Coronavirus

Out of context: Reply #6275

  • Started
  • Last post
  • 6,399 Responses
  • palimpsest1

    @set @Hench @Rendle
    Did you not tell us that ail vaxxxxed people are legally not human anymore?
    Because I'm basing all my logic on this fact you told us to be true.

    • So you ridiculed that point the whole time, but now you're agreeing in ernest, is it?Rendle
    • I'm basing all my iogic on your fact. How is this difficult to understand? I'm here for you.palimpsest
    • Do you agree that vaxxxxed people are no longer humans?palimpsest
    • As I said, ridicule does not bode well. Nor will it age well. You continue all you like..Rendle
    • Ok. Thanks for the answer.palimpsest
    • If you genetically modify an organism, it is no longer legally considered the same organism. It's basic law. Not my fault you cannot comprehend.Rendle
    • Do you think you can patent and own a tomato? The answer is no. Do you think you can patent and own a tomato if you genetically modify it? The answer is yes.Rendle
    • Is that genetically modified tomato still legally a tomato? The answer is no. Is it legally now considered a new organism? The answer is yes.Rendle
    • I'm completely agreeing with you. I think that's what difficult for you to understand.palimpsest
    • If you've taken the mRNA, are you now genetically modified? The answer is yes. It's really quite simple.Rendle
    • Vaxxxxed "people" are no longer human. Can we both agree on that? Because I think we do and it's difficult for you to understand.palimpsest
    • I'll post my original reply again... "So you ridiculed that point the whole time, but now you're agreeing in ernest, is it?"Rendle
    • a*Rendle
    • It's quite simple, as you've already stated.
      I don't see where the problem is. Do you care to elaborate?
      palimpsest
    • So here's my answer:
      I agree with your claim that's why I'm basing all my arguments on it.
      How is that difficult to see?
      palimpsest
    • Because you ridiculed it from the start, but now you're apparently being earnest, even though it doesn't sound like it. How many times must I repeat myself?Rendle
    • Ridicule is nothing to be scared of
      Don't you ever, don't you ever
      Stop being dandy, showing me you're handsome
      Gardener
    • And how many times must I repeat myself? You're the only one that sees a discrepancy in our arguments.palimpsest
    • From my point of view you haven't really internalized the significance of vaxxed people no longer being human.palimpsest
    • https://www.qbn.com/…palimpsest
    • @Rendle a genetically modified tomato is still a tomato (Solanum lycopersicum), it would even fit in the same species but it would be of a different variety.palimpsest
    • Take a step back and learn a bit of biology and taxonomy before fronting.palimpsest
    • You can't patent an own a tomato created by nature. If you GM it, you can, because it's no longer legally considered a tomato. It's a GM tomato. A different orgRendle
    • How many times do I have to say the same thing until you understand?Rendle
    • That's the last time I waste time responding to you.Rendle
    • A GM tomato is still a tomato. This is not hard to understand. It's not the same variety as a the tomato it's based on but taxonomically it's a tomato.palimpsest
    • You can patent a GM tomato. But guess what? It's still a tomato, that's what we're calling it: a patented tomato. Get it?palimpsest
    • It's a new variety of..... drumroll.... tomato!palimpsest
    • But it's not legally considered a tomato. It's legally considered a GM tomato, which the modifier can own the rights to.Rendle
    • If you took the mRNA, you're no longer legally considered a human being, you're a GM human being, which the modifier can own the rights to. It's very simpleRendle
    • I honestly don't know why I'm still responding to you, you're an idiot beyond measure.Rendle
    • How is a GM tomato not a tomato since tomato is in the name?
      What is the name of the species if that makes it clearer?
      Serious question.
      palimpsest
    • I'm not saying you can't claim ownership of a GM tomato. It's a matter of taxonomy. Where do we place this not tomato?palimpsest
    • Thanks for your patience.palimpsest
    • It's a different organism. It's been modified. Genetically. To be different. What the fuck are you not understanding?Rendle
    • Where do you place it taxonomically? In what genus? It's a simple question.
      I understood that it's no longer a tomato.
      palimpsest
    • Are we making a new kingdom for genetically modified organisms?palimpsest
    • You're just doing any mental gymnastics you possibly can fathom so as not to acknowledge the fact that you're now a genetically modified humanRendle
    • Not legally a human being, but a genetically modified human being. You can't patent and own the former, but you can the latter.Rendle
    • I have acknowledged I'm no longer human because I'm vaxed.
      I want to know why this tomato is no longer a tomato yet you keep calling it a tomato.
      palimpsest
    • Idiot.Rendle
    • We'll deal with the taxonomy of a modified human later. Let's keep it simple and concentrate on the non-tomato.palimpsest
    • Do you understand my question?palimpsest

View thread