@Ceili,
Quote:I don't come here to entertain fools. The article I told you to read had your answer. I can't help it if your too thick not only write a decent sentence but to read one either.
If I am such a fool and as thick as you suggest how on earth do you expect me to read articles written for brainboxes like you? Do you not know how media works? Fools and thick people have their own media and brainboxes do too. You are implying that the editor of the article had taken aim at thick fools and brainboxes in one go. And it isn't my fault that you haven't figured that simple thing out yet. It bodes ill for your approach to the challenges to evolution which is a much more difficult subject.
Even if the article did have the answer it is incredible that a brainbox like you should be caught reading it when it is in the business of simplifying complex subject matter in order that fools and thick people, like me, can be made to feel we understand them so we can go in pubs and explain it all to everybody.
Were you in the outside closet with a torn up newspaper in patience mode? That's the only excuse I can think of for a brainbox like you to be found reading an article that a fool such as I can understand.
But, of course, the article does not answer the questions at all as you declare it does. And it doesn't matter that it doesn't. Except that it exposes your assertion as false which taints all your other assertions with the same black strokes of the tar brush. Judging from your member profile you have two brushes.
What matters is that the questions were asked on this thread. That you choose to bluster a non answer is neither here nor there. Readers here will decide for themselves what to make of those questions and whether they were answered or not.
In a public debate the audience is what matters and I made sure that A2Kers knew those questions had been asked. And I'm making sure here that some of them know that asserting that they were answered is not the same as answering them and can never be allowed to stand duty for them being answered.
Quote:Lightwizard also gave you another good answer. I can't help but notice his answer didn't stop you foaming of the mouth either.
I dealt with LW with my reference to his "has to do" expression. And if you think that was a species of foaming at the mouth you must have never seen me perform when I have let myself go a little in that direction.
Quote:I can't help that your feeble mind can't understand genetics.
Look love. That sort of thing is meaningless. I neither proves I don't understand genetics, which nobody does, or proves that you do, which is impossible. It insults the readers of a science thread. Or any thread except maybe Insults. A person must understand something in order to be able to prove someone else doesn't. So you are claiming to understand genetics. Or seeking to give the impression that you do without offering any verification. With a flick of the wrist so to speak.
Quote:If you can't figure out the importance of genetics or knowledge in general, that's not my concern.
Well it should be. I came on here to ask experts and be abled to know and here's you, posing as an expert in both knowledge and genetics, saying it is not your concern to provide me with guidance.
What would you say is the importance of genetics and knowledge?
Quote:Sue me. I have better things to do.
If I had the time and the money to spare it would probably be interesting to sue you. I would no doubt lose but the entertainment might be worth it.
What could I sue you under? It's not illegal at the moment for gobby, uppity females of a certain age to spout opinions on any subject under the sun irrespective of whether they know anything about them and to fling out inane, schoolyard imprecations at anybody who gets in their way. And I can't say I have any other cause to complain.
