| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55
Comments:
<0> Mp3z [Tesla - Modern Day Cowboy.mp3] (mins 9secs/28 kbps/.63Mb)
<1> some scientist dont belive in black holes either
<2> unless youre going into personal beliefs, youll have to accept that what im saying is right
<3> personal beliefs, like "words mean things"
<3> lol
<1> well u have nothing that really backs u up 100% SoSally
<2> Pepsibeast how's 99%? close enogh?
<1> u can debate this on and on..without winning
<2> ofcourse you cant go 100% into anything
<2> dont be stupid
<3> yes you can
<1> i didnt mean ur 50% eitehr...i think u r wrong
<3> if I drop an anvil on yer foot, 100% of the time it WILL hurt :)
<2> Captain_Winky what if the nerves in my foot are deas?
<2> dead*?
<3> they arent
<2> feel dumb now?
<2> what fi they are?
<2> what if i apply anesthesia?
<2> what if im in a coma>
<3> then I wouldnt say it to you
<3> ok get by gravity
<2> see? never 100%
<3> 100% of the time the anvil WILL fall and not rise
<2> Captain_Winky what about in space?
<1> i know what ur getting at SoSally...but i still dont think ur rite
<2> what about in magnetic fields?
<3> my goodness think of the havoc if gravity were only 99%
<2> Captain_Winky 100% is hard to achieve for any argument
<3> you cant drop things in space, were on earth now lets try to stay here in reality
<1> even 99% is
<2> space is real
<3> in a reality, where 99% of us live
<3> you may not
<2> Captain_Winky what about in a magnetic field facing upwards?
<2> they have those
<3> but the rest of us know that gravity is 100%
<2> what then?
<2> you're fighting the wrong argument
<1> u2 SoSally
<3> the sooner you learn that there ARE absolutely absolutes the sooner you make sense to the world around you
<1> u cant prove ur more rite than other in monogomus
<2> i KNOW there are. you just havent named one yet
<3> so can I get a ride in yer spaceship?
<1> so u start picking on words instead
<2> Pepsibeast Captain_Winky started the word picking.
<1> hmm i thought u did
<3> ya I hate that when philosophers try to inject their religion into science
<1> we have diffrent views on stuff and we all very stubborn
<3> it just adds to confusion
<2> monogamy was developed by k-selected species(mammals vs roaches(r-selected), for example) to increase child survival rate.
<2> most creatures that don't have a thousand babies eventually become monogamous.
<1> we have to accept that
<4> bbiab
<1> if human males get teh chance they will have *** with as mamy females they can
<3> ya like with dogs, they only have like 20 pups and they hump.... well legs.. couches... lol anything
<1> just like djinghis khan did
<2> Pepsibeast doesnt change the argument
<1> its becoz of the social enviroment 2 ppl stay 2gether
<1> but u never know how much they cheated
<3> dj who?
<0> Mp3z [Tesla - Paradise.mp3] (mins 50secs/28 kbps/.33Mb)
<2> sigh
<1> and u never know exactley how they lived
<2> again, CHEATING doesnt break monogamy in most animals
<3> sure you do man dont deny the fossil records !
<2> it's *** vs child care that matters
<3> cheating is the opposite of monogomy
<2> no it isnt. polygamy is
<2> pay attention
<3> lol
<2> polygamy doesnt mean multiple *** partners
<1> waht do think cheating is SoSally?
<2> i think cheating is irrelevant
<1> what about men who has several wifes
<3> lol
<2> Pepsibeast NOW we're getting there
<2> this is where the forebrain and social structure change
<1> what about tribes where most men have died..so the men there marries several wifes
<3> thats marriage lol tat has nothing to do with ***ual partners
<2> Pepsibeast you mean... NO tribes?
<3> monogomy is ONE ***ual partner
<1> its all about the situations
<3> not just ONE wife
<2> Captain_Winky no it isnt
<3> yep yep yep
<3> you can call the sky green all ya want
<5> monogamy is being married to one person
<1> some societies may have very diffent styles of life than u r describing SoSally
<2> monogamy is taking care of one woman's kids. survival of the child
<2> the ape can screw all he wants, but the food and protection go to her kids
<2> monogamy
<1> some ppl rejcet their4 children
<3> well cool that means all American men are monogomous :0
<2> Captain_Winky no ti doesnt
<1> some ppl even embraces other children
<3> Id like to see ya sell that one
<3> sure cus polygamy is illegal
<1> SoSally we can go on all night
<2> this is why mormons can be polygamous. he takes care of multiple womens children
<1> exactley Captain_Winky
<3> I pay taxes, so I take care of millions of children
<3> are they all considered mine?
<2> Captain_Winky legal doesnt mean true. i do illegal stuff all the time
<2> so do you
<6> Captain_Winky well not all people follow the law
<3> but you cant GET legally married .... and there is no illegal marriage recognized anywhere... not even in M***achussettes
<1> nothing proves that mankind r truly monogomus...its just that we live in a society where most ppl r paired up
<3> ok maybe in M***.
<2> our society is changing where the female doesnt always need the male to take care of children. but NATURALLY(your original argument) homo sapiens are monogamous
<2> they evolved that way
<2> the polygamous ones had poor survival rate
<1> how do u know that ?
<2> cause we see it in other similar creatures
<3> SoSally I would accept your argument if I agreed with your theory about only one marriage... since I rarely see marriages in the animal kingdom
<1> i think it was easier that way becoz of the situations
<3> but IM sure we will soon
<2> Captain_Winky marriage is such a human term. think of what it boils down to.
<2> relationship/children
<3> lol
<1> but nowdays when men get the chance a lot r not monogomous
<3> relationship
<0> Mp3z [7 - Enya - How Can I Keep From Singing.mp3] (mins 25secs/60 kbps/.05Mb)
<3> like as in... a ***UAL relationship
<2> Pepsibeast stop! read back! pay attention to your words
<4> hello
<3> so marriage is or can be considered.... a simple ***ual relationship in your words
<3> which makes us right
<2> well, think in terms of homo sapiens, not as "people"
<1> well i still dont agree with u SoSally
<3> humans are NOT monogomous in any stretch of the imagination
<1> exactley
<1> except in some ppls mind
<2> "men are not mongamous if given the chance" is incorrect. if a man was given the chance to raise some other kids that dont belong to his own partner, would he go for it? no.
<3> but maybe in space in zero gravity SoSally is right
<1> lol
<1> in space
<3> sure we go for it, we all pay taxes willingly
<1> with wierd magnetic fields
<3> taxes paying for our neighbors kids, is part of your evolution of man isnt it?
<2> whats the matter Pepsibeast, never heard of a freaking magnet?
<3> it takes a village to raise an idiot... or something
<7> hi
<1> offcourse now i have
<2> ah
<2> glad i could educate you
<2> for more info, go to SCHOOL
<1> sure
Return to
#chat-world
or
Go to some related
logs:
cakap chat
#allnitecafe
#chat-world
#india
guys becoming girls
#linux
SEELAN ala
#allnitecafe
#chat-world
mrsindia
|
|