Posted: May 07, 2012 9:38 pm
asyncritus wrote:
Now can we have an answer to either or both of the 2 questions?
You've been handwaving for the longest time now, and I wait for your answers.
Can you stop lying through your teeth?
I've answered all your questions in depth. If you ignore them, you don't get to pretend that no one has answered.
I will await your response, but if I see you pulling this shit anymore, I will report it.
asyncritus wrote:You say 'absurdities of instinctive behaviour'. I'm still waiting for some explanation of the origin of the absurdities of
Reading comprehension: I said 'Async will wax lyrical about the failings, as he sees them, of evolution to account for the absurdities of instinctive behaviour.'
Now, that clearly indicates that it's you who's appealing to these absurdities. I've given you an explanation that's pretty mundane, so I hardly find the phenomenon an 'absurdity'.
If you stopped jumping around trolling people and actually focused on what's being said, you might actually manage to follow a conversation.
Incidentally, this was a pointed destruction of your ramblings.
You claim these migratory events are absurd, damaging, ridiculous, insensible.... and then you blithely invoke your favoured Celestial Dictator as the explanation. Something doesn't add up there - but apparently you can't see it.
asyncritus wrote:a. The swallows' magnificent journey
b. The godwit's (nice name, that) epic two-way trans-Pacific journey
c. The eels' migration.
I've given you a clear explanation already.
If you don't comprehend my explanation, feel free to ask further questions - note that simply repeating the question again like a broken record will earn you only further criticism of your poor behaviour.
asyncritus wrote:And of course, how the behaviour entered the genome.
Blatant trolling.
I have explicitly answered this question at least 5 times; and I have explained why this is a stupid question indicative of not having even a shallow grasp of comprehension.
You may note a pattern here. The first time I actually answer your question with substance and application of facts. Once you start parrotting, I start focusing on your behaviour and why it is you can't address substance.
If you want to talk about the topic - feel free to actually get round to responding to my earlier posts. Simply ignoring them so you can regurgitate the same questions is not acceptable.
asyncritus wrote:Please begin your statements with something like:
The XYZ behaviour in the (name of organism) originated thus...
The XYZ behaviour in the (name of organism) entered the genome thus...
Sorry, I don't jump through hoops - particularly not for someone who's shown zero interest in the topic. 3 years you've known about the bee experiments showing that behaviour is linked to gene expression. Have you followed this up? Have you fuck. You're not interested in the topic, just in whacking your god off in public.
asyncritus wrote:If you can see your way to doing this, it will assist me considerably in evaluating the quality of your evidence/whatever.
If it's of that much interest, you could of course just go back a few pages and actually address my responses.
asyncritus wrote:I have been away for a few days, and if in the meantime you have produced the required answers, then forgive my missing them, and link me directly, as I haven't yet had the time to read through the updated pages.
My ability to click the page number buttons is not in any way superior to yours: stop trying to get people to jump for you and go and read the posts you skipped over before.
asyncritus wrote:If on the other hand you have been handwaving and producing generally irrelevant posts such as the one quoted, then please regard the above questions as outstanding and awaiting your response.
Try reading the numerous posts I've made that directly answer your questions.
If you don't want to read those posts, that's fine. You can remain ignorant of the answers to your questions. No skin off my nose.
However, please desist from pretending that your questions remain unanswered. This is provably an outright lie, and I shan't continue accepting this type of slimy dialogue from you - if you want me to go back through the posts, I will do so with a report to the mods showing the number of times you've ignored these direct responses.
This deception is over, Async. You either address the topic matter, or you slink off back to whatever Creationist site it is that you dredge up this sewerage from and crow about your victory over the Evillusionists.