• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

2017 Trump Presidency Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
You've got issues. You aren't even consistent. It doesn't imply better, but we are higher (maybe I can see this, but there was never really that argument made)? You keep seeming as if you are informing me, but you're clueless. You don't seem to comprehend my post.

SNIP- swilow

*Right. The link. After I read through it, I didn't think it applied to any argument. It was still interesting, so I included it. This was why I said related, but that it is an aside (maybe sloppy).

*The hypothesis was an example of how evolution can occur. I think it's reasonable. I'm not sure why you have such an argument.
Species were naturally separated by boundaries, and the fact that we only had horseback for fast-travel. Now is kind of a different territory.

Snubbing each other? Groups do that all the time. We share with those we already share with, or those who share. It would come much more naturally to be "tribal". I am not saying we should totally give in, but we should be aware that certain behaviors will always be there, or at least for the foreseeable future.

There are things that you keep saying, as if you are trying to inform me about how evolution works, as if I have made an error that you are correcting, but I doubt you can pinpoint what you are actually making an argument with, from my exact words. Can you? I'd be happy to clarify, or maybe I need to realize I'm wrong, but you may be able to help me with that.

The only time I mentioned species in my posts, I said that they were all more or less the same species. The different groups, all the diversity of the planet, including our human "races" and ethnicities/ethnic groups, are all going through the same processing. But the distance between "human" and chimp is much greater than the distance between "Mongolian" and "Nigerian", for example. This is why I said "more or less" where I did, because species is a word, and it cannot describe to a T- it cannot be the definition and the definition does allow room to think, at least. The word "Species" means "look"- like "Spec"tate. And this could connect in meaning to "look like"- so in one very basic way, grouping species, we group things because they look like each other, in traits, and things (it gets very specific, with added requirements to make it so or not, or subspecies, or however to order). I can easily separate East Asian, and West African. We do not have quite the definition as different species, apart from each other, but there are noticeable differences. They are also not just skin-deep. And the implications of it are not just so dismissable.

Things aren't as clean, clear cut and dry like you seem to wish it would be. Yes, we are the same species, but things are very dynamic, and it isn't as easy as I'm just a racist fuck.

Intermingling of the species is not a problem to anyone who is not a racist fuck.

Would you like to have a contest? I'll list examples of where intermingling of different groups, however they were grouped (not that the metrics weren't of influence) was an issue, and you list examples where it wasn't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its like Godwins Law of CE&P, soon enough every thread turns to white supremacy.

I don't think what23 is actually a white supremacist though.
 
*
* word, and it cannot describe to a T- it cannot be the definition and the definition does allow room to think, at least. The word "Species" means "look"- like "Spec"tate. And this could connect in meaning to "look like"- so in one very basic way, grouping species, we group things because they look like each other, in traits, and things (it gets very specific, with added requirements to make it so or not, or subspecies, or however to order). I can easily separate East Asian, and West African. We do not have quite the definition as different species, apart from each other, but there are noticeable differences. They are also not just skin-deep. And the implications of it are not just so dismissable.

Things aren't as clean, clear cut and dry like you seem to wish it would be. Yes, we are the same species, but things are very dynamic, and it isn't as easy as I'm just a racist fuck.



Would you like to have a contest? I'll list examples of where intermingling of different groups, however they were grouped (not that the metrics weren't of influence) was an issue, and you list examples where it wasn't.


Members of the same species can look nothing alike. Caterpillar and butterfly as an example.

Species has a definition : two things are the same species if they can mate and produce a fertile offspring.

Nothing to do with looks

You may classify a species by looks. But it's likely due to your lack of scientific understanding.
 
Last edited:
Members of the same species can look nothing alike. Caterpillar and butterfly as an example.

Species has a definition : two things are the same species if they can mate and produce a fertile offspring.

Nothing to do with looks

You may classify a species by looks. But it's likely due to your lack of scientific understanding.

I was being general. But yes. I'm just stupid.
 
I'm talking about adaptations in humans, as were others, and trying to make examples of how sometimes the trade may not be positive for one end. Recognizing that light skin would give an advantage over dark skin in northern climates, for instance, must be because I'm a white supremacist. Because light skin is wonderful in the hard sun.

It's funny nobody can really argue me and they have to just shout "white supremacist", or whatever. Low level.
 
And also, as far as evolution, and consciousness, and if consciousness can have an effect- why not? Consciousness at least becomes a player. If I can perceive that someone has an adaptation that is beneficial, or if we can, and then practice eugenics (positive genetics), this would be assessing the situation, and what would fit the environment, and adjusting course accordingly. It may not work in their favor, but it can still be a player.
 
And yes - consciousness and what I called sexual selection, is something that the organism is geared toward. We evolved to have this thing we try to call "consciousness", and our choices are largely (at least, this is an understatement) "hard-wired" (not much choice in them).
 
I didn't call u stupid...lots of geniuses never studied science nor know anything about it. I was just saying that your understanding of a species is flawed
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rom-india-killing-one/?utm_term=.26004697a16e

WONDER if this attacker was a trump supporter.

shoots two indian american citizen engineers from Garmin calling them muslims. purely out of hate for muslims. fucking hick moron doesn't even know the difference between an indian and muslim. plus he said "get out of my country"....hes an uneducated moron from a line of people that came to this country's true owners, slaughtered them and took over and spread disease everyone. how is this his country?...which he has contributed nothing whatsoever to except probably doing meth and heroin and liquoir
 
Bernie needs a shot of testosterone ASAP. Maybe then he won't be a slavery apologist.

And why would DT read his tweets, when it's the same cucks chirping (mostly shitty comedians and authors trying to get more attention, being anti trump is what the edgy kids do I guess)
 
Trump's semi-literate.
He claims to dictate his tweets to one of his 'people'

Cute that you have such a hard-on for him though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top