[Platt] Your answers have been mere assertions unsupported by evidence. Anybody can say anything. But unless claims can be backed by something, it's just blowing smoke. So give me something to support you claim that shifts in the wind are inorganic responses to DQ. Anything.
[Arlo] So give me something to back up your claims, Platt. Back your claim up with something. Answer my question. I have made claims, and I have given you evidence. My position is sound and coherent. I've answered all these questions. All you keep doing is saying "that doesn't count", as if that proves something. So again, you think I am wrong. You think my evidence "doesn't count". So answer my question and show me the error of my ways. Tell me why my evidence "doesn't count" by giving me a substantive reply. Tell me what would be evidence of an animal responding to DQ, if my evidence is faulty. Tell me what "would count" as an animal respond to DQ, since by your claim they used to be able to. You've claimed, "when an animal can stare at its tail in wonder", you'd accept that it can respond to DQ. Is this something an animal used to be able to do, when an animal could respond to DQ? Is this your evidence that they used to be able to do this, but no longer can? Answer the question. You've claimed that there existed an animal in the past that could respond to DQ. Give me an example of something that it could do, when it could respond to DQ, that it can no longer do today. Answer? 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/
