Recommended Posts

(edited)

Who says they haven't ?

Edited by DayTrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/15/2019 at 3:02 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

Okay, Joe is an idiot, but how many politicians know the difference between a clip and a magazine?

 

That's true but I would imagine most normal men (and even boys) should know that you can't put a clip in a magazine 😆

I'm with Alex Jones, they must be lizard people

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

 

 

Colorado's Large-Capacity Magazine Ban Is a Colossal Failure

An unintended loophole in a Colorado gun control bill illustrates what happens when lawmakers legislate technology they don't understand: Firearms owners find a way to work around the law without breaking it.  ...

... Similarly, when New Jersey imposed a 10-round limit on magazines in the state and mandated that any existing large-capacity magazines be surrendered last year, "approximately zero" of New Jersey's 1 million gun owners decided to turn them in, reported Reason's Jacob Sullum.  ...

 

Also, Babylon Bee brings the spicy satire again:

Supreme Court Allows Victims Of Heart Disease, Obesity To Sue Utensil Manufacturer

Acme Forks & Knives was trying to block a lawsuit brought against them by the obese community. The lawsuit suggested that the company's utensils were deadly tools that caused people to become overweight.

The Supreme Court has blocked the company's attempt to block the lawsuit, paving the way for victims of heart disease and other diet-related ailments to sue Acme.

"Finally---the big forks and knives lobby will be held accountable for contributing to heart disease and obesity, the leading causes of death among American adults," said a spokesperson for the oppressed obese community. "No human action leads to these deaths. It is entirely on the sentient utensils used to carry out the mass eating events."

"Blood is on their hands!" protesters cried. "Fight the corporate fork and knife lobby!"

Lawyers for the plaintiffs in these lawsuits have presented evidence that Acme Forks & Knives have marketed their utensils to the obese, specifically encouraging them to shovel a bunch of food in their mouths. They also said it was dangerous and irresponsible for the company to market a "fully automatic assault spork" that can shove "300 rounds of chili" into your face in under 10 seconds.

"Nobody needs that kind of forkpower," said one lawyer. "We will get justice for the obvious cause of this epidemic of deaths: the guys who make the utensils."

 

Oh you can laugh but spoons, butter knives and even bicycle wheels have become a serious problem here in the UK, don't let this warning fall of deaf ears...you still have time to change course.

150519spoon.jpg

471.jpg

cCaLfcO.png

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, El Nikko said:

a serious problem here in the UK

Greta is right. We are f**king doomed, but not for the reasons she says.

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DayTrader said:

Greta is right. We are f**king doomed, but not for the reasons she says.

I just can't quite put my finger on it....

 

1573899680213.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unreal.

Surname says it all. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

 

Darwin's theory is not that we 'came' from apes. Obviously if that were the case he would have been laughed out of the room, as like you say, 'why are apes still around then?' The theory revolves more around everything adapting perfectly to its surroundings, that the 'fittest' will pass on their genes and survive, and so on. Chimpanzees are merely our closest 'cousin' - the last link or offshoot that we can visibly see in the modern day, and we share a common ancestor and 98.6% of each others' DNA I believe. We both went our own way, hence both still here. It isn't a case of 'we are here, they shouldn't be', or that apes have been lazy compared to Man. There would have been earlier 'versions' of apes too, just as we had. 

Evolution happens over ridiculous timescales, and there is by definition no 'goal'. It's simply evolving. Biologically we are pretty much no different to 'man' or whatever word you wanna give us, 200,000 years ago. This is how slow it is. Generation after generation and slight differences over thousands and thousands of years. Genes are passed down again and again and again, and as Tom happily says, the introduction of meat to our diets, presumably one of our differences from other primates, is potentially what started to 'separate' us intellectually.
 
People seem to believe certain aspects of evolution and every species being perfectly suited to where it is etc, but when it comes to mankind they seem to say ''haha, you see! Darwin was wrong!'' The issue arises as to it being 'wrong' because it is falsely misinterpreted as we came 'from' apes, plus people see this sort of thing and assume it is in any way accurate ...
 
image.png.06afe52fd325df9289b2acd102152143.png
For a kick off, it should be an image of over 1000 figures across probably, and the picture is simply a reflection of OUR history. It doesn't mean that everything left of the final figure is now extinct - they just branched off into their own line. Some died, some didn't. Some became 'us', some didn't.
 
He wasn't wrong in any sense, that's why he is a genius and his theory has been respected for 160 years. It is the simplicity of it that makes it so amazing, and the reason every single animal on the planet is perfectly adapted to its surroundings - precisely because they have evolved that way and passed on their genes.  That is my take on Darwin anyway buddy. This is from Wiki ...

Charles Robert Darwin12 February 1809 – 19 April 1882

- was an English naturalistgeologist and biologist, best known for his contributions to the science of evolution. His proposition that all species of life have descended over time from common ancestors is now widely accepted, and considered a foundational concept in science. In a joint publication with Alfred Russel Wallace, he introduced his scientific theory that this branching pattern of evolution resulted from a process that he called natural selection, in which the struggle for existence has a similar effect to the artificial selection involved in selective breeding. Darwin has been described as one of the most influential figures in human history, and he was honoured by burial in Westminster Abbey.

Darwin published his theory of evolution with compelling evidence in his 1859 book On the Origin of Species. By the 1870s, the scientific community and a majority of the educated public had accepted evolution as a fact. However, many favoured competing explanations which gave only a minor role to natural selection, and it was not until the emergence of the modern evolutionary synthesis from the 1930s to the 1950s that a broad consensus developed in which natural selection was the basic mechanism of evolution. Darwin's scientific discovery is the unifying theory of the life sciences, explaining the diversity of life.

In his book ‘The Descent of Man’ published in 1871, English naturalist Charles Darwin presented the idea that human beings and apes have a common ancestor. Contrary to common perception, Darwin did not say that humans directly evolved from apes. He merely pointed out the similarities between birds, fishes, mammals and reptiles and suggested that all life is related. This, in turn, means that all complex life forms evolved from simpler ones through various genetic mutations.
 
White bearded head of Darwin with the body of a crouching ape.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Epstein knew too much. He had to go.
#DT2020
 
Edited by DayTrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chimps were NOT our closest relative DNA-wise, that would have been Neanderthal Man (I believe). So why did Neanderthal Man disappear?

If you answer, ‘because he evolved into us’, then isn’t that argument equally valid if Neanderthal Man evolved from apes?

People sneer at the idea of Creationism, but evolution takes alot for granted and does require some ‘leaps of faith’ as well.

Keep in mind that Neanderthals did not disappear from specific regions....they disappeared ENTIRELY - and they were supposedly more evolved than the present apes. How do you explain this?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Chimps were NOT our closest relative DNA-wise, that would have been Neanderthal Man (I believe). So why did Neanderthal Man disappear?

If you answer, ‘because he evolved into us’, then isn’t that argument equally valid if Neanderthal Man evolved from apes?

People sneer at the idea of Creationism, but evolution takes alot for granted and does require some ‘leaps of faith’ as well.

Keep in mind that Neanderthals did not disappear from specific regions....they disappeared ENTIRELY - and they were supposedly more evolved than the present apes. How do you explain this?

 

Neanderthals (apparently) we’re stupid (Remake It springs to mind) and modern man drove them away from the best habitat and basically murdered them to extinction with weapons that Neanderthals couldn’t invent as they hadn’t got the brain power. Not only that they couldn’t even copy them so they were even more stupid than modern day Chinese people (yes I’m poking Remake It again only joking moderators).

some scientists believe it was disease or volcanic eruptions but I doubt it

dont think we’ve evolved that much! 

Edited by Rob Plant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But....you can apply that same ‘wiped out’ scenario to the Neanderthal vs ape issue.

Plus, it would be damned difficult for early man to wipe out ALL Neanderthals in Every geographic location!

Apparently they missed remake it, there may be others.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they were in the main Eurasian, yes a large area but it’s doable for modern man.

we are by nature masters of our habitat and all other living things, I think over a few thousand years those poor old Neanderthals wouldn’t stand a chance against modern man.

i am only surmising and happy to be disproven, disease ie influenza or any pandemic could have wiped them out. I don’t buy that though as “travel” wasn’t exactly on their agenda back then.

the real mystery is how Remake It and his ancestors survived????

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would add that apes climb trees a lot quicker than we can and can therefore hide/escape from man a lot easier than an 8 foot Neanderthal

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

6 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Chimps were NOT our closest relative DNA-wise, that would have been Neanderthal Man (I believe). So why did Neanderthal Man disappear?

The DNA % of each is just an interesting fact. It has nothing to do with who made it. I've just woken up but from what I'm reading it suggests you still think we 'came' from apes? I need coffee. Read my explanation again.

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Plus, it would be damned difficult for early man to wipe out ALL Neanderthals in Every geographic location

It's not a case that we were all over the planet back then. You can go to museums in London now, they can scrape the inside of your cheek and tell you which part of Africa you originally came from. We were not in every continent for a very long time. 

This chat is hilarious, even Popes have believed evolution but Doug is even more hardcore 🤣

Respect (but you're wrong)

Edited by DayTrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps we were not all over the planet, but if a ‘tribe’ is intent on killing you off that some of the Neanderthals would have moved to the ‘Here there be dragons’ portion of the map?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Respect (but you're wrong)

You are starting to sound like your mate Re-Tread.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

if a ‘tribe’ is intent on killing you off that some of the Neanderthals would have moved to the ‘Here there be dragons’ portion of the map

I need coffee seriously, this sentence just mad to me at the moment  🤣

Remake it would not say 'respect' to anyone I can guarantee it, so that comment is a bit low 🤣

 

Edited by DayTrader
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

You're seeing it as ''Man v Neanderthal'' and ''they had to go'' Epstein style.

Maybe we killed some, some just died of starvation, disease, wild animals, whatever - there wasn't like some War of Evolution where 'Man' decided ''we must wipe them out so we evolve''

Shit goes extinct all the time, just ask Greta *sniff - 99% of everything that's ever lived on the planet is gone.

You're wrong about marmite too .... ;) 

1 hour ago, Rob Plant said:

I would add that apes climb trees a lot quicker than we can

Exactly - that was part of THEIR evolution / path / survival

2 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

dont think we’ve evolved that much! 

''Humans are a virus with shoes'' - Bill Hicks

Edited by DayTrader
  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Douglas have you not seen planet of the apes?

they had guns, way more intelligent than Neanderthals! 😂

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Yeah Doug!

Duh.

Case closed. And they spoke perfect English.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

image.png.9f313fea28cf5b19ab26ff88756026d5.png

Edited by DayTrader
  • Great Response! 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even Texas is becoming crazy land, but still has a good Governor.  Unfortunately, when the Gov. told the Mayor of Austin to "clean up his act in Austin" the Mayor and City Council bought a multi-million dollar hotel to house the homeless.  Also busses to bring them back and forth between the hotel and the underpass to try and keep the needles, trash and feces out of the area.  The homeless instead said "nope, I like it where I am".  They want to stay around their "friends".  What is that called?  It is "public property", you tell them to go or go to jail.  There is the choice, but Austin seems to think the homeless are "their people and should be free to do as they chose".  

The lesson learned here is that when cities like New York, L.A., San Francisco, etc., run by liberal idiots creates a place where you cannot live anymore, the people who flee come to places like Austin and it becomes exactly like the place they ran from.  

Now, it's time for the Governor to step back in and get every person who voted for these socialist maniacs as well as a ticket for the homeless to go back where they came from.  As for the socialist maniacs in Austin, the people will vote again to get them the hell out and take their city back.

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoMack said:

Even Texas is becoming crazy land, but still has a good Governor.  Unfortunately, when the Gov. told the Mayor of Austin to "clean up his act in Austin" the Mayor and City Council bought a multi-million dollar hotel to house the homeless.  Also busses to bring them back and forth between the hotel and the underpass to try and keep the needles, trash and feces out of the area.  The homeless instead said "nope, I like it where I am".  They want to stay around their "friends".  What is that called?  It is "public property", you tell them to go or go to jail.  There is the choice, but Austin seems to think the homeless are "their people and should be free to do as they chose".  

The lesson learned here is that when cities like New York, L.A., San Francisco, etc., run by liberal idiots creates a place where you cannot live anymore, the people who flee come to places like Austin and it becomes exactly like the place they ran from.  

Now, it's time for the Governor to step back in and get every person who voted for these socialist maniacs as well as a ticket for the homeless to go back where they came from.  As for the socialist maniacs in Austin, the people will vote again to get them the hell out and take their city back.

Unfortunately the danger to the 'safe' red states is mass immigration, many studies have shown that there is a strong tenancy for immigrants to vote Democrat and this is backed up by independent research. I do agree the liberal idiots fleeing to red states is a big problem, from what I've read there's an exodus from California a state which used to be pretty solid red and had elected the likes of both Reagan and Nixon numerous times, that is unlikely to ever happen again. I also believe Virginia just turned blue as well, another state that I believe had a massive influx of immigrants (to the north of the state).

This is not an anti immigrant post before anyone says so, the data and statistics appear to support what I said above and also just to be clear the people who enacted legislation are obviously not immigrants and they are the people who need to be held to account.

I hate to say it but there is a real chance Trump's 2020 victory could be the last win for the Republican party if the demographic shift continues. It's not a nice subject to talk about but unless something is done that could very well be the case unless somehow the Republicans can buy recent immigrant votes and if they do then they would be shifting even further left than they have been doing over the decades.

So, just to be clear I'm just pointing out voting patterns and not saying anything against immigrants in general other than there is an observable  trend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DayTrader said:

Yeah Doug!

Duh.

Case closed. And they spoke perfect English.

 

image.png.9f313fea28cf5b19ab26ff88756026d5.png

I can't believe the anti-marmite comment's I've seen on here...I'm triggered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

10 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

But....you can apply that same ‘wiped out’ scenario to the Neanderthal vs ape issue.

Plus, it would be damned difficult for early man to wipe out ALL Neanderthals in Every geographic location!

Apparently they missed remake it, there may be others.....

Yes they weren't totally wiped out because we of European (and I believe Asian descent) have Neanderthal DNA, they were conquered and/or interbred with a more successful group. I believe people from Africa don't have the Neanderthal DNA.

Edited by El Nikko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.