed darwinism very I try to modify it for better underestanding:

       
Quote

Anti-Darwin: What concerns the famous struggle for life, then it seems to me meanwhile more stated than proved. It occurs, but as exception; general aspect of life is not dearthe, hunger or starvation but abundance, sumptuousness, even absurd wasting, lavishing - where fight occurs there one fights for power... One should not confound Malthus with nature. - Let us assume however, that this fight happens - and it really happens - then it runs out unfortunately in reverse as the school Darwin's wishes, when perhaps one might wish with it: indeed to detriment of the strong ones, the privileged, the lucky exceptions. The kinds do not grow in the perfection: the weak ones become again and again the masters of strong ones, - they have large numbers, they are also more intelligent... Darwin forgot the spirit (- that is english! ), the weak ones have more spirit... One must to have  need for spirit, in order to get spirit, - one loses him, if one does not need him any more. Who has the strength, get rid himself of spirit (- "go away! one thinks today in Germany - wee must keep the Reich"...). I understand as spitit the caution, the patience, the ruse, the adjustment, the large self-control and everything what mimicry is (to the latter a large part of the so-called virtue belongs).


Enjoy.

You never said, John, how's Vermont about now? I mean, I realize it's too late for the leaves to change color and all, but I imagine the snow on the trees and all must be kind of pretty.

As an aside, John, your imitation of incompetent English is kind of iffy. Sometimes you sound like someone whose first English lesson was a month ago, and sometimes just like yourself with the person marking removed from a few verbs just for appearance's sake. (I mean, 'chance worshipper'? Please.) You have to keep up a consistent voice, as they say in literary criticism.

Anyway, I'm glad you found a library not too far from your house to post from.

What are your feelings about Spravid Dinger these days?

How do you like them road apples?

PS: German is not a 'syntetical' language, John.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 8833
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 01 2006,14:02   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Nov. 27 2006,16:39)
Quote (Alan Fox @ Nov. 27 2006,15:04)
 
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Nov. 27 2006,09:55)
   
Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 27 2006,14:46)
     
Quote

No one here CARES who you are.  (shrug)


No one here cares even what the true is. (shrug)
What do you really care of is how to denigrate professor Davison with your adolescent offences.

So how's Vermont this time of year, John?

I'm not so sure it's John's hand up the sockpuppet, Arden. John has never to my knowledge been able to post a link, or cut and paste. Just out of curiosity, can't someone (calling Mr Story) check the ISP. Virtual six-pack says you're wrong.

I already asked Steve whether 'VMartin's' ISP shed any light on this, but haven't heard back. Something smells rotten about his posts, since he can't even stay in character (watch his Borat accent go in and out), tho I agree these posts do seem to be beyond Javison's meager computer skills.

The fact of Javison being banned doesn't impress me as evidence, since, as GoP can tell you, all that means is you have to go down to your nearest library to post.

I don't think these posts are Paley, but I am sort of wondering if the ISP originates from, oh, I dunno, Austin, TX. I think we've seen this person under a different name.

I too want to know what the true is.  :p

VMartin might obviously be Davison or someone, I don't know. I checked the IP and it's somewhere it Europe, which means little. Davison is insane but in a boring way like Larry Falafelman, so I don't read his posts, or this thread, enough to detect if VMartin is him. Or Larry.

   
  417 replies since Oct. 11 2006,12:18 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (14) < 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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