Fred J. McCall
7/26/2009 7:37:00 AM
Malcolm <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:
:In article <g4bn65lh63v32gd3optf1l13g3jth3fnae@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
:<fjmccall@gmail.com> writes
:>Malcolm <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:>
:>:
:>:In article <9lnm65dict6crqe0v9mkl22kg8htjr9258@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
:>:<fjmccall@gmail.com> writes
:>:>Malcolm <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:>:>
:>:>:
:>:>:In article <41fm65ddt5fg911lqmjcuh9gj93tmc9bsj@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
:>:>:<fjmccall@gmail.com> writes
:>:>:>Malcolm <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:>:>:>
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:In article <50pk65dhha7jhg1iach151gs6faobfg3j2@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
:>:>:>:<fjmccall@gmail.com> writes
:>:>:>:>Malcolm <Malcolm@indaal.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>:In article <c9dj65hl016ridikomj1asmbvumpj8tc7k@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
:>:>:>:>:<fjmccall@gmail.com> writes
:>:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:>Why, of course not. I mean, it's not like animals have brains,
:>:>:>:>:>emotions, or anything like that, right?
:>:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>:But you mustn't attribute human brains, emotions or anything like that,
:>:>:>:>:right?
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>No, but it's not all 'instinct' like some want to claim, either.
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:Some may want to claim that. I haven't. Learning is as important as
:>:>:>:instinct in many cases.
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>
:>:>:>But you still seem insistent on the idea that they don't have
:>:>:>'emotions', 'character traits', or any of that. Why, they never do
:>:>:>anything just because they enjoy it...
:>:>:>
:>:>:
:>:>:I go on the evidence. If you know better, produce it.
:>:>:
:>:>
:>:>You've not produced your 'evidence'.
:>:>
:>:>There's no 'evidence' that people have any of those things, either. Do
:>:>you assert that they do not until someone provided you with concrete
:>:>proof?
:>:>
:>:
:>:I'm a scientist. I work with facts and proof. You clearly don't.
:>:
:>
:>Evasion and attempted insult noted.
:>
:
:It wasn't any kind of an insult, attempted or otherwise. It was a
:statement about your indulgence in opinion not fact.
:
And so we see the problem with so many of your sort. When someone
else says it it's an insult. When you say it, it's a statement of
fact.
Yeah, sure...
:>:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:>I live out here where we've got bears, lynxes, wolves, coyotes,
:>:>:>:>:>mountain lions, etc.
:>:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>:Good for you. Perhaps those wild animals are wary of humans because they
:>:>:>:>:have been hunted for too long.
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>Nope. We're not allowed to hunt them or even shoot at them if they
:>:>:>:>come into town. There was a big furor here over a mountain lion that
:>:>:>:>came down after some fires and staked out a local school as its new
:>:>:>:>territory being shot by authorities.
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:No, I didn't say you still hunted them, but they were hunted over a very
:>:>:>:long period, were they not?
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>
:>:>:>People haven't lived out here for "a very long period". Besides
:>:>:>which, all those animals are long dead. Are you proposing 'ancestral
:>:>:>memory' now?
:>:>:>
:>:>:
:>:>:I've no idea what you mean by "ancestral memory" in this context. What
:>:>:does happen is that behavioural traits are passed down through the
:>:>:generations. See my earlier remark about "learning".
:>:>:
:>:>
:>:>But they wear back off, too, unless you postulate that the current
:>:>generation can somehow 'remember' and react to experiences they've
:>:>never had, but that their great great great great great grandparents
:>:>might have had.
:>:>
:>:
:>:You really don't know what you are talking about, do you? Yet that
:>:doesn't stop you, does it? That's been apparent in thread after thread
:>:in this ng.
:>:
:>
:>Lack of content noted.
:>
:Have you been reading your own posts, then?
:
<yawn>
:>:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:>Because you're apparently too stupid to get it otherwise.
:>:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>:And now ad hominem remarks. Clearly you are not capable of carrying on a
:>:>:>:>:discussion and making your points without indulging in them. But then
:>:>:>:>:that's your style here, isn't it? In thread after thread, you put
:>:>:>:>:forward your views and then as soon as someone with a better grasp of
:>:>:>:>:the subject puts forward an alternative view, you start throwing your
:>:>:>:>:toys out of the pram.
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>Again, you started it. If you don't like it, don't do it. If you do
:>:>:>:>like it, you'll likely be killfiled shortly, as folks who enjoy that
:>:>:>:>sort of thing are generally too fuckwitted to be worth bothering with
:>:>:>:>except to poke occasionally.
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:I did not start ad hominem remarks. You did as you do in thread after
:>:>:>:thread.
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>
:>:>:>Generally because one finds insulting snots in thread after thread and
:>:>:>I give them what they merit.
:>:>:>
:>:>:Yes, like this:
:>:>:
:>:>:"Poor stupid little git. This is why I said STUPID and ignorant. The
:>:>:single thing that's even close to being right (although it's not) in the
:>:>:paragraph and THAT is the one you fixate on.
:>:>:Ignorance is correctable. Stupidity is not and will prevent you from
:>:>:ever correcting the ignorance.
:>:>:Run along now. You're obviously too stupid to seriously bother with."
:>:>:
:>:>:"See what I mean about never learning anything from you? It's because
:>:>:you're such a bloody liar that nothing you says can be given any
:>:>:credence."
:>:>:
:>:>:"You just get stupider and stupider and stupider. You're like the
:>:>:energizer bunny of dumb."
:>:>:
:>:>:"But then, we understand that. It's just that you're SO bloody thick is
:>:>:all.."
:>:>:
:>:>:"You just never get any brighter, do you?"
:>:>:
:>:>:"The Phlatulant Pillock thinks there is 'Truth' (with a capital 'T').
:>:>:I'll stick with the facts and leave 'Truth' to boronic idiotlogues like
:>:>:him, thanks... "
:>:>:
:>:>
:>:>Now list the folks those were in reply to and you'll understand
:>:>PRECISELY what I said, above.
:>:>
:>:I merely post these recent messages of yours to demonstrate your style
:>:of "discussion".
:>:
:>
:>What the other party is doing matters, Malcolm. You merely dredge up
:>examples of people getting what they give as misdirection.
:>
:I didn't "dredge" anything up. I merely looked at a handful of your most
:recent posts.
:
And did you happen to peruse just what those people have said to me?
No, I didn't think so.
:
:It doesn't seem to matter with you what "the other party"
:is doing. Your style remains the same.
:
Either your amazingly dense or you're an outright liar.
:>:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:>Then they're hardly "doing it for food", are they?
:>:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>:Usually. There are circumstances where adults do it to teach their
:>:>:>:>:young. There are also a great many animals and birds which cache food to
:>:>:>:>:consume later. Examples of killing and then abandoning are rare.
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>Name a feral animal species (what we're talking about here) that does
:>:>:>:>that.
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:Mink have been reported as doing so, but not regularly.
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>
:>:>:>I don't believe I've ever heard of the vast herds of feral mink going
:>:>:>about attacking people and storing them up for later.
:>:>:>
:>:>:
:>:>:No, you wouldn't have.
:>:>:
:>:>
:>:>And that would be because such don't exist. I'll leave the delusions
:>:>to others, thanks.
:>:>
:>:
:>:No-one said they did exist. Certainly I didn't.
:>:
:>
:>Evasion noted.
:>
:
:What? I'm not evading anything. I'm trying to inform you about animal
:behaviour, something you are clearly not fully informed about.
:
More than you, it seems.
:>:>:>:>:>DOH!
:>:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>:You do have a *big* problem, don't you, with anyone who disagrees with
:>:>:>:>:you.
:>:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>Not really. I do have a big problem with people who think their
:>:>:>:>assertions count as evidence.
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:So what have you been doing other than making assertions and failing to
:>:>:>:back them up with evidence?
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>
:>:>:>You're the one claiming to know far more than I. Little evidence of
:>:>:>it so far, I must say. See your very next remark, below.
:>:>:>
:>:>:It has become increasingly obvious, the more you post, that I know far
:>:>:more on this subject than you do. Live with it and learn.
:>:>:
:>:>
:>:>It has become increasingly obvious, the more you post, that I know far
:>:>more on this subject than you do. Live with it and learn.
:>:>
:>:
:>:Except that you don't, and parroting my words won't change that.
:>:
:>
:>Except I do, and your assertions of your opinion won't change that.
:>
:My case rests.
:
:>:>Are you convinced now? So you see how 'convincing' your remark is.
:>:>
:>:
:>:I couldn't care less whether or not you find it convincing. Your
:>:opinions are of little interest.
:>:
:>
:>Yet here you are, fuming and stewing.
:>
:
:I'm doing neither. I'm sitting here with a bemused smile on my face
:wondering how why you're so insecure.
:
<yawn>
Still trying to pass Stupid Usenet Tricks 101, are you?
:>:>:>:>:Try taking into account that your knowledge is not necessarily superior
:>:>:>:>:to other people's. In this particular case, it is definitely inferior.
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>I'd suggest you go read what you just wrote and take it to heart.
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:I have read what I wrote. I have also read what you wrote. I have
:>:>:>:provided facts and mentioned my personal observations of a wide range of
:>:>:>:species in many different countries.
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>
:>:>:>Gee, me too.
:>:>:>
:>:>:
:>:>:But strangely reluctant to produce some actual evidence based on
:>:>:personal experience. More bullshitting, perhaps?
:>:>:
:>:>
:>:>You've never done. Why should I?
:>:>
:>:
:>:I listed groups of animals to back up my correction of your sweeping
:>:statement.
:>:
:>
:>In other words, you tried to obscure the issue.
:>
:
:If that's how you interpreted what I wrote, then it appears that you
:have a major problem with comprehension.
:
Or perhaps you have a major problem with expression. But no, it can't
be YOU, can it?
:
:And, before you say it, that is
:not an insult, it is how I see your lack of understanding of the written
:word. I've seen it in other threads, too.
:
As I said earlier. When YOU do it, it's "not an insult". When I do
it, it is.
You get what you give, regardless of what YOU call what you're doing.
And it really doesn't matter if you're so self-deluded that you
actually believe what you're saying doesn't constitute an 'insult' or
if you're just playing debating games and lying.
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:I am a biologist who has studied
:>:>:>:mammals and birds for many years. I also try and keep abreast of the
:>:>:>:literature on animal behaviour.
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>
:>:>:>I, on the other hand, just stayed alive around them.
:>:>:>
:>:>:
:>:>:But obviously didn't acquire any knowledge of animal behaviour.
:>:>:
:>:>
:>:>Certainly enough to not get eaten. Were you in danger of being
:>:>devoured by all those books, were you?
:>:>
:>:
:>:Meaningless remark.
:>:
:>
:>Lack of content noted.
:>
:
:A comment telling someone they've posted a meaningless remark very
:obviously contains content. See above about comprehension.
:
Lack of content noted.
:
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>:Readers can determine whether this
:>:>:>:counts for anything against unsubstantiated comments about what you
:>:>:>:believe to be differences between wild and feral animals using
:>:>:>:anthropomorphic comparisons.
:>:>:>:
:>:>:>
:>:>:>I'm not using 'anthropomorphic comparisons'. That's just your claim
:>:>:>of what I'm doing. It's a pure bullshit debating tactic on your part.
:>:>:>
:>:>:You have more than once mentioned animals doing things for "sport", for
:>:>:"fun" and other decidedly anthropomorphic comparisons.
:>:>
:>:>So your claim is that animals don't feel those sorts of things in
:>:>their own ways?
:>:>
:>:That's a meaningless question. Start by defining "in their own ways".
:>:
:>
:>Evasion noted.
:>
:
:Needle stuck?
:
Like you, I call them like I see them. Stop repeating Stupid Usenet
Tricks 101 tactics and I'll stop pointing out that you're doing so.
:>:>That seems to bring us back to my earlier remark that you seem to have
:>:>some belief that humans are somehow unique in these regards.
:>:>
:>:>We're animals just like them...
:>:>
:>:Well, you maybe, but the rest of the human race while indeed animals
:>:have major differences from the rest of the animal kingdom.
:>:
:>
:>Oh? And just what are those? Remember, SCIENTIFIC PROOF is required.
:>
:
:Of course it is. I suggest you go and look for it.
:
Your inability to support your repeated 'scientific' claims is noted.
:
:I'm bored with your
:inability to discuss a matter rationally without descending into your
:usual insult mode.
:
You get what you give, Malcolm. If you don't like what you get, start
looking to yourself for the cause.
:
:Reading other threads makes it clear that you are not
:open to being informed on matters about which you have demonstrated a
:lack of knowledge.
:
No, I'm just not particularly open to accepting your unsupported
assertions as God's revealed truth. And it's obvious that you're not
open to anyone disagreeing with your unsupported assertions.
--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates