Can anyone explain how the moth got it's owl eyes?

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

it makes perfect sense, would you trade sickle cell anemia for malaria resistance? Because that's what happens.

Actually, I decided to check something on this: people with sickle cell anaemia are just as likely to die from malaria. But people with the sickle cell itself are less likely to die from it.

Your question is still a stupid one though.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

And what does that have to do with evolution?

Did you know 100% of the world is arsenic intolerant?

If you can't grasp what I'm saying then there's no helping you understand what I'm saying.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you can't grasp what I'm saying then there's no helping you understand what I'm saying.

I know enough of what you're saying to believe you are wrong.

Plus, it's what you're not saying that's telling on you.

That is, not answering my questions.

It's much easier to claim my points are Bos Sullage, than answer the questions, isn't it?

Does that make you feel real scholarly?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I know enough of what you're saying to believe you are wrong.

Plus, it's what you're not saying that's telling on you.

That is, not answering my questions.

It's much easier to claim my points are Bos Sullage, than answer the questions, isn't it?

Does that make you feel real scholarly?

I think you're very much full of yourself, and your vindictive, Don Quixote-style drive against anything academic related, real or imagined by you, is very much on display for everyone to see. As per usual.

 

[AV1611VET]

Your question is still a stupid one though.

That would sound real good in an auditorium debate, wouldn't it?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

That would sound real good in an auditorium debate, wouldn't it?

Again: your vindictive, Don Quixote-style drive against anything academic related, real or imagined by you, is very much on display for everyone to see. As per usual.

 

[AV1611VET]

I think you're very much full of yourself, and your vindictive, Don Quixote-style drive against anything academic related, real or imagined by you, is very much on display for everyone to see. As per usual.

So is your evasiveness.

 

[AV1611VET]

Again: your vindictive, Don Quixote-style drive against anything academic related, real or imagined by you, is very much on display for everyone to see. As per usual.

Again: so is your evasiveness.

 

[Astrid]

it makes perfect sense, would you trade sickle cell anemia for malaria resistance? Because that's what happens.

No. It isnt

You claimed you had made your last post on this thread. Despite that I asked if you might take the time to anwer my questions from post #93. I asked this, and repeated the question, in post #103 . Now, for your convenience I repeat them again here and ask that you please repsond.

1. Which field of science are you expert in? I'm not asking for your speciality, e.g. carbonatite lavas of East Africa; or, generalities, e.g. geologist; but something in the middle, e.g. vulcanologist.
2. Since you know evolution is not possible how did you go about falsifying it?

Thank you for your attention.

Good luck

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

So is your evasiveness.

No need to evade that which is daft enough to not be a good comment...?

I had something there but I lost it part way through.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Again: so is your evasiveness.

I'll actually answer it then: no, it wouldn't, but this isn't an auditorium so I don't give a hairy rat's behind.

 

[AV1611VET]

No need to evade that which is daft enough to not be a good comment...?

At least I try to answer good questions put to me, even though I don't know a lick of science.

I even tried to answer Ibanezer's question from a microevolution perspective.

Others, on the other hand, either ad hominem the questions, or put me on IGNORE.

And that says a lot, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

At least I try to answer good questions put to me, even though I don't know a lick of science.

I even tried to answer Ibanezer's question from a microevolution perspective.

Others, on the other hand, either ad hominem the questions, or put me on IGNORE.

And that says a lot, as far as I'm concerned.

I'm still figuring out what I was trying to say.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

If they didn't have them the day they were created, then those "eyes" must have been coded into their genes or something.

so... evolution?

 

[AV1611VET]

so... evolution?

Yes.

Microevolution.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Yes.

Microevolution.

Thanks. Evolution confirmed.

 

[Ophiolite]

That would sound real good in an auditorium debate, wouldn't it?

Based on personal experience, I believe it could be delivered in a way that charmed the audience and dismantled the speaker's position.

 

[AV1611VET]

Based on personal experience, I believe it could be delivered in a way that charmed the audience and dismantled the speaker's position.

QV please:

Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada April 21, 1995

"Free Speech is Dead" Bob Larson escapes Canada
Crowd turns ugly and Minister forced to leave building for fear of Violence.

Radio talk show host Bob Larson, made his third visit to Winnipeg yesterday and was met by over 1,000 people who came in vain to hear him speak.

The event was held at a local university but several days before the event was to take place, there was controversy as the local student union vowed to disrupt the show on the grounds that Bob Larson was spreading hate.

At the show, a small group of around 30 very loud and agressive gay supporters, blew whistles, occupied the stage, some shouted obsenites and gave third finger salutes and held placcards with various messages.

The security force from the Unviersity remained on the second floor and away from any and all action despite the apparent total lack of any sense of crowd control.

After a long delay the speaker edged his way towards the packed stage (a major mistake) and the crowd lunged forward with a mob mentality causing an usher to jump off the stage platform.

Bob Larson, then obviously began to get crushed as the mob seemed to lose total control and at that point an effort was made to push Bob Larsen off the stage and quickly out the back door and away from the scene.

The gay activists then stood on the stage blowing whistles, rasised arms and cheered in a show of solidarity for what they had done.

As a side note, earlier in the evening a noted Canadian skinhead was observed in the room and was harassed and demanded to leave by an angry mob (some of the same people).

If anything was accomplished that night, it was to prove that there is no freedom of speech and the saddest part was that several key university students orchestrated the whole protest.

I hope that the students intention was only to disrupt part of the meeting and that they did not really wish to stifle the freedom of speech of this person who paid for the room and invited all to attend.

The mob seemed to think that they had a victory, but I know that this event will cause them much more harm than would have come by hearing the simple 1 hour lecture with the ample time alloted for questions and
answers.

Again, I state that I have no religious position and went to the meeting to hear Bob Larsen speak and to hear him, as usual answer question from any and all takers.

It was a sad day, and I left with countless others feeling sorry for the speaker and embarassed for our city.

Note: anyone can use my comments in any way they see fit, but I would prefer not to have my name included without prior permission.

I respect the rights of all human beings, satanists, skinheads, christians and others and feel that through thoughtful discourse perhaps some good can come through a better understanding of each other.

Generally speaking Winnipeg is a great and safe place to live.

SOURCE

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

QV please:

That's really got nothing at all with the fact that, in a professional and academic environment, if you know how to say it, saying "Your question is still a stupid one" can be done if you know how to phrase.

Luckily, this forum is neither a professional nor academic environment, so I don't have to phrase it either way. Just as long as I don't call the poster in question stupid or something worse.

 

[Ophiolite]

QV please:

Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada April 21, 1995

"Free Speech is Dead" Bob Larson escapes Canada
Crowd turns ugly and Minister forced to leave building for fear of Violence.

Radio talk show host Bob Larson, made his third visit to Winnipeg yesterday and was met by over 1,000 people who came in vain to hear him speak.

The event was held at a local university but several days before the event was to take place, there was controversy as the local student union vowed to disrupt the show on the grounds that Bob Larson was spreading hate.

At the show, a small group of around 30 very loud and agressive gay supporters, blew whistles, occupied the stage, some shouted obsenites and gave third finger salutes and held placcards with various messages.

The security force from the Unviersity remained on the second floor and away from any and all action despite the apparent total lack of any sense of crowd control.

After a long delay the speaker edged his way towards the packed stage (a major mistake) and the crowd lunged forward with a mob mentality causing an usher to jump off the stage platform.

Bob Larson, then obviously began to get crushed as the mob seemed to lose total control and at that point an effort was made to push Bob Larsen off the stage and quickly out the back door and away from the scene.

The gay activists then stood on the stage blowing whistles, rasised arms and cheered in a show of solidarity for what they had done.

As a side note, earlier in the evening a noted Canadian skinhead was observed in the room and was harassed and demanded to leave by an angry mob (some of the same people).

If anything was accomplished that night, it was to prove that there is no freedom of speech and the saddest part was that several key university students orchestrated the whole protest.

I hope that the students intention was only to disrupt part of the meeting and that they did not really wish to stifle the freedom of speech of this person who paid for the room and invited all to attend.

The mob seemed to think that they had a victory, but I know that this event will cause them much more harm than would have come by hearing the simple 1 hour lecture with the ample time alloted for questions and
answers.

Again, I state that I have no religious position and went to the meeting to hear Bob Larsen speak and to hear him, as usual answer question from any and all takers.

It was a sad day, and I left with countless others feeling sorry for the speaker and embarassed for our city.

Note: anyone can use my comments in any way they see fit, but I would prefer not to have my name included without prior permission.

I respect the rights of all human beings, satanists, skinheads, christians and others and feel that through thoughtful discourse perhaps some good can come through a better understanding of each other.

Generally speaking Winnipeg is a great and safe place to live.

SOURCE

As @Warden_of_the_Storm observed, that has little or nothing to do with the point that we both assert: It is possible to describe a question as stupid without arousing hostility.
All your example could possibly demonstrate is that this is not always the case. That was never in dispute.
As to your example, there is no mention of Larson stating that someone has asked a stupid question. My conclusion: yours is a stupid example and on thus, on two counts, wholly irrelevant.