"Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in news:buukve$p2o$0@pita.alt.net:
>
> "Eric Gill" <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns947A5DCE18BC0ericvgillyahoocom@24.93.43.121...
>> "Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in news:buttes$csv$0
@pita.alt.net:
>>
>> >
>> > "Ineedmoney" <mail@atmycomputer.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
>> > news:butqab$a2v$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>> >>
>> >> "Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:butoq1$4hq$0@pita.alt.net...
>> >> >
>> >> > "Cheezits" <cheezits32@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> > news:Xns947A4B5CBF133cheezitsnetzeronet@129.250.170.83...
>> >> > > laurieappieton@aol.com (LaurieAppIeton) won't even try to
defend
>> >> > > this nonsense, but let's have some fun with it anyway:
>> >> > > > 1) no natural process which resulted in information forming
>> >> > > > automatically in matter, has ever been observed;
>> >> > >
>> >> > > No act of divine creation has ever been observed.
>> >> >
>> >> > Oh yes it has, Sue. When God confounded the languages at Babel,
>> >> > humanity
>> >> was
>> >> > able to observe it. That's why we were scattered all over the
>> >> > earth, and
>> >> we
>> >> > speak languages whose families cannot possibly have a common
>> >> > ancestor.
>> >>
>> >> Any evidence of that outside the Bible, shmuck?
>> >>
>> >> Ed
>> >>
>> >
>> > Sure.
>>
>> You obviously meant "no," from the rest of your message. FYI.
>>
>> > All the evidence of a lack of common ancestor between the various
>> > language families lies in the fact that in the nearly two hundred
>> > years of sensible study of philology that we have had, no-one has
been
>> > able to posit one.
>> >
>> > Or even give a reasonable envisaging of one.
>>
>> Ah. So, of course, that leaves you free to make something up.
>>
>> God-of-the-gaps is not an argument, Professor Nebbish.
>>
>> > So, if you would like to say that it's wrong, then kindly show me
what
>> > the common ancestor language could have looked like between, say,
>> > Finno-Ugric and Indo-European,
>>
>> Wrong?
>>
>> How about "baseless"?
>>
>> You, ah, *do* understand the term, right?
>>
>> > and kindly leave my genitalia out of
>> > this discussion if you want to continue to be treated with respect.
>>
>> From you, Petseleh? After that drek?
>>
>> What value might that have to anyone who values honesty?
>>
>> > There are many more elevated uses of Yiddish phraseology.
>>
>> Yes, we're all fans of the mighty Yiddish epics in literature. They
are
>> right up there with the bombastic Klezmer symphonies.
>>
>
> Less of the anti-semitism.
More of the complete sentences. *Some* substance, logic, if have.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 |
| 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 |
|