pfrankinstein wrote:Thrower The genius who can't even spell words a 6 year old would be required to know.
snipA six your may also know the basic principle of "cause and effect".
Understand in a naive way, perhaps, but not truly understand cause and effect in terms of necessary and sufficient causes, for example.
I know that YOU don't understand cause and effect to the extent you'd need to in order to even have a seat at any table of people who do actually know what they're talking about.
I know this because what we might laughingly call 'your argument', which really just amounts to you stacking a handful of words together without any substantiation, logic, or even apparent comprehension of the few words you use, you claim that there is one single process which caused from original past to everything contemporarily extant. This is literally dumb as fuck. Your inanely stupid position is just an inanely idiotic affirmation of the consequent - i.e fallacious reasoning.
This was explained to you many, many times over the years, but still you persist, blithely unaware that your refusal or inability to understand this makes you look like a total loon.
Just because something exists today, and the universe notionally began to exist in the past (a problematic contention in and of itself), that doesn't mean that a single process follows through from the primordial instances of the universe's early expansion to me wearing blue boxer shorts today, or you talking moronic shite yet again on the internet.
There is no single process there. There are many processes there. Many of those processes are contingent; contingent on a network of contingencies. You treat 'cause' like a child would conceive of 'cause', wherein there's a simple relationship where one defined event results in a second defined event - a necessary cause where in the 2nd event could not have occurred absent the preceding event.
What a child, or someone with a child's mind, might not yet grasp is that there are multitudes of ways in which the 2nd event *could* have happened, and there are multiple possible results the initial event *could* have produced.
This means you have your head up your arse.
It also means that you will never be able to find any embryonic biological evolution in the quarky soup of the initial expansion. It's just not there. It just doesn't exist. At that moment, there's an array of things that
could possibly happen, not what
would necessarily happen.
With your head up your arse, you're unable to see that my choice to wear blue underwear today, or your choice to once again engage in embarrassingly inept Live Action RolePlaying on the internet, wasn't a
possibility that existed in the Planck Epoch, no single process from there led to your engagement of inanity today. There's a gulf of gulfs between these events, and your dumb declaration that this must be so was understandable 15 years ago considering you were just poorly educated, but the fact you STILL think you're onto a winner now necessitates either seeing you as having a juvenile mind that just can't grasp any of the substance of the topic at all, or that your hubris is so absurdly overgrown you're no longer even able to see how foolish you are in other peoples' eyes, or you're taking the piss.
Any which way, it's still cretinous clownery. You need to get a bunch of mates, buy a small car and all squeeze in - there's good money in entertainment. Don't forget the big shoes and squeaky nose: HONK HONK!
pfrankinstein wrote:Easy peasy. Question " The Origin of species
The usual numptyism:
1) You can't even write this tiny phrase in a grammatically sensible fashion.
2) There's no fucking question, you numpty!
I have a question: banana
pfrankinstein wrote:The Charles Darwin answer. The PROCESS of EVOLUTION.
Charles Darwin's answer to 'Easy peasy. Question'?
pfrankinstein wrote:A 12 year old may envisage with the minds eye the protoplantery disc.
Not you thrower.
Paul - are you high as a fucking kite?
Do you even think about what you're writing, or do you just draw random words out of a bag?
pfrankinstein wrote:Great map makers mankind. How's your mapping out of SELECTION going thrower.?
You're not 'great' Paul - you're either mad or full of shit or both.
What's most amusing is the concept of you still thinking you've alighted on some genius concept of the world while still being unable to write more than a dozen words on the topic, and even then, they'd be grammatically incoherent, and you'd be using the words wrong. It's pure clown show, Paul.
HONK HONK
by 
