Personally I just like to use the totally true historical fact that Nordics and whites in general were still running around naked playing hide and go seek in the "glorious primeval forests of Europe" while the Egyptians, Arabs, Mediterraneans, Asians, and just about everyone else in the world had civilisation for thousands of years. haha.
you should start a rock band
where is guernsey
incase you missed it
Anyway, the best way to prick the bubble of a "non racist" is to have a discussion of what breed of dog they own or prefer and what lovely characteristics it has compared to other breeds.
Lol I would totally bring up some amatuer understanding of biology using dog breeds, which are sub species, if I was an illiterate racist too! lol I get you man. You read some science over your head and now you are using pop science to refute it. I would love to see you stand up in front of a group of genetic and taxonimic experts. "Hey, he is not an ignorant racist! he is a red man! look at his face".
P.S. 1+1=2. I figured since you don't have a even a rudimentary understanding of logic we would start there! The world must be confusing when you are just making up your own ideas and they are constantly being proven wrong.
So help me out of my ignorance. Define what the differences are between"race", "breed" and "sub species".
And I wonder if you could use some kind of orthographic optimiser before you post your response. Just to make it more readily comprehensible to us simpletons.
A) only you can help yourself out of ignorance. Dont unfairly burden me with an impossible task.
B) readily comprehensible is redundant
C) Breeds are not a scientific classification like genus or species.
D) it is a non sequitur, since there is only the species of homo-sapien.
C) I am not your english or science teacher
D) My words dont signify anything, they are written in plain english, if you don't understand then it is because you are not familiar with the subject being discussed. I didnt suggest that breeds are equivalent to sub-species I flat out stated that as a fact, which it is. If you dont understand race and species and sub-species, perhaps you should not be a racist. Since that is like being the D&D Dungeon Master and not understanding role playing. In fact, it is almost exaclty the same thing (Sorry, D&D players, your fantasies are not nearly as bad as racist fanatasies about how the world exist).
E) readily is redundant when you say comprehensible
1.com·pre·hen·si·ble
2. re·dun·dant
F) I can state it no clearer than I have, race is not applicable in a taxomic sense (that is the classifaction system we use to distinguish actual innate differences between organism) to homo sapiens. It is highly improbable that your genetic counterpart lives within your population. That is to say, the guy who is your match for genetic information, most likely is not your color.
G) Non sequitur is latin for "does not follow". I am saying it has nothing to do with anything.
Good thing you aren't a teacher, given that your spelling is rather haphazard. I've long held the view that a word consistently misspelt is an error, which can be corrected, but random variation is evidence of stupidity. (here's a tip, get yourself a speech recognition program and nobody will be able to tell you can't spell)
And you still haven't told us which race of Canus you would like to keep around the house
random variations are post-modern. sorry asstromete666, you're only half as witty as you think we think you are.
Anyway, the best way to prick the bubble of a "non racist" is to have a discussion of what breed of dog they own or prefer and what lovely characteristics it has compared to other breeds.
Lol I would totally bring up some amatuer understanding of biology using dog breeds, which are sub species, if I was an illiterate racist too! lol I get you man. You read some science over your head and now you are using pop science to refute it. I would love to see you stand up in front of a group of genetic and taxonimic experts. "Hey, he is not an ignorant racist! he is a red man! look at his face".
P.S. 1+1=2. I figured since you don't have a even a rudimentary understanding of logic we would start there! The world must be confusing when you are just making up your own ideas and they are constantly being proven wrong.
So help me out of my ignorance. Define what the differences are between"race", "breed" and "sub species".
And I wonder if you could use some kind of orthographic optimiser before you post your response. Just to make it more readily comprehensible to us simpletons.
A) only you can help yourself out of ignorance. Dont unfairly burden me with an impossible task.
B) readily comprehensible is redundant
C) Breeds are not a scientific classification like genus or species.
D) it is a non sequitur, since there is only the species of homo-sapien.
C) I am not your english or science teacher
D) My words dont signify anything, they are written in plain english, if you don't understand then it is because you are not familiar with the subject being discussed. I didnt suggest that breeds are equivalent to sub-species I flat out stated that as a fact, which it is. If you dont understand race and species and sub-species, perhaps you should not be a racist. Since that is like being the D&D Dungeon Master and not understanding role playing. In fact, it is almost exaclty the same thing (Sorry, D&D players, your fantasies are not nearly as bad as racist fanatasies about how the world exist).
E) readily is redundant when you say comprehensible
1.com·pre·hen·si·ble
2. re·dun·dant
F) I can state it no clearer than I have, race is not applicable in a taxomic sense (that is the classifaction system we use to distinguish actual innate differences between organism) to homo sapiens. It is highly improbable that your genetic counterpart lives within your population. That is to say, the guy who is your match for genetic information, most likely is not your color.
G) Non sequitur is latin for "does not follow". I am saying it has nothing to do with anything.
Good thing you aren't a teacher, given that your spelling is rather haphazard. I've long held the view that a word consistently misspelt is an error, which can be corrected, but random variation is evidence of stupidity. (here's a tip, get yourself a speech recognition program and nobody will be able to tell you can't spell)
And you still haven't told us which race of Canus you would like to keep around the house
Half of the words you highlighted are spelled correctly. Idiot. You should consider variations like z or s which are spelled correclty in American english.
Random variation? Redundant. lol I can spell pretty well actually if I am not lazy and think for a second. Spelling is just recognition you know, ;) are you using this to hide from the fact you can't understand what I said? Aw, that is so cute Astro! Uh, buddy...... I walk circles around you. I am in the 99 percentile. Which is really besides the point. Because how smart I am has nothing to do with whether or not I make a correct or incorrect statement. You didn't look up ad hominem yet did you bud? Go on, you can do it boy, go google it. Then you can at least respond to what I say. I believe in ya kid. You will grow up one day!
Don't bother correcting grammar and spelling mistakes. I could comb your posts and make you look like more of an idiot than you already appear to be. Just take a deep breath and try to ask an adult near by about the big words. Read them slowly and they might sound familiar! ;)
this from the moron who doesn't know where Guernsey is.
Nobody knows where Guernsey is, because to know where something is you have to recognize, to gain recognition you have to be significant, to be significant you have to more than an island nations trade when they are bored. Troll along now flags.
this from the moron who doesn't know where Guernsey is.
And probably also couldn't opine on the fine distinctions between Jerseys and Guernseys, speaking sartorially.........uh oh he's going to blow
this from the moron who doesn't know where Guernsey is.
Nobody knows where Guernsey is, because to know where something is you have to recognize, to gain recognition you have to be significant, to be significant you have to more than an island nations trade when they are bored. Troll along now flags.
This guy seems to have a bad case of being American
Ah astro! you are forgetting your friend is just a troll. So he can't fight the fight for ya! Notice how you never respond to any of the points I make. Also, I have Australian friends, and they kind of hate racist. Yeah, they think you make Australia look bad.
now we're getting started. let me guess Gilded, you've got a black friend too. and a gay friend. and jewish friend. and you even know a woman. a WOMAN!
now we're getting started. let me guess Gilded, you've got a black friend too. and a gay friend. and jewish friend. and you even know a woman. a WOMAN!
Royal Spammers lol. I mean, if you want to troll I understand the appeal. But you are giving youself away with the card carrying membership ;)
And no. I dont have a black, gay, jewish, woman friend. Just a white one....... from Guernsey, but I lost him/her (gender is so vague with some people) somewhere. I mean, they just dont smile like they use to.
Is that the gold you were looking for flags! I know you need to stoke the fire nice and well before you can really enjoy the banter.
sorry asstromete666, you're only half as witty as you think we think you are.
Even then, too much credit.
Want me to edit it so it says used to? lol I mean if it will make you smile again.
But then if we are going to follow all the grammar rules I can't start my sentences with conjunctions and prepositions anymore. No, I think I will leave it like it is. I am used to it now.
Personally I just like to use the totally true historical fact that Nordics and whites in general were still running around naked playing hide and go seek in the "glorious primeval forests of Europe" while the Egyptians, Arabs, Mediterraneans, Asians, and just about everyone else in the world had civilisation for thousands of years. haha.
you should start a rock band