Blackvegetable » 17 Oct 2022, 12:22 pm » wrote: ↑
if your 3 year old bleated something like this, you'd drown it and divorce its mom....on the grounds of Indisputable Infidelity.
OKAY, THIS HAS TO STOP!
You should probably refuse to argue with anyone but vegas - at least if this weakness is prequel.Blackvegetable » 17 Oct 2022, 2:56 pm » wrote: ↑ No...it doesn't...
Bi-Sexial is a label.
Words do not define scientific ideas, they describe them. Grammar is not determinant.
Actually, @Cannonpointer painted you into a corner and forced you to admit that science recognizes precisely two discrete sexes, and not one sex more.Blackvegetable » 17 Oct 2022, 3:00 pm » wrote: ↑ I would also add that this is a **** derivative of @Cannonpointer 's **** argument, which has been vaporized.
Skans » 17 Oct 2022, 3:13 pm » wrote: ↑ I have refuted each and every one of your assertions, except for the first one which is unintelligible. Vegas is not a moran and I have proved this to you in the manner you requested in your OP.
He is referencing his delusion that he once debunked my claim that science recognizes only two sexes - and suggesting that vegas stole the whole "there are only two sexes" thingy from me.Skans » 17 Oct 2022, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑ I have examined your topic and thread. @Cannonpointer does not have any response posted anywhere in your thread. Therefore, my response (one of the first responses, by the way) cannot be a derivative of Cannonpointer's argument.
Now, if you removed his argument, then this is on you and your cross to bear. Please do not reference the posts/arguments of others which you have chosen to remove in responding to my assertions.
And YOU copy-pasted from some sciency source that affirmed my argument.Blackvegetable » 17 Oct 2022, 4:06 pm » wrote: ↑ Give it a rest..
Cannonpointer insists that because his dictionary defines gender/sex in some manner, Science must oblige.
Yes, it does.Blackvegetable » 17 Oct 2022, 4:09 pm » wrote: ↑ This is tedious, Skans..
Is THIS Vegas' question?
No...it doesn't.
Nod.
Male and female, ya say.Blackvegetable » 17 Oct 2022, 4:17 pm » wrote: ↑ It is a label describing those who don't distinguish between male and female with respect to what attracts them.
Oh, this fool is ENORMOUSLY reliant on fallacies.FOS » 17 Oct 2022, 4:54 pm » wrote: ↑ see...'groan' is not an argument.
Indeed pretty much everything you ever post can be summed up this way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_stone
The fact you always make a logical fallacy does not speak well for your own IQ...and the fact you cannot even show more diversity in your fallacies make the situation even worse
...want to argue with a retarded wall...
For making a semetic argument?Blackvegetable » 18 Oct 2022, 9:02 am » wrote: ↑ This @Vegas ?This @Vegas ?The man is an idiot.Why is he wrong? I dare you to answer that without calling me or anyone else an anti-semantic.
just joking around here, why is asexual not bi-sexual(earthworms and plants) having both male and female reproductive organs and still requires worms to mate with one another by aligning with each other from opposite directions.Cannonpointer » 27 Jan 2023, 5:14 am » wrote: ↑ Male and female, ya say.
Are there any OTHER sexes? If so, name them. If not, then yeah - "bi" refers to the two sexes.
BumpBlackvegetable » 18 Oct 2022, 10:37 am » wrote: ↑ Will the US eventually put foots on the ground against Russia?
People.....this is a pyrotechnic display of idiocy..
@Vegas
You are panicking and desperate. You are not bumping threads from 3 years ago.
Blackvegetable » 17 Oct 2022, 12:19 pm » wrote: ↑ @Vegas is back from his Vision Quest to resume his tedious narcissism. Incapable of productive contribution, he demands that everyone bear witness to his pouting, and that he be afforded exemption from forum rules to facilitate his tantrums.
I challenge this piece of crap to post something, ANYTHING, he has written which casts even a hint of a shadow of a doubt on the certainty that he's a moron.
Until that Coward walks the walk, I will post some highlights from his archives....
If any of his wingidiots want to speak on his behalf, feel free...
But if you fail to defend it against a challenge, it's off to PG..
I have said you are lying.Vegas » 12 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ You bumped a thread from 3 years ago just to dodge my question. I got your number. I got you running. I got you cornered.![]()
![]()
Do you still deny that you're a moron?Vegas » 19 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ You are panicking and desperate. You are not bumping threads from 3 years ago.![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Dodge 165 in real time
Now here is the thing. Your definition was "it's a sampling error." (God you are dumb as hell.). All options have sampling errors, but only one is considered survivorship bias. Let's make it dodge 166.
Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?
A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors.
You are doing your usual 4 step evasion and that won't get you out of this. Ill remind you:Blackvegetable » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑ I have said you are lying.
You have run from the challenge....but you can't outrun my vengeance.