I gotta say, Platt. I'm impressed the sheer audacity with which you do these games. In all these posts you've evaded answering my question, while I've answered yours in every post. You may disagree with my answers, but I've answered.
Now its your turn. Stop playing these inane rhetoric games and just answer the question. You've said that an animal existed in the past that could respond to DQ. Give me an example of something that animal could do, in response to DQ, that no animal today can do. You say I am wrong, that watching an animal respond to "it's better here" is not evidence of it responding to DQ. Okay, now... give me an example of what an animal used to be able to do, when it could respond to DQ, that it can no longer do today. If my "evidence" is not to your liking, then how about give me something to support your claim? Anything. So far you've offered "die" and "stare at its tail in wonder". I'm sure the fact that you've not gone back to these indicates you realize how absurd they are. Or not? Are these examples of something animals could do but no longer can? Otherwise, from this point forward all you are doing is playing stupid little talk show tactic games. I don't know who you think you're fooling, but I doubt anyone but yourself. So what's it going to be? Prove me right and keep acting like you're auditioning for the Limbaugh program? Or answer the questions as I've answered yours? moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
