hm



um

uh

I don't know how to save the best for last because they're all "the best".



Without exact stat on how many pits there are and how many attacks happened, we couldn't say there are "just as many pits as humans" and more importantly that you "have a 30% chance of being mauled to death on your daily walk."

That's literally the entire point.

You happy, Trolly?

We could have a whole separate thread picking that one apart, right?

It is not that we question where your invisible friends come from. We question that they exist.

Lol I keep noticing new stuff.

Wait how long does it take to breed out the fighting characteristics? Lots longer than breeding them in? I bet it's like a zillion times longer.

Imagine putting somebody as stupid as you in charge of jailing black boys.

Ok, this one I actually do have some sympathy for:


I think you're having some genuine confusion because this analogy only works if you're the side saying assault rifles are not really well-defined and who knows exactly how many kids get shot like this. I'm saying "ban guns" and you're saying "ban 9mm semi-automatic pistols cuz they're used the most in crimes" which, spelling it out like that, I'd assume it's easy to see how ridiculous your stance is.

But analogies are hard I've learned. This one really tripped up KingOfFelt (He's actually dumber than you but less neurotic if you're keeping track of that).










See what happened there? Because I didn't literally specify every way the guns were similar and instead ended with "and what not" he got confused and then compared two types of guns that were very different in one important function. He's real real dumb.

Yeah, actually. Good books and plenty of physical activity are key, gotta get regular exercise. How are you doing?


I actually am not as critical of the self-reported study as phresh, it probably captures a lot of useful stuff, but aggression sure isn't one of them. How many pit owners are going to be honest about that? Like, "oh, he was a perfect angel up until this one incident" is what they say in every dog-eats-toddler story.

But to your point, yes 9% heritability seems awfully high.

That was a certified 13 banger.

I'm glad that you and I are here to witness it together, old friend.

Then if 1 out of 1000 pit bulls were involved in dog fighting would you expect the general population to retain this trait? Or maybe the next phrase after the one you bolded ("but behavior only subtly differentiates breeds.") was accurate as well. If aggression is abnormally heritable, would you expect the vast vast vast vast majority of pits which are quite removed from any program to create better fighting dogs to retain that level of aggression?

Without a big selection pressure to reverse it, who knows? But we don't have to speculate on this, we can just take a look at the numbers and see an astonishing agreement between the breeds bred for fighting and the breeds that will run across the street to maul someone's kid. I just don't see the argument for letting people make more of these dogs when there are so many other breeds that don't seem to be a huge problem.

Would you be interested to know that it was me who came up with the "certified x-banger" and "combo breaker" and what not to describe my own posting, years back?

Would you be interested in anything? (aside from the perhaps the most pathetic attempt at outgrouping and othering I've ever seen)

I can requote the relevant posts of our discussion or I can just leave you to whatever it is you're doing.

a PhD

a PhD in SCIENCE

lol there's something beautiful happening alright

the seamless transition from "they trickle in here and get DeStRoYeD!!!" to this whatever **** this is might qualify

Tell me everything.

Aw sheeit I might've bit off more than I can chew for right now, because that would require a whole epic backstory about various posters in PoliticsUnchained and its various iterations.

I will say though that you've been hitching your wagon to some rough stars:




I mean, imagine what it would take for a person to end up interacting with the world like that, right?

“I agree with you 99% of the time but this 1% gave me no pause or moment of reflection and indeed I found it normal and impersonal to mock you and insult you and cheer on the people banning you over this 1%”

Lol before this exposure to weaponized 2p2 autism I wouldn't have even thought that possible.

Since I've got you on the line though,

you alluded to Babs and much like your lack of exposure to the Politics forum and subforums, I lack exposure to that whole thing. I could tell you that TBAB stands for The Bay Area Beast and that he is "a thief and a scammer" but beyond those incredibly broad strokes, not much else.

What is that thread like? I assume he's probably banned now but was in the thread interacting with people previously.

hm

lol, this guy thinks he invented the concept of combo breaking, incredible tapioca-brained ****.

Yes Trolly, my brain is made of pudding.

I'll try to tie two ideas together in one post, even though that's not really my style:

This,

was a PM!

Otherwise I don't think we would've seen even that level of honesty.

Trolly was dubbed Awkward OK Guy from this sketch:



Which is why this,

is so shocking!

I legit didn't even know the thing was capable of real human emotion. This is why I don't use "lol u mad" as some sort of snarky jab. I think it's good and healthy to get mad about things from time to time!

Well Trolly, since you're braving the waters of Words That Get You Mad,

1. I know.

2. You do have to speculate.

3. Because you don't know the numbers.

4. Because you don't even have a definition for "these dogs" much less everything else even though you're allowed to just make up whatever definition you want.

5. Because you got your degrees by a series of blowjobs.