Warrior General Games

Originally posted by hays23
you lost to a team that is 7-5 and can't match your talent in any phase of the game. you might want to think about posting less and planning more.

Yea USA AA is definitely way tougher than Africa AAA. We spanked an Africa AAA team by 15 that crushed your team by 34. I wish we were in an easy Conference like Africa AAA. None of the teams here would even make the playoffs in USA AA.

Originally posted by hays23

FACT: I have a small penis

Looks like you mixed your IM to your online boyfriend with your post again. We're all aware you have a small penis, Hays.

Originally posted by msupoke
Out of curiosity, with which American college are you familiar?

Are you asking them if I know them? If we have had Shakespearian business together?

It's a better question for you, I think, since you've claimed to come out of one with the belief that Darwinian evolution is like a farmer walking into a field of oak trees and cutting them all down and planting wheat.

Originally posted by Sly
Originally posted by msupoke

Out of curiosity, with which American college are you familiar?

Are you asking them if I know them in a Shakespearian sense? If we have business together?

It's a better question for you, I think, since you've claimed to come out of one with the belief that Darwinian evolution is like a farmer walking into a field of oak trees and cutting them all down and planting wheat.

which drug are you currently using?

Originally posted by hays23

which drug are you currently using?

Nothing gives me a bigger high than seeing you bang your fists on the ground, baboon-clown


Originally posted by hays23

FACT: I have a small penis

Looks like you mixed your IM to your online boyfriend with your post again. We're all aware you have a small penis, Hays.

Originally posted by Sly
Originally posted by msupoke

Out of curiosity, with which American college are you familiar?

Are you asking them if I know them? If we have had Shakespearian business together?

It's a better question for you, I think, since you've claimed to come out of one with the belief that Darwinian evolution is like a farmer walking into a field of oak trees and cutting them all down and planting wheat.

It was a straight-forward question. Just answer it or shut the fuck up.

Also, to revert back to the evolution of language, you must be an ignorant person, even for an Englishman, if you believe that nothing has happened in both of our cultures that could, and have, caused our dialects to change. Language does not evolve on its own, but war is not always the only cause of a change in a language. It usually occurs when cultures meet. If you want proof of this, research the roots of the English language itself. It is a hybrid of a number of earlier languages.

Originally posted by msupoke

It was a straight-forward question. Just answer it or shut the fuck up.

As was mine. It's clear you're embarrassed by your poor educational background, as you should be.

Originally posted by msupoke
Also, to revert back to the evolution of language, you must be an ignorant person, even for an Englishman, if you believe that nothing has happened in both of our cultures that could, and have, caused our dialects to change. Language does not evolve on its own, but war is not always the only cause of a change in a language. It usually occurs when cultures meet. If you want proof of this, research the roots of the English language itself. It is a hybrid of a number of earlier languages.

Ah, baboon-clown, but before you were very specific in talking about why we no longer speak Old English -

Originally posted by msupoke
If you had half of the sense you are desperately trying to show, you would realize that if language did not evolve, you would still be speaking Old English. -

which shows your complete ignorance of the subject matter you claim expertise in, because the movement from Old English specifically was no more "evolution" than my prior analogy of a farmer cutting down a field of Oak trees and planting wheat. Had you any real expertise in your subject matter you would have known that, just as you would have known the correct use of periods. Basically you're a hack and a joke, just as most people are who get English degrees from inferior American educational systems, and especially English degrees, which are passed out sort of like special education diplomas just to move morons out of the American college system.

Originally posted by Sly
Originally posted by msupoke


It was a straight-forward question. Just answer it or shut the fuck up.

As was mine. It's clear you're embarrassed by your poor educational background, as you should be.

If you are referring to these questions...
Originally posted by Sly

Are you asking them if I know them? If we have had Shakespearian business together?


The answers are no and no. However, I do not see how you even came to ask those questions, as they were not the logical interpretation of my question, and no one with any common sense would even go there. If those were serious questions, then you have severe reading comprehension issues. Please explain the steps in your logic that got you to this point, then answer the original fucking question.

Originally posted by Sly
Originally posted by msupoke

Also, to revert back to the evolution of language, you must be an ignorant person, even for an Englishman, if you believe that nothing has happened in both of our cultures that could, and have, caused our dialects to change. Language does not evolve on its own, but war is not always the only cause of a change in a language. It usually occurs when cultures meet. If you want proof of this, research the roots of the English language itself. It is a hybrid of a number of earlier languages.

Ah, baboon-clown, but before you were very specific in talking about why we no longer speak Old English -



No, I said that if language did not evolve, you would still be speaking Old English. I did not mention the reason. You did, but you were not that accurate. There was not one reason the language evolved to Middle English, as that type of change is gradual.

Originally posted by Sly
Originally posted by msupoke

If you had half of the sense you are desperately trying to show, you would realize that if language did not evolve, you would still be speaking Old English. -

which shows your complete ignorance of the subject matter you claim expertise in, because the movement from Old English specifically was no more "evolution" than my prior analogy of a farmer cutting down a field of Oak trees and planting wheat. Had you any real expertise in your subject matter you would have known that, just as you would have known the correct use of periods. Basically you're a hack and a joke, just as most people are who get English degrees from inferior American educational systems, and especially English degrees, which are passed out sort of like special education diplomas just to move morons out of the American college system.

So you are saying that it is not evolution because there were causes. There are always causes to evolution, both in nature and in society. You use a lot of words, but you never really make a statement. If you were my student in an inferior American school, you would get a 'C' in content. Your grammar would be acceptable, though. Kudos to you.

Originally posted by msupoke


If you are referring to these questions...
Originally posted by Sly


Are you asking them if I know them? If we have had Shakespearian business together?


The answers are no and no. However, I do not see how you even came to ask those questions, as they were not the logical interpretation of my question, and no one with any common sense would even go there. If those were serious questions, then you have severe reading comprehension issues. Please explain the steps in your logic that got you to this point, then answer the original fucking question.

No I'm referring to this question, baboon-clown:

Originally posted by Sly

Originally posted by msupoke
Out of curiosity, with which American college are you familiar?

It's a better question for you

Since you're clearly unable to grasp the simplest twists of clever use of language, I'll explain the other part to you in more the "connect-the-dots" fashion that you received in your special education (English) classes at some American college. Both my other two questions have a common meaning with one of the words you used - "familiar". Therefore my other questions were a fancy way of asking what sense of the word "familiar" you meant, because, I'm sure if you checked the OED, you'd discover there are more than one.

Now I've answered one of your questions by explaining a concept that a 3rd year student outside the USA could figure out on his own, so I'm waiting to find out what institution of lesser learning has the distinct dishonor of granting a moron like you a diploma?

Originally posted by msupoke
No, I said that if language did not evolve, you would still be speaking Old English. I did not mention the reason. You did, but you were not that accurate. There was not one reason the language evolved to Middle English, as that type of change is gradual.

Even now you show you're completely ignorant in your field. So sad but not at all unexpected given that you're an American with an English degree. This particular transition wasn't particularly gradual in comparison to normal evolution of language.

Žus com, lo, Engelond in-to Normandies hond: And Že Normans ne couŽe speke Žo bote hor owe speche, And speke French as hii dude atom, and hor children dude also teche, So Žat heiemen of Žis lond, Žat of ho blod come, HoldeŽ alle Žulke speche Žat hii of hom nom: Vor bote a man conne Frenss me telŽ of him lute. Ac lowe men holdeŽ to Engliss, and to hor owe speche-ute. Ich wene Žer ne beŽ in al the world contreyes none Žat ne holdeŽ to hor owe speche, bote Engelond one.
Ac wel me wote uor to conne boŽe wel it is, Vor Že more Žat a mon can, Že more wurŽe he is.
Robert of Gloucester, ~1300

Originally posted by msupoke

So you are saying that it is not evolution because there were causes. There are always causes to evolution, both in nature and in society. You use a lot of words, but you never really make a statement. If you were my student in an inferior American school, you would get a 'C' in content. Your grammar would be acceptable, though. Kudos to you.

That's not what I was saying. In a real institution of learning, you would get an "F" in reading comprehension. But your greatest failure is you're passing on your ignorance to others. That's simply despicable.

Without bothering to quote all of your drivel, I would like to point out that you are asking me to answer your question, which was not really a question. Furthermore, your debate of my definition of the word 'familiar' is a pretty weak tactic of deflection. I am still awaiting your answer. Please let me know with which American university you are familiar.

Here are some American schools with which the British would not be familiar.

http://www.dentalsite.com/dentists/densch.html

Originally posted by msupoke
Without bothering to quote all of your drivel, I would like to point out that you are asking me to answer your question, which was not really a question. Furthermore, your debate of my definition of the word 'familiar' is a pretty weak tactic of deflection. I am still awaiting your answer. Please let me know with which American university you are familiar.

I've answered one of your questions already, baboon-clown. Still waiting to hear what institution of lesser learning has the distinct dishonor of granting a moron like you a diploma?