23 and 24. I asked how anyone knew it came up to die, and you insultingly said, "Because it's dead genious." So not only did you claim to know, you started the argument and the insults. Class act!
I agree with the biologists. They think it was sick and/or dying. They don't know, they think, and I am in agreement with them. It's when you claim to know is when you are going beyond the biologists' theory. Biologists would never make such a foolish error.
23 and 24. I asked how anyone knew it came up to die, and you insultingly said, "Because it's dead genious." So not only did you claim to know, you started the argument and the insults. Class act!
fact: it IS dead. or are you going to claim that we don't really know that either?
also a fact: being a genius is not an insult. you took it as one, because you know you couldn't possibly be one and have such poor arguementative skills.
fact: it IS dead. or are you going to claim that we don't really know that either?
also a fact: being a genius is not an insult. you took it as one, because you know you couldn't possibly be one and have such poor arguementative skills.
Don't pussyfoot around your insults and try to deny them. And I know it's dead. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish by pointing out the obvious. The issue was whether or not it was dying before we took it out of the water. From past knowledge and experience, one would assume that it was dying or it wouldn't have been near the surface. The only thing I was pointing out is that we can't be absolutely certain that is the case. Biologists would not hesitate to agree with me. It's a matter of science and scientific study not to claim theory and opinion as fact. I think the one with poor argumentative skills is the one who resorts to insults. If this was an actual facilitated debate (in which I've been in a few) you wouldn't have made it past the first round.