On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:54:54 GMT, a jury from soc.men found John
Knight guilty of posting this:
>>"Peter J Ross" <heresiarch at meow.org> wrote in message
>news:2b2dvucbg4ksqea1b5r1uk4ekm55g1glli at 4ax.com...>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:35:32 GMT, a jury from soc.men found John
>> Knight guilty of posting this:
>> >Second, there' no such thing as an "evolutionary theory". A "theory"
>> >requires some shred of evidence which "evolutionists" have NEVER been
>> >to produce.
>> >If homo sapiens "evolved" from ANY lifeform whatsoever, other than an
>> >original homo sapiens, then whatever it "evolved" from would have had to
>> >have been a DIFFERENT species, right? As soon as you utter the word
>> >"evolve", you mandate that speciation was involved.
>> >If there was NO speciation whatsoever, ever, then NOTHING could ever have
>> >"Evolutionists" are MORONS who constitutes only 9% of the population who
>> >"believe" that homo sapiens "evolved" from some lower life form
>>>> Ooh look! A Fundie! I wish I'd looked at this thread sooner.
>>>> I've got a little question for you, Fundie. Now that you've disproved
>> the Theory of Evolution by clever use of your magical Acme
>> Non-Sequitur Machine, could you advise me which of the two
>> contradictory Creation stories in Genesis 1-2 I ought to believe? I
>> mean, since they don't agree with each other about any of the details,
>> one of them must be just as false as that boring old evolution myth,
>> mustn't it?
>> PJR :-)
>>>Ooh lookie! A "liberal". Just what the world needs--another "liberal".
Of course, everybody who accepts that scientific research is more
useful than primitive mythology is a liberal! I'm probably a lesbian
>There's nothing contradictory in Genesis--
Once you admit that you can't read, I'm sure people will be
>unless you're a moron like lojbab
>who thinks that it's a sign of "intelligence" to "think" like a "liberal".
One can think like a liberal, one can think like a conservative, or
one can follow the path of John Knight and not think at all.
>If you do a little simple math, you'll see that in order for speciation to
>have occurred, there would have had to have been FAR MORE [like millions of
>times more] fossils of the "intermediate species" than of the original
It probably isn't worth mentioning to you that the conditions
necessary for fossilisation are very rare, is it?
>If speciation is as slow and gradual a process as the
>9% of Americans
How dare you insult Americans by calling 91% of them morons! You
>who proclaim their STUPIDITY by promoting "evolution" claim
>it is, then there would have had to have been BILLIONS of times more fossils
>of these "intermediate species" than of the original species.
Let's add complete ignorance of the manner in which genes mutate to
your other intellectual deficiencies, shall we?
>But you don't have even ONE bone from ONE of these "intermediate species",
Every single fossilised bone is from an "intermediate species", O
>All you have are monkey bones that LOOK similar to each other, stacked in an
>orderly pile next to each other, coupled with the CHILDISH notion that
>because they look similar, they must have had a "common ancestor".
>>This is even more CHILDISH than saying that because an axle from a train
>found in Italy a million years looks similar to an axle from a Ferrarri
>found in Chicago, they must have had a "common ancestor", or they must have
>"evolved" from each other. But even you can consider that they were
>DESIGNED that way, and didn't "evolve" and didn't need a "common ancestor"
>to exist, right?
It's logically possible. Tell me, how did the designer evolve?
>>You have not ONE fossil of even ONE species which can be linked to each
>other to prove that ANY kind of "speciation" or even "adaptation" ever
>occurred. You have sheer SPECULATION, and nothing else, that an ancient
>fossil that is DIFFERENT but looks SIMILAR to a modern species was a "common
>ancestor" to ANYTHING on the planet today.
It would be extremely surprising if a fossil were discovered to be a
direct ancestor of an organism that's currently alive.
>>You also have SCIENTIFIC DNA *proof* that the "scientists" who once
>proclaimed that Neanderthal and homo sapiens were "genetically linked" were
>DEAD WRONG [read: they were NOT "scientists"].
Niels Bohr was not a scientist! One of his theories was wrong!
Johannes Kepler was not a scientist! Several of his early theories
about the motions of the planets were wrong!
Clearly, John Knight is the only true scientist who ever lived.
>Neanderthal was their last great white hope--and it's as DEAD as their
Nice trolling, er, I mean *talking* to you, cretin.
Alcatroll Labs Inc. Graduate Researcher in Chuckles Studies
MEOW MEOW ARMY (TINMMA)
england.chat bronze star x 2
buried deeper than anyone else in wd's killfile
"see, the mean people know who they are. the problem is the stupid
people don't know who they are, so it's the job of the mean people
(who know who they are) to make sure the stupid people are aware that
they're stupid. see?"
- j r sherman explains our mission in alt.arts.poetry.comments
"What really needs to be done is to recognize that rape isn't a big
deal and stop kowtowing to every fucked in the head bitch who cries
"rape!" Stop supporting the rape industry and send them to get
regular jobs. Make the punishment a $20 fine like a parking ticket,
about what the "crime" deserves."
- Bob (bobx23456) advocates rape in soc.men
"While Bob's position sounds extreme, he does have a point that rape
is given far more importance than it deserves. How many men would
spend their lives crying if a woman forced them to have sex with
them? Or worry about prosecuting their wife if she forced him to have
sex with her? The rape hysteria says more about women's frigidity
and lack of respect for men's sexuality than it does about the
severity of the crime.
- Mark Sobolewski joins the rapists' liberation front in soc.men
"I think you will find [Pathetic Loser] describes most people in this
group pretty well, myself included."
- Jack Archer shows insight in alt.sex.strip-clubs
"We have not been able to discuss anything meaningful since the
onslaught of the flonkers."
- wd gets it right in soc.men
"A prune, if it is a real prune, knows no cheese."
- Frank Zappa, irrefutably