Oh. My. God.

[Timshel]

No, clearly he did, because he did it.

I have the benefit of hindsight, not foresight. Duh.

Meanwhile, I've been asking you twerkboy, over and over.... what other species do you envision building a space shuttle?

Dumbass, without foresight you can't claim that other species do not possess this capacity.

I don't recall you asking that question before and you clearly are not very good at accurately recalling your past statements. I am not going to answer your stupid question. It has no relevance to the theory of evolution. Besides that you are too much of a coward to take a position on the toe and you'd probably backpedal and abandon any new positions you take here.

 

[Taft2016]

Dumbass, without foresight you can't claim that other species do not possess this capacity.

Carrier of piss buckets, with hindsight I see no species exhibiting any of the traits man did thousands of years ago.

But let's keep playing.... which species do you see building a space shuttle?

don't recall you asking that question before and you clearly are not very good at accurately recalling your past statements.

So answer it now....

It has no relevance to the theory of evolution.

You always say that when it's inconvenient to your position. Which means you've been saying it over and over and over and over...

 

[Timshel]

Carrier of piss buckets, with hindsight I see no species exhibiting any of the traits man did thousands of years ago.



But let's keep playing.... which species do you see building a space shuttle?



So answer it now....



You always say that when it's inconvenient to your position. Which means you've been saying it over and over and over and over...

Who cares. Even if this were relevant to the discussion about the toe, you already backpedaled into the fetal position and admitted defeat by abandoning your previously stated position on that several times anyway. Your questions are not only irrelevant they are totally pointless.

 

[Taft2016]

Who cares. Even if this were relevant to the discussion about the toe, you already backpedaled into the fetal position and admitted defeat by abandoning your previously stated position on that several times anyway. Your questions are not only irrelevant they are totally pointless.

You are such a liar...

Backpedaled from what? I said from the beginning I don't know how man developed into his current state, only that I didn't see how evolution could account for it. How the hell does one backpedal away from such a non-committal position? You are clearly a liar.

You said you did know, and could explain through the TOE.

But sadly, you failed time after time after time after time after time...

 

[Timshel]

You are such a liar...

Backpedaled from what? I said from the beginning I don't know how man developed into his current state, only that I didn't see how evolution could account for it. How the hell does one backpedal away from such a non-committal position? You are clearly a liar.

You said you did know, and could explain through the TOE.

But sadly, you failed time after time after time after time after time...

I posted the several quotes showing your evolving position. You implied you accepted the theory of evolution and were a creationist. Then implied support for divine creation, rejected the possibility of man's evolution but maintained support for the toe as it applies to other animals. Then you finally curled up into the fetal position and claimed to take no position on the evolution of any species.

No, sir I never claimed the toe would explain what or if any species would develop a space shuttle. LOL. I would never make such a claim because I understand the proof of evolution is not technological similarities but our biological ones. Your a clueless idiot spouting nonsense but I enjoy the spectacle you have made of yourself.

 

[Taft2016]

I posted the several quotes showing your evolving position. You implied you accepted the theory of evolution and were a creationist. Then implied support for divine creation, rejected the possibility of man's evolution but maintained support for the toe as it applies to other animals. Then you finally curled up into the fetal position and claimed to take no position on the evolution of any species.

No, sir I never claimed the toe would explain what or if any species would develop a space shuttle. LOL. I would never make such a claim because I understand the proof of evolution is not technological similarities but our biological ones. Your a clueless idiot spouting nonsense but I enjoy the spectacle you have made of yourself.

Good God, you are recounting what I said, and how many times did you use the word "implied"?

I never implied anything, it's just like I said: you are incapable of having a nuanced non-traditional discussion of the subject.

 

[Timshel]

Good God, you are recounting what I said, and how many times did you use the word "implied"?

I never implied anything, it's just like I said: you are incapable of having a nuanced non-traditional discussion of the subject.

You are a liar. Your position has been all over the place and then you laid down and admitted your defeat.

How does the evolution of other species PRECLUDE the Divine creation of man?

I do not however, believe man is the product of an evolution from a lesser species.

One can believe that species evolve and at the same time man is not part of that equation.

There is no scientific proof either than all life emerged from single organism. Just theories.

The possibility that species evolved separate and apart from the Creation of man is not only possible, I'd call it probable.

I accept the possibility of the evolution of every form of life on this planet except for one. And for that, you say I reject the entire premise.

 

[Taft2016]

You are a liar. Your position has been all over the place and then you laid down and admitted your defeat.

No, it hasn't.

It was very simple and straight forward.

You just admitted you read implications into it from the outset.

So you are a totally dishonest debater.

 

[Timshel]

No, it hasn't.

It was very simple and straight forward.

You just admitted you read implications into it from the outset.

So you are a totally dishonest debater.

Oh just leave it alone loser. You most certainly implied that you were a creationist who accepts evolution.

Unthinking libtards will never give up on the false premise that creationism and evolution are mutually exclusive.

I am not reading anything into that.

You abandoned your positions and now state you don't have an opinion on evolution at all (because you can not defend what you actually believe). There is nothing more of interest to discuss. I am not interested in listening to some spineless moron muse about nonsense.

 

[Taft2016]

Oh just leave it alone loser. You most certainly implied that you were a creationist who accepts evolution.



I am not reading anything into that.

You abandoned your positions and now state you don't have an opinion on evolution at all (because you can not defend what you actually believe). There is nothing more of interest to discuss. I am not interested in listening to some spineless moron muse about nonsense.

And my stated position was basically: "Yes, I can accept how every form of life on earth reached its current status through evolution except one. I think something different occurred to propel man beyond all other species. I don't know what it was, but to me it was clearly a different process than evolution."

You, however, fancying yourself as some sort of Imam of Evolution, instantly recognized this as heresy. So I can believe all 8.7 million species reached their current state through evolution, but because I question if ONE species did so, I am a complete denier, heretic, non-believer, and rejecter of science to you.

The irony is, my position isn't religious. *YOURS* is.

 

[Timshel]

And my stated position was basically: "Yes, I can accept how every form of life on earth reached its current status through evolution except one. I think something different occurred to propel man beyond all other species. I don't know what it was, but to me it was clearly a different process than evolution."

You, however, fancying yourself as some sort of Imam of Evolution, instantly recognized this as heresy. So I can believe all 8.7 million species reached their current state through evolution, but because I question if ONE species did so, I am a complete denier, heretic, non-believer, and rejecter of science to you.

The irony is, my position isn't religious. *YOURS* is.

Round and round you go. So I was not reading anything into it.

Pick a position and stick with it coward.

You don't/didn't accept the evolution of other species as explained by toe. You abandoned that when faced with the fact that your metric of technological similarities does not support the idea that a gorilla and a palm tree are related. If you now want to change once again, back to the idea that toe explains other species but not man then you are going to need to explain this problem.

Your definitely the one pushing religion here. Your hang up on accepting the evolution of man is your need to feel special which is obviously based in your acceptance of divine creation or a remnant of that.

 

[Taft2016]

Round and round you go. So I was not reading anything into it.

Pick a position and stick with it coward.

You don't/didn't accept the evolution of other species as explained by toe. You abandoned that when faced with the fact that your metric of technological similarities does not support the idea that a gorilla and a palm tree are related. If you now want to change once again, back to the idea that toe explains other species but not man then you are going to need to explain this problem.

Your definitely the one pushing religion here. Your hang up on accepting the evolution of man is your need to feel special which is obviously based in your acceptance of divine creation or a remnant of that.

Your flailing and babbling are duly noted.

My position was perfectly rational, yours was hysterical and fundamentalist.

Watch this. The difference between the 4th and 5th horse is meaningless. The important thing is the distance Secretariat put between himself and the rest of the pack. Your argument would be to diminish the winner, and focus on how well #4 and #5 did. In other words, irrelevant.

 

[Timshel]

The use of religious words like heresy are all yours. My problem is your position is based on whim chosen as a matter of faith and not based on science.

Explain to us why the evidence for the toe fits for other species but not for man? How is it that the homologies between a gorilla and a cat can prove their relationship but those between gorilla and man do not support their relationship?

There is no way to dismiss the evidence for man's evolution without challenging the evidence of toe at a fundamental level. Not unless you are choosing your position based on faith and whim, which you obviously have. That's ol, you can pick a new one.

 

[Timshel]

Your flailing and babbling are duly noted.

My position was perfectly rational, yours was hysterical and fundamentalist.

Watch this. The difference between the 4th and 5th horse is meaningless. The important thing is the distance Secretariat put between himself and the rest of the pack. Your argument would be to diminish the winner, and focus on how well #4 and #5 did. In other words, irrelevant.

Your position was nonsense. Chosen on faith and whim. Are we still talking in the past tense about it or are you retaking this stand?

Are you suggesting that only the development of man is relevant to the toe?

 

[Taft2016]

The use of religious words like heresy are all yours.

Yes, a perfect description of your attitude.

My problem is your position is based on whim chosen as a matter of faith and not based on science.

Lying again?

Please tell me, what faith describes Creation as "Something different happened to one species, we don't know what it was"?

Give me the name of that organized religion, I might consider joining it.



Meanwhile, your "science," like man-made global warming "science," is dependent upon manipulated data. The dishonesty is both palpable and laughable.

But please, do go on.

 

[Timshel]

Yes, a perfect description of your attitude.



Lying again?

Please tell me, what faith describes Creation as "Something different happened to one species, we don't know what it was"?

Give me the name of that organized religion, I might consider joining it.



Meanwhile, your "science," like man-made global warming "science," is dependent upon manipulated data. The dishonesty is both palpable and laughable.

But please, do go on.

You completely ignored my arguments TapsOut.

Explain to us why the evidence for the toe fits for other species but not for man? How is it that the homologies between a gorilla and a cat can prove their relationship but those between gorilla and man do not support their relationship?


Show us that your position is based on science. Prove me wrong!

There is no way to dismiss the evidence for man's evolution without challenging the evidence of toe at a fundamental level. Not unless you are choosing your position based on faith and whim, which you obviously have. That's ol, you can pick a new one.

 

[Taft2016]

You completely ignored my arguments TapsOut.

Explain to us why the evidence for the toe fits for other species but not for man? How is it that the homologies between a gorilla and a cat can prove their relationship but those between gorilla and man do not support their relationship?

And this is why I keep ignoring your arguments. You keep repeating them and they are lies and straw men.

I never said that any of these creatures are unrelated. I never said a Divine Being picked up dust, blew on it, and created man.

I never said any of that. You're trying to argue with a caricature, which is not what my position is.

Stop lying already, please, just stop.

 

[Taft2016]

And besides, what is there for me to "prove"?

I've said repeatedly I don't know what happened to set man on course to his current position.

Why do I have to prove what I say I don't know?

 

[Timshel]

And this is why I keep ignoring your arguments. You keep repeating them and they are lies and straw men.

I never said that any of these creatures are unrelated. I never said a Divine Being picked up dust, blew on it, and created man.

I never said any of that. You're trying to argue with a caricature, which is not what my position is.

Stop lying already, please, just stop.

So you are back to the fetal position? What is the point of this?

You said it...

How does the evolution of other species PRECLUDE the Divine creation of man?

I do not however, believe man is the product of an evolution from a lesser species.

One can believe that species evolve and at the same time man is not part of that equation.

There is no scientific proof either than all life emerged from single organism. Just theories.

The possibility that species evolved separate and apart from the Creation of man is not only possible, I'd call it probable.

I accept the possibility of the evolution of every form of life on this planet except for one. And for that, you say I reject the entire premise.

And please explain your point about the horse race, jackass.

 

[Timshel]

And besides, what is there for me to "prove"?

I've said repeatedly I don't know what happened to set man on course to his current position.

Why do I have to prove what I say I don't know?

All I have asked is for you to do is show some sign that your position is based on science and was not just chosen based on whim/faith. You failed.