Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence


Lee Olsen wrote:
Jim McGinn wrote:
Lee Olsen wrote:
claudiusdenk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Lee Olsen wrote:
claudiusdenk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Lee Olsen wrote:

Well, I think your comments only bolster my claim that my hypothesis is
indisputable. You do admit, don't you, that you have not presented any

Science doesn't work that way, no hypothesis/theory is indisputible.
They are always open to amendment. You have demonstrated an
incompetence seldom seen outside creationist circles.

Answer my question you evasive twit: You do admit, don't you, that you
have not presented any kind of dispute of my assertions.

kind of dispute of my assertions. Are you saying that stone tipped

Are you demanding hard evidence in return to refute hypothetical
thinking, or are you demanding hypothetical theory to counter your
hypothetical theory? If the former, cite any scientist in the world
that would let that get past peer review. Any example of such a case
will do. Use your search engine if you can't remember any examples.

What are you blabbering about?



spears would not be useful to a community of Apiths that wished to keep
inmigrating herbivorous species from getting access to their garden
habitat? Are you saying that a community of Apiths that wished to keep
inmigrating herbivorous species out of their garden habitat would not,
as a result of maintaining their general health and well being through
the depth of the dry season, be less likely to be a target for
predators during the dry season? Are you saying that predators would

"Are you saying"? Where did you get the idea that I was saying any of
that? Did you hear voices again? Do you see any quotes where I said
that? I thought you said honesty was required in these discussions?
"You're a chicken*** phoney, afraid to quote me directly."

Answer the questions you evasive twit.


Hypothetically your scenario wouldn't work. As soon as the predators
found the herbivors, who feed at night in the gardens under the trees
when Lucy is asleep, the resulting carnage from the chase and struggle
would tear the garden apart, leaving Lucy's community to starve to
death.

Let's not be ridiculous. Why would you assume this would happen
typically?

What if the garden was infested by aphids, would the apiths be
intellegent enough ( as moden humans who do plant gardens), to invent
bug spray? Or would they simply lose their garden to the bugs and
starve to death? Hypothetically thinking they would obviously starve to
death.

What's your point?


Your scenario has been completely falsified.

Youre an idiot.

.