rules say i can't "lurk" in voice chat, but if i can't speak but i want to listen and occasionally comment in chat is that the type of "lurking" that is not allowed here? my mic is screwed up.

so if it seems that i'm posting in chat fairly often and at least attempting to engage in the conversation via type i probably will be tolerated? that's acceptable to me. i'll possibly be back later then. thankyou @Zastava and @Max Payne

also were you asking what kind of guys i date or was that directed elsewhere?

ah

ah. k.

well. i'll seeya later. ttyl.

i'm just going to point something out really quickly @Foxy something that may be useful to acknowledge in this discussion that people almost never remember to acknowledge.

the currently typical stance and assumption taken by evolutionary biologists on evolution (and actually historically the typical stance) is that there were likely multiple independant origin point of biogenesis. not single. multiple seperate ones is the assumed event. the "single common ancestor" criticisms are at least partial red herrings because they don't actually apply to the typical assumed origin event. the actually typical assumption within the field is one of multiple origin points that of course converged but do not all go back to a single ancestor. its not the standard among evolutionary biologists to assume there was one biogenesis and @Darth Dawkins should probably acknowledge that at least a bit before making some of his statements and make appropriate alterations.

@Manny no that's wrong. you don't have to acknowledge that

that's actually incorrect

he's throwing out another red herring

@trent mic's screwed up. doesn't work

ahhhhhh

'm just going to point something out really quickly @Foxy something that may be useful to acknowledge in this discussion that people almost never remember to acknowledge.

the currently typical stance and assumption taken by evolutionary biologists on evolution (and actually historically the typical stance) is that there were likely multiple independant origin point of biogenesis. not single. multiple seperate ones is the assumed event. the "single common ancestor" criticisms are at least partial red herrings because they don't actually apply to the typical assumed origin event. the actually typical assumption within the field is one of multiple origin points that of course converged but do not all go back to a single ancestor. its not the standard among evolutionary biologists to assume there was one biogenesis and <@320281143763271710>🎃 should probably acknowledge that at least a bit before making some of his statements and make appropriate alterations.

@Manny no that's wrong. you don't have to acknowledge that. he's throwing out another red herring as far as the laws being required for evolution thing.

lol...i didn't use a music command

although its unlikely for a given person to get the winning lottery number someone does.

***someone*** does

you do not understand statistics.

does someone who can use mic happen to understand the math problems with dawkins falacies here?

my mics broke

correct

that's a red herring

in physics there is absolutely chance

stop misrepresenting the field 😠

no

say no

deny him what he needs for that argument.

the answer is no

even if my mic's not broke i wouldn't use one. my voice has gotten me doxed before.

my voice is rather unusual

its that simple

you don't need to be famous

not even slightly. if you understand social patterns the world gets a bit smaller. either you understand this or you don't.

my point is, he's quite QUITE blatantly throwing out a mathematical red herring

@dolan that conversation is a waste of my time no offense

chat is a perfectly valid way

unless there is low literacy here

but i think people can read here

i was mostly talking to his oposition

which is intellectually less dishonest

for or against darth?

he's insignifficant to me.

i'm not for either side of the evolutionary argument per se if that's what you mean.

i'm just also not for misrepresentations.

i don't think darth is doing a good job honestly.

what kind of question is "are you for or against (insert person's name)"?

i'm for/against ideas. not people.

dumb question

@dolan ah. i see.

that was a test in a way.

dumb question. clever test.

kudos.

seriously though. you guys need to try to get a mathematician in there (who's not a mic-cripple like me) to mediate the use of "math".

it decreases issues like this.

@LaCraig can't read can you?

i don't like being doxed

stop being stupid.

no one is gonna "X"

easy to say. hard to prove.

can you prove a negative?

careful. the way you answer that question could expose your stupidity.

that's what i thought. shut up.

cuck.

sorry. stupid people like you sometimes think i'm angry when i'm just not interested in my time being wasted.

i assure you. i'm not. i'm just bored with you.

lol

ok.

@trent you seem tech savy. could you explain to him that its not allowed but still conceivable to dox via voice in combination with vocabulary and regional knowledge/identifiable use of terms tied to specific instituations?

i'd like him to stop wasting my time.

@LaCraig he used a simple simple chat command. correct. HOWEVER, its behavior that on average the typical user wouldn't do.

even though they could

its not a common chat command.

you can assume few people memorize it. easy or not.

@LaCraig cool story bro.

going off experience though i'm going to say i'm avoiding it.

because its already happened before.

what part of that don't you get?

are you thick?

"it won't happen"

don't care because ***it did***

doi

you sound like the "ehhhhh...my kids won't get polio because its uncommon so i won't vax them" type of person right now.

@LaCraig less than you think.

but i'm becoming increasingly annoyed. i think i'm just going to not bother with this server quite frankly.

don't even get that voices are identifiers. sheeeesh.

this is like that

i'm doing something preventitive

after the voice was the issue in the past

stop being weird and just ***get it***

right... i guess you don't get this

another mathematically incompetant.

bye

.agree

does anyone know if jim ***actually*** has been doxed?

@rart no. im wondering if he actually got doxed. i wasnt saying he was.

@rarti <3 metokur too. but no one i know has been able to tell me if hes actually been doxed or if its just been another failed attempt. i hope its a failed attempt.

@Creoldits the proto norse word for silver and its in elder futhark which is the proto norse alphabet

its the proto norse word for silver and its in elder futhark which is the proto norse alphabet. @Creold

+giveme consent

is there something morally wrong with someone having sex with or dating an individual who has 60 iq lower than they have? is it akin to child molestation?

that being said i sleep in the day. so ill be going to sleep soon.

@Grey Squirrelthe earth is not flat

there is no too early

red hair is very european.