Why don't Darwinists say that birds are fish?

[Avajs]

You already claimed that. So far, you've failed to prove it. But apparently you're silly enough to imagine that your mindless repetition of your claim proves your claim.

It doesn't seem you have read it, either. Especially in hard cover. It doesn't even seem you listened to it on Audible.

I did read it -- I read the title. You posted the title, remember? Remember that? That you posted the title? You posted the title, in a post you wrote, in this thread. And I read the title that you posted in your post, see? So, I read that much of the book. Not only that, but I read the author's name, too, since you posted the author's name. Remember that you posted the author's name? In your post. In this thread. Remember that? And I criticized the title, because it's a stupid title, see. Remember that? I pointed out that the title gives it away that the author desires to not be taken seriously by rationally-thinking people.

And, in addition to all that, you told me that the author says something really stupid: you said the author says "your ancestors included fish". That's you telling me that the author is a deranged imbecile. So, why throw a tantrum over my criticism of a book which you, yourself, told me was authored by a deranged imbecile?

So, then, when you told me that the book says...

...you were not telling me what the book says? Yes or No?

• Does the book say that fish are ancestors of humans? Yes or No?
• Did you tell me that the book says fish are ancestors of humans? Yes or No?

If the book says that fish are ancestors of humans, and if you told me that the book says that fish are ancestors of humans, and if I believe that the book says fish are ancestors of humans, then why would you say I do not know that the book says what you told me the book says?

Wait... so, I'm somehow obligated to believe your claim, just because you make it, Internet Claim-maker? Of course I'm not obligated to do that. Duh. Think how stupid you sound: 1) I challenged you to try to prove your claim that you've read the book you claim you've read, 2) you have failed to prove your claim that you've read the book you claim you've read, and 3) now you are complaining about the fact that I won't believe your claim just because you're claiming it.

the issue at the moment is not whether the claims put forth in the book are true. the issue is why you do not believe i read the book?
other than that you clearly have too much time on your hands in order to write an 8
paragraph response to my suggestion that you read the book (not just the title).

 

[7djengo7]

the issue at the moment is not whether the claims put forth in the book are true.

The claim you put forth, and which you claim is put forth by the book you claim you read -- that fish are ancestors of humans -- is false, and is only an issue for mental-degenerates who believe that fish are ancestors of humans.

the issue is why you do not believe i read the book?

Are you asking a question?

The issue is why you do not believe I read Life on the Mississippi, by Mark Twain.

other than that you clearly have too much time on your hands in order to write an 8
paragraph response to my suggestion that you read the book (not just the title).

I can see how an illiterate butcher of English such as you would drastically overestimate the amount of time it takes to write short, pithy posts like those I've written in reply to your sorry posts.

About the book you claim (and continue in your failure to prove) you read, you wrote:

you do not know what it says

So, I asked you:

• Does the book say that fish are ancestors of humans? Yes or No?

You: <NO ANSWER>

(If you read the book, then why can't you answer that Yes/No question about it?)

And, I asked you:

• Did you tell me that the book says fish are ancestors of humans? Yes or No?

You: <NO ANSWER>

As you will see if you read the book, your ancestors included fish.

Is that you telling me that the book says fish are ancestors of humans? Yes or No?

 

[Avajs]

Yes, the book (an the evidence it presents) concludes that fish are the ancestors of humans.
Since you are clearly way beyond me in the ability to write short pithy posts just get on with your life.
In the meantime, if you bothered to investigate who knows what might happen.
However, the book is correct, you are wrong. Bubye

 

[7djengo7]

Yes, the book (an the evidence it presents) concludes that fish are the ancestors of humans.

That's you telling us that the book you claim you read was written by an irrationally-thinking fool who desires to not be taken seriously by rationally-thinking people.

Read Neil Shuben's "Your Inner Fish"

Why do you want us to read it, since you've already told us that Neil is an irrationally-thinking fool who desires to not be taken seriously by rationally-thinking people?

 

[Avajs]

That's you telling us that the book you claim you read was written by an irrationally-thinking fool who desires to not be taken seriously by rationally-thinking people.

Why do you want us to read it, since you've already told us that Neil is an irrationally-thinking fool who desires to not be taken seriously by rationally-thinking people?

i suspect the book might be too difficult for you, has lots of genus and species names that are hard to pronounce. clearly you have zero science background or interest

 

[7djengo7]

i suspect the book might be too difficult for you, has lots of genus and species names that are hard to pronounce.

How many?

List for us some of the words which you're complaining "are hard to pronounce".

 

[Avajs]

How many?

List for us some of the words which you're complaining "are hard to pronounce".

try to read the book. why should i do all thw work for you? does your mommy do your homework for you?

 

[7djengo7]

You wrote:

lots of genus and species names that are hard to pronounce.

So, I asked you:

How many?

List for us some of the words which you're complaining "are hard to pronounce".

You: <NO ANSWER>

So, it's not just that you can't pronounce whatever words you're complaining about, but they're even too hard for you to write!

You've already had far more than your fair share of audience with me, Avocadope. Enjoy having your "last word", now that you're on IGNORE.

 

[Avajs]

You wrote:

So, I asked you:

You: <NO ANSWER>

So, it's not just that you can't pronounce whatever words you're complaining about, but they're even too hard for you to write!

You've already had far more than your fair share of audience with me, Avocadope. Enjoy having your "last word", now that you're on IGNORE.

awww