It's very boring to have to repeat my points, but as you ignore them, and seem literally incapable of following the debate, I will do so. But this'll be the last time you and I debate anything, I have you pegged. (Yay, natural competition....go, first to rip their baby from their womb wins a Boneflour T-shirt). (Yeah, and here's a chimp with a frog showing humanity...boom). I don't need to read your mind, I just need to read your words, which I correctly understood, and you confirm above your view that human evils are no worse than those animals, you even used bold letter to make it crystal clear, excellent.. As you're slippery on words, for the record, I'm not referring to anything other than good and evil, and more specifically, evil. In fact, you now state explicitly that you believe humans are better than most animals (hmm, just most animals eh), which tips you further away from my view, so that's good to clarify. You continue to ignore the abortion issue, you continue to ignore Christianity. The avoidance of those two issues speaks volumes for your worldview, and volumes about your debating style: evasive, like a politician. I'll bet a dollar you still ignore those two points. Because you're in a hole, you lost this one. The only possible way out of your hole is to argue for abortion as not evil, and against Christianity as endowing *good* values on its followers. Please, be my guest. So, the old high horse tactic appears, as a deflection. Doesn't wash with me, just plain boring and childish. Be a man, address my points. As for the Ma issue, he made a statement, but offered no proof. You and Apercus eagerly jumped in and stated he was correct and you agreed with him. I've stated already I think he was talking utter BS. You and Apercus on the other hand, have agreed without a shred of evidence. So, time to put up or shut up dude. Read the article and his words carefully, go and do thousands of hours of research, and report back. Even then, it'll be pure BS, because it's all hypothetical anyway. But yeah, you agreed anyway, with a fucking Chinese globalist and a US-hating Marixst dude. Noice. I was going to throw this on a separate thread, but as this is the last interaction you and I will have, it fits nicely here. A while back I made an innocent little joke on your gym thread: Boneflour responded: 'Don't speak for me, thanks.' glosoli: 'Even when I am making a fantastical claim that we are lifting fully grown cows for the sake of banter and humour? Even then? Wow.' Boneflour: 'Even then. No offense, it's just something I feel strongly about. I ask that you respect it even if you disagree with it.' glosoli: 'They were rhetorical questions.But no offence taken.' I thought it was very weird indeed, and expressed in an unfriendly manner too. But people have weird irrational dislikes (me, I hate inconsistency and idiocy and snakery). Imagine my surprise when I watched this a few days ago: (Skip to 2:27 for Boneflour's opening line 'I was a weak sickly child......'). Perhaps the weak sickly childhood explains a lot eh? A youtube video with someone literally pretending to be you and stating preposterous facts, not that you were lifting a fully grown cow as I had joked, but that you were lifting the whole gym, and your eyes changed colour too. I thought you'd be so angry, as, you know, it's something you feel strongly about. Here's the link to your response: Feeeelings | https://aeolipera.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/feeeelings/#comment-7859 So Boneflour, we're done. You're the sort of person I strive to avoid in real life. I see why you are working for the TSA. This little episode does make me start to question the validity of Thal facial types. Maybe you're altruistic, but so what, you're still a fucking unprincipled snake. Feel free to reply with whatever you like, you'll get nothing more from me.