Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

'Let's Talk About Fallon Fox.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Devil throughout the entire thread...

    Comment


      Originally posted by Permalost View Post
      -can you define the specific, identified physical characteristics and what genes they correspond to?

      -chopping your junk off doesn't affect your genetic code for junk.


      Most of the times the drive or ability is lost isn't directly related to genetics. Age and industrial accidents make evolutionary cul-de-sacs out of "positive" genetics.

      Let's go with gender identity. I realize chopping off your dick doesn't change your genetics. If you're a man who wants to be a woman and sleep with men, you've got an issue with reproduction, right? It's not that you can't make a baby. It's that you don't want to be with a woman.

      I don't know what genes that characteristic would correspond to, but I'm operating under the assumption that gender identity is genetic, not a lifestyle choice. That was Hedge's take on it as well and it was my agreement but differing interpretation of what that meant that started this conversation in the first place.

      Or are you suggesting that gender identity is a lifestyle choice?

      Comment


        Originally posted by Tranquil Suit View Post
        Bullshit cop out.
        Oh so wrong. And it is evident in what we are doing right now.

        Humankind's key advantage, the greatest expression of our superiority, is language. Which you and I are using as a tool together right now.

        Language, the ability to communicate ideas, group identity, past history, future plans is what makes us special and unique.

        If evolution was not a team sport for humans, language would be no advantage to us.

        And thus when a group works together and plans to secure shelter, to gather food, to grow food, to divide tasks, to make tools and all the other basic cave person life tasks, these tasks are done more efficiently.

        Within the context of group survival, individual reproduction is not as significant, and in fact, some members of the group not reproducing is an advantage, as they have time for other tasks, and those tasks still ensure the survival of off spring.

        Also, sexual orientation is not a bar to reproduction. Many Many people who are not attracted to the opposite sex have biological children. Sexual gratification and Sexual reproduction are not nessecarily the same thing.

        Which is why Devil's moral argument of "gayfags are bad cuz survival of fittest" falls flat on its face biologically. He has resorted to science to prove a moral opinion that science in fact disproves.

        It's false science in the service of a bigoted notion being overused by a self admitted troll. Shit like that annoys me.

        Comment


          Originally posted by Antifa View Post
          Oh so wrong. And it is evident in what we are doing right now.

          Humankind's key advantage, the greatest expression of our superiority, is language. Which you and I are using as a tool together right now.

          Language, the ability to communicate ideas, group identity, past history, future plans is what makes us special and unique.

          If evolution was not a team sport for humans, language would be no advantage to us.

          And thus when a group works together and plans to secure shelter, to gather food, to grow food, to divide tasks, to make tools and all the other basic cave person life tasks, these tasks are done more efficiently.

          Within the context of group survival, individual reproduction is not as significant, and in fact, some members of the group not reproducing is an advantage, as they have time for other tasks, and those tasks still ensure the survival of off spring.

          Also, sexual orientation is not a bar to reproduction. Many Many people who are not attracted to the opposite sex have biological children. Sexual gratification and Sexual reproduction are not nessecarily the same thing.

          Which is why Devil's moral argument of "gayfags are bad cuz survival of fittest" falls flat on its face biologically. He has resorted to science to prove a moral opinion that science in fact disproves.

          It's false science in the service of a bigoted notion being overused by a self admitted troll. Shit like that annoys me.

          The flaw here is that we're not discussing the survival of the group or the evolution of the species. We're discussing natural selection and the likelihood certain individuals within the population will survive and reproduce.

          Yes, homosexuals are physically capable of reproducing and sometimes do. Please learn what the term likelihood means.

          Comment


            Originally posted by Devil View Post
            The flaw here is that we're not discussing the survival of the group or the evolution of the species. We're discussing natural selection and the likelihood certain individuals within the population will survive and reproduce.

            Yes, homosexuals are physically capable of reproducing and sometimes do. Please learn what the term likelihood means.
            The likelihood of an individual within a population surviving and reproducing is dependent on the cooperation and cohesion of their immediate group more than any other factor.

            Your right wing individualist reductionism will not pass scientific muster regardless of which demeaning phrases you use to frame your argument.

            Comment


              The problem with your argument is Homosexuals often have the desire to reproduce. They may not be able to naturally but we keep coming up with ways for them to do so.
              As the clock ticks on this will mean them passing on their genes.
              For example
              http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19879113

              Comment


                Originally posted by Antifa View Post
                The likelihood of an individual within a population surviving and reproducing is dependent on the cooperation and cohesion of their immediate group more than any other factor.

                Your right wing individualist reductionism will not pass scientific muster regardless of which demeaning phrases you use to frame your argument.

                Really? Using clear cut socialist speak to debunk my right wing science? That's rich.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Rock Ape View Post
                  I can use a calculator, Understand that what goes up-must come down, I own a computer with AutoCad installed and got electrocuted once. Does that count?

                  True story on the electrocution, I ended up dead.
                  That explains a lot.




                  Originally posted by Devil View Post
                  Or are you suggesting that gender identity is a lifestyle choice?
                  Modern evolutionary synthesis, or Neo-Darwinism, teaches us that gender identity would be malleable in the presence of the right factorS. Notice I said factors, not factor. For example, if a male who produced a bit more estrogen than is typical had the right environmental conditions, it is feasible that he could identify with being a female more than the biological equipment he was born with.

                  That's only two factors though. One thing that has become increasingly apparent is that the whole biosphere is vastly more interrelated than we previously thought. Often, yesterday's external environmental factors are tomorrow's population variables. That's a fancy way of saying things are a whole lot more complicated than we thought they were.

                  You keep trying to bring genotypic arguments into a phenotypic discussion. Ms. Fox's current ability to reproduce has little bearing on whether she should be allowed to fight in the women's division in my opinion.

                  I realize that you already answered that question earlier. Unfortunately I suffer the vanity of believing that I can explain a few aspects of evolutionary biology to you. This despite the fact that my major was in molecular biology.
                  Shut the hell up and train.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by goodlun View Post
                    The problem with your argument is Homosexuals often have the desire to reproduce. They may not be able to naturally but we keep coming up with ways for them to do so.
                    As the clock ticks on this will mean them passing on their genes.
                    For example
                    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19879113
                    You need to learn what likelihood means too.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by jnp View Post
                      That explains a lot.





                      Modern evolutionary synthesis, or Neo-Darwinism, teaches us that gender identity would be malleable in the presence of the right factorS. Notice I said factors, not factor. For example, if a male who produced a bit more estrogen than is typical had the right environmental conditions, it is feasible that he could identify with being a female more than the biological equipment he was born with.

                      That's only two factors though. One thing that has become increasingly apparent is that the whole biosphere is vastly more interrelated than we previously thought. Often, yesterday's external environmental factors are tomorrow's population variables. That's a fancy way of saying things are a whole lot more complicated than we thought they were.

                      You keep trying to bring genotypic arguments into a phenotypic discussion. Ms. Fox's current ability to reproduce has little bearing on whether she should be allowed to fight in the women's division in my opinion.

                      I realize that you already answered that question earlier. Unfortunately I suffer the vanity of believing that I can explain a few aspects of evolutionary biology to you. This despite the fact that my major was in molecular biology.

                      This may be thought provoking. Right now, it's dinner time in the Dirty South. I'll meditate on it later.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Devil View Post
                        Really? Using clear cut socialist speak to debunk my right wing science? That's rich.
                        Again we get to another part of the argument:

                        Which science is that? Please cite an author, a work, a theory, an article, a publication a something, since you wont even name a school that you attended.

                        Please tell me where you learned what you think you know. Please give me something to read that supports you argument.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Devil View Post
                          You need to learn what likelihood means too.
                          Maybe its cause I live in one of those rich liberal states but I often see gay partners with children where at least one of them is the biological parent. So maybe you need to revisit your "likelihood" argument.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Antifa View Post
                            If evolution was not a team sport for humans, language would be no advantage to us.
                            If you're trying to say that modern science acknowledges that "genetic diversity in existing natural populations is key factor in evolution"* and that banding together in groups is a positive adaptation to accomplish this, you are correct.

                            I think that would be the only correct interpretation of your statement though.

                            *From the Wiki page
                            Shut the hell up and train.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Antifa View Post
                              Humankind's key advantage, the greatest expression of our superiority, is language. Which you and I are using as a tool together right now.

                              Language, the ability to communicate ideas, group identity, past history, future plans is what makes us special and unique.

                              If evolution was not a team sport for humans, language would be no advantage to us.

                              And thus when a group works together and plans to secure shelter, to gather food, to grow food, to divide tasks, to make tools and all the other basic cave person life tasks, these tasks are done more efficiently.
                              I swear to god I almost heard this whilst reading.





                              Within the context of group survival, individual reproduction is not as significant, and in fact, some members of the group not reproducing is an advantage, as they have time for other tasks, and those tasks still ensure the survival of off spring.
                              You're talking society. Who gives a flying fuck. We're talking about passing on your genes to an offspring. Not how many more hours you could clock at the IT helpdesk if you cut your dick off.


                              Also, sexual orientation is not a bar to reproduction. Many Many people who are not attracted to the opposite sex have biological children. Sexual gratification and Sexual reproduction are not nessecarily the same thing.

                              Which is why Devil's moral argument of "gayfags are bad cuz survival of fittest" falls flat on its face biologically. He has resorted to science to prove a moral opinion that science in fact disproves.
                              Look, it's a simple argument. If you don't have the genitalia, then you can't reproduce. If you chose to neuter yourself cause your brain is telling you so (and that's genetic), then buddy you got unlucky with that gene.
                              Last edited by Tranquil Suit; 4/18/2013 3:11pm, .

                              Comment


                                You dumbasses need to realise THESE:

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	rovnyi-pol_1.jpg
Size:	11.8 KB
ID:	4327057

                                ... sorts of degrees really count in life, and not all that other shite.

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC02976.jpg
Size:	11.8 KB
ID:	4327058

                                And the only math you need is the ability to count the number of magazines you got and 5.56mm fo killin zombies.

                                Fuckers

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X