jehurey 3,236 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 1 minute ago, Cookester15 said: You're calling them mutants?! You're awful!! If you evolved from something........you are a mutation of that. That's not even my casual interpretation using those words.......that is the actual way it would be described in biology. Guess you didn't know that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kaz 2,439 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 i wish i was the mutant from xmen with the ability to change my penis into a vagina on the go Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cooke 2,030 Posted January 16, 2019 Author Share Posted January 16, 2019 1 minute ago, kaz said: i wish i was the mutant from xmen with the ability to change my penis into a vagina on the go Wouldn't that just be swell! And swollen! Oh my Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McWicked 825 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 33 minutes ago, Cookester15 said: No one can prove there are more than 2 genders. Google search didn't turn anything up supporting you, did it? I know. Posting Louder with Crowder isn't going to help your image of "totally not alt-right", though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McWicked 825 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 17 minutes ago, jehurey said: If you evolved from something........you are a mutation of that. That's not even my casual interpretation using those words.......that is the actual way it would be described in biology. Guess you didn't know that. Correct. This is a fantastic resource on the subject, and probably the only subject I would recommend listening to Richard Dawkins about: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cooke 2,030 Posted January 16, 2019 Author Share Posted January 16, 2019 4 minutes ago, McWicked said: Google search didn't turn anything up supporting you, did it? I know. Posting Louder with Crowder isn't going to help your image of "totally not alt-right", though. Redefining the meaning of gender doesn't change the fact. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McWicked 825 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just now, Cookester15 said: Redefining the meaning of gender doesn't change the fact. Words get redefined all the time. Look bruh, I'm not the one making threads asking why people are biology deniers, that's you. So unless you have the scientific literature to back up your feels, then I'mma just chalk you up to being a biology denier. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jehurey 3,236 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 7 minutes ago, McWicked said: Correct. This is a fantastic resource on the subject, and probably the only subject I would recommend listening to Richard Dawkins about: Like we have evolutions in rather simple ways that we can tell. People would have their wisdom teeth pulled out, because our jaws aren't designed to accomodate them anymore, and we don't need those teeth to tear hard meat anymore. Now we people who are born WITHOUT wisdom teeth. Like it feels silly........but we witnessing evolution as it is happening. Human beings literally do not need something from their body, and our body just started to "omit" that thing. Lactose tolerance, I hear, is another thing. Human beings were not used to drinking milk (on a regular basis) as recently as 200 years ago. Its a relatively new thing. Lactose-intolerance is how things used to be for humans. We changed so that our digestive system doesn't react as poorly to it anymore. And the thing is...........evolution isn't one path. Its like water, breaking up into SEVERAL paths going in multiple directions. Some paths will eventually come to dead stops, other paths keep going. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kaz 2,439 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 (edited) you guys should considergetting a gender studies degree Edited January 16, 2019 by kaz Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McWicked 825 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just now, jehurey said: Like we have evolutions in rather simple ways that we can tell. People would have their wisdom teeth pulled out, because our jaws aren't designed to accomodate them anymore, and we don't need those teeth to tear hard meat anymore. Now we people who are born WITHOUT wisdom teeth. Like it feels silly........but we witnessing evolution as it is happening. Human beings literally do not need something from their body, and our body just started to "omit" that thing. Ehh, that's not quite it. So the theory of evolution has two basic parts to it. There's the mutation part, which is fairly random. This is the part that science deniers latch on to and pretend is the only aspect of evolution. The second half, the part that Darwin discovered, is natural selection. Natural Selection states that good mutations are selected for survival over bad mutations by the environment because good mutations allow a creature to reproduce more often. There is a fantastic example in the book involving the same species of fish being separated into two environments: one with predators and one without. In the environment with predators, the fish slowly began to become camouflaged because the ones that weren't became food quickly. In the environment sans predators, the males became more colorful to aide them in attracting a mate. Exact same fish from the same gene pool, two different potential evolutionary paths, solely due to the environment selecting from the random mutations. For wisdom teeth, they have to have an effect on reproduction for evolution to take place. Either wisdom teeth help with reproduction (make someone more attractive, make someone live longer to attract more mates, etc.), or they hinder reproduction (people die of infections) for natural selection to take place. That's probably not happening in first world countries today, and dentistry hasn't really been around for enough generations to cause any meaningful change. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,086 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 (edited) 23 minutes ago, McWicked said: Google search didn't turn anything up supporting you, did it? I know. Posting Louder with Crowder isn't going to help your image of "totally not alt-right", though. There being two genders with an intersex potential from genetic flaws are the only scientifically supported gender variations and even in the case of someone who is intersex they're clearly more one than the other and will identify as such. Where is your scientific proof for anything beyond that? It doesn't exist, it's invented, it's perpetuation of a mental illness being coddled by PC driven members of society with the aim of being inclusive and non-offending. There are two sexes with the possibility of a genetic anomaly and there are only two corresponding genders. It's as binary of an equation as one can be, you're one or the other. That doesn't mean you can't be a more masculine female than others or a more effeminate male than others, but you are either male or female. It's baffling that this is even contested or dignifies an argument, frankly it's insane. Edited January 16, 2019 by DynamiteCop! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McWicked 825 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 2 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said: There being two genders with an intersex potential from genetic flaws are the only scientifically supported gender variations and even in the case of someone who is intersex they're clearly more one than the other and will identify as such. Where is your scientific proof for anything beyond that? It doesn't exist, it's invented, it's perpetuation of a mental illness being coddled by PC driven members of society with the aim of being inclusive and non-offending. There are two sexes with the possibility of a genetic anomaly and there are only two corresponding genders. It's as binary of an equation as one can be, you're one or the other. That doesn't mean you can't be a more masculine female than others or a more effeminate male than others, but you are either male or female. I'm not the one making claims, Deeno. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,086 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 4 minutes ago, McWicked said: I'm not the one making claims, Deeno. But you're aligned with a political sect who is, do you not try to combat their delusions? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McWicked 825 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 3 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said: But you're aligned with a political sect who is, do you not try to combat their delusions? I'm content to wait for a scientific consensus, because I'm not so insecure that the thought of Caitlyn Jenner offends me. What people do with their bodies is their own fuckin' business. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tears of the Cows 1,211 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 2 minutes ago, McWicked said: I'm content to wait for a scientific consensus, because I'm not so insecure that the thought of Caitlyn Jenner offends me. What people do with their bodies is their own fuckin' business. Don’t care what people do with their bodies at all, I don’t even care what they call them self. But Bruce Jenner will ALWAYS be a man. Always. He can call himself a woman, but he’s a man. Sorry bro. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McWicked 825 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 1 minute ago, ghostz said: Don’t care what people do with their bodies at all 2 minutes ago, ghostz said: But Bruce Jenner will ALWAYS be a man. Always. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,086 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 1 minute ago, McWicked said: I'm content to wait for a scientific consensus, because I'm not so insecure that the thought of Caitlyn Jenner offends me. What people do with their bodies is their own fuckin' business. Waiting for a scientific consensus on something already deemed an immutable fact implies there already isn't one, there is and it hasn't changed so that should be some indication as to where things stand. What you're saying is more along the lines of "I'm not going to accept reality as it stands until someone refutes that reality". That's ridiculous and stupid. Also people are free to do what they want with their bodies, you don't have to be accepted by society to do you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McWicked 825 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 3 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said: Waiting for a scientific consensus on something already deemed an immutable fact Oh, so you've got a peer-reviewed study locked and loaded? Post it. Cook will be grateful that you've done the legwork for him. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DynamiteCop 2,086 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, McWicked said: Oh, so you've got a peer-reviewed study locked and loaded? Post it. Cook will be grateful that you've done the legwork for him. That's not how this works, you're charged with proving the opposite of existing scientific doctrine and 700+ years of language surrounding gender and sex. Nothing has changed in those 700+ years until the last 6 or so years where people started getting fantastical ideologies, so the burden of proof and contradiction lies on the accuser. There's nothing to contradict that which has stood as scientific reality for hundreds of years, least of all people with mental illnesses making up genders on a whim to identify and distinguish themselves in the world as something different with the only thing backing their delusions being the delusions of others enabling them. Edited January 16, 2019 by DynamiteCop! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McWicked 825 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 11 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said: That's not how this works That's exactly how this works: You don't assume shit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.