.Nostradamus'omh » 31 Dec 2023, 7:59 pm » wrote: ↑ Facts defend denial. Genetic results defines the specificity of each ancestor alive in the entire food chain adapting in space now.
Food chain started with single cell organisms and expanded into current food chain having reproductions or not. The or not become extinct when dead.MackTheFinger » 31 Dec 2023, 8:11 pm » wrote: ↑ .
solo is rusty because the food chain was established in the caveman...wait I mean cave people time.
.
All one has to do is watch the Flintstone to see Fred always eats first and my assertions is correct.
.
.
.
.![]()
R.Suave » 31 Dec 2023, 7:51 pm » wrote: ↑ The first one IS my thoughts, you braindead pile of goat ****.
Because unlike ******* slack jawed MAGAts, Grifty understands that any such decision hinges on the desires of Alito's sponsors. If Grifty is no longer useful to them, Sammy will be told to order Free Ride and The Handmaid to Stand Down.
That's enough of your **** presumption.Vegas » 31 Dec 2023, 8:46 pm » wrote: ↑ This pile of ****?
How the hell is that level 2+? It's just you predicting Trump's and MAGA's character. Hell, I do that with the senile pedo and you pervs all the time.
Level 1. Nothing more.
Die.
My local library's website doesn't have a link for the NY Slimes daily vomit anywhere on it's website.R.Suave » 31 Dec 2023, 7:57 pm » wrote: ↑ 1) online, dolt
2) that's not what I'm asking....the answer to that is "I eyeguzzle a LOT of FOX."
Red state.RedheadedStranger » 31 Dec 2023, 9:01 pm » wrote: ↑ My local library's website doesn't have a link for the NY Slimes daily vomit anywhere on it's website.
I cite way more than just three sources for material that I C&P on this forum... and yes, sometimes some of the articles are from FOX, but it certainly isn't the majority by any stretch of the imagination.
I posted a piece from The Atlantic just last week, and Newsweek right before that. I never have relied on any single source, or even three.
Just because you rely on one or two sources for everything, it doesn't mean everyone does ya know.
.Nostradamus'omh » 31 Dec 2023, 8:18 pm » wrote: ↑ Food chain started with single cell organisms and expanded into current food chain having reproductions or not. The or not become extinct when dead.
Prove it was an assumption.
RN's hands are broken?
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom That's enough of your **** presumption.Vegas » 01 Jan 2024, 12:04 am » wrote: ↑ Prove it was an assumption.
1. Turn it around on me as always.
100% accuracy
Yawn. That is manmade intellectual logic protecting reasonable doubt semantics. Explain why that works that way? What separates proteins, from bacteria and viruses? Time each is both occupying space spontaneously different simultaneously here. That is what is called series parallel energy flow where space between each is going forward here at the same time each has its own unique displacement.MackTheFinger » 31 Dec 2023, 9:41 pm » wrote: ↑ .
Wrong !
.
A single cell organism will not fight another single cell organism to see who eats first.
.
The last universal common ancestor is the most recent organism from which all organisms now living on Earth descend. Thus, it is the most recent common ancestor of all current life on Earth. The last universal common ancestor lived some 3.5 to 3.8 billion years ago, in the Paleoarchean era. In 2016, a set of 355 genes considered likely to derive directly from the last universal common ancestor was identified.
.
Because single organisms won't eat each other...the result is lower distortion, better dynamic range, improved damping factor, greater stability and greater respect for individual single cell organisms rights.
Groomed by a sodomite, raped his ex wife, raped a woman in a department store, bragged about grabbing women by the ******, paid to have his "manhood" ridiculed by a pornstar, talks about banging his own daughter....Z09 » 01 Jan 2024, 7:32 am » wrote: ↑ NYT?
Didn't they send a reporter to Moscow to look for pee tapes?
He's a great example of conservative family values.R.Suave » 01 Jan 2024, 8:00 am » wrote: ↑ Groomed by a sodomite, raped his ex wife, raped a woman in a department store, bragged about grabbing women by the ******, paid to have his "manhood" ridiculed by a pornstar, talks about banging his own daughter....
"Peed on by Russian hookers????!!!!???? No way.....he's a FAMILY MAN!"
Stupid **** Hole.
You seem fixated on that.
That's called "raw intelligence".
Squatchman » 01 Jan 2024, 8:20 am » wrote: ↑ You seem fixated on that.
If golden showers are your thing I wouldn't mind pissing in your face.
I just did, stupid **** hole.
He can't, all he's got is rap and a crown air freshener.
I am pro-choice.R.Suave » 31 Dec 2023, 4:04 pm » wrote: ↑ Today, 8:37 am
Just spotted this in the NYT
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/15/us/s ... rtion.htmlOn Feb. 10 last year, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. showed his eight colleagues how he intended to uproot the constitutional right to abortion.
At 11:16 a.m., his clerk circulated a 98-page draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. After a justice shares an opinion inside the court, other members scrutinize it. Those in the majority can request revisions, sometimes as the price of their votes, sweating sentences or even words.
But this time, despite the document’s length, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch wrote back just 10 minutes later to say that he would sign on to the opinion and had no changes, according to two people who reviewed the messages. The next morning, Justice Clarence Thomas added his name, then Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and days later, Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. None requested a single alteration. The responses looked like a display of conservative force and discipline.
Has @Vegas EVER read the tea leaves like this?
I challenge him to show me...