[BigV]

Originally Posted by tw

Shame on you for posting cheapshots.

Let's get the cheapshot out of the way first, shall we?

Do you even know where babies come from dumbass? You don't indicate any such knowledge with your recent posts.

There? Feel better? Until now, I haven't made any cheapshots, the ridiculousness of your claim makes mockery impossible (see Poe's Law).

Originally Posted by tw

Nope.

It's still "Nope." despite your subsequent posts. Now to your further failure to support your claim with any evidence whatsoever.

I asked you to provide some support for this claim of yours:

Originally Posted by tw

snip--

Reveiw the science. Statistics suggest that women are more likely to become pregnant from sex that occurs during greater emotion. That applies both to rape and to illicit sex (martial cheating). Yes, the pretty boy lover is more often likely to get a wife pregnant than the husband.

--snip

Let's review what you say.

I said your claim is false. You say

Originally Posted by tw

Of course it isn't.

Ok, you're off to a good start. You've unabiguously reiterated your belief in your original statement. I asked you for a cite, or some other evidence to bolster your claim that

Originally Posted by tw

Statistics suggest that women are more likely to become pregnant from sex that occurs during greater emotion.

and you follow up with:

Originally Posted by tw

Considering the number of statements I have made so contrary to popular belief (ie predicting Desert Storm and its response months in advance, the mythical Saddam WMDs, a financial morass called AIG, stupidity of the Chevy Volt, actual cost of Mission Accomplished, escalating military tensions between China and its neighbors, etc).

A nonsensical sentence fragment. Hm.

Originally Posted by tw

Since overwhelmingly unpopular statements have been proven correct so often, then you should accuse with caution. Or at least first learn some facts rather than entertain a feeling. The emotional only remember how unpopular those statement were; and forget unpopular statements were also the accurate ones.

What are you saying here? You've made extremely unpopular statements in the past, but were correct, so I should challenge you on

Originally Posted by tw

Statistics suggest that women are more likely to become pregnant from sex that occurs during greater emotion.

"with caution"? I have learned many facts, I am cautious when caution is called for. Your claim is certainly "overwhelmingly unpopular" but it still hasn't been "proven correct". Not yet anyway, but you talk some more, so let's go see.

Originally Posted by tw

...
Facts come from research into infidelity and propagation of the species.

A quibble--facts can be revealed from research, they don't actually come from research

Originally Posted by tw

Long known was that infidelity and rape tends to result in a higher fertility.

See? This is a claim, it is not evidence. It is an assertion, a false attribution or an appeal to tradition, both fallacious.

Originally Posted by tw

That was never disputed.

Whether or not it has ever been disputed before (and I'm skeptical of that one too), I'm disputing it now. Still no evidence.

Originally Posted by tw

Researchers have been asking why. Genetic diversity is considered important for the advancement of the species. For example, one in five children are sired by someone other than the wife's spouse. A number that has held consistent even during the 1950s when adults were so more 'moral'. The resulting diversity is considered genetically healthy. A trend that begs the current hypothesis.

What the heck are you talking about? I read ahead and this little detour into a different fantasy and it doesn't connect with your original claim about that

Originally Posted by tw

Statistics suggest that women are more likely to become pregnant from sex that occurs during greater emotion.

Originally Posted by tw

A higher fertility rate during rape or infidelity creates increased genetic diversity. Undisputed is the higher fertility rate. The outstanding question is why and how important that would be for survival of the species.

You're fond of using "undisputed" and "never disputed" and "long known" when you try to round out an argument for one of your claims. The REAL outstanding question is "where are the facts to support your claims?". Answer that one and the others will be much easier to explain and understand.

Originally Posted by tw

Research with animals in England and Australia both demonstrated that the male who "copulatory ambushes" the female also have sperm with higher fertility rates. The romancing mate or 'pretty boy' male tends to be less fertile.

Cite, please.

Originally Posted by tw

In this case, the rapist and not the victim is more fertile. Bottom line conclusion remains despite unsubstantiated and speculative denials.

Let me try to paraphrase you to check my understanding: "I'm right because I'm right because you haven't disproved my claim." Ridiculous.

Originally Posted by tw

Also noted; women tend to become more interested or flirtatious with 'other' males around the time of ovulation. Not only spending more attention on them. But also having increased sexual fantasies about them. Another reason why women tend to have more children from extramarital liaisons - desired or forced.

Other interesting trends also exist. Men under increased stress prefer heavier women with bigger butts. Another trend also believed related to species survival.

Adults who suffered through famines as children or adolescents tend to have fatter children. Also unpopular because many only feel it must be wrong rather than first learn facts. How can a famine decades earlier change genetics?

I'm just tired of trying to understand your logic. There's so much noise and so little signal..."forced extramarital liasons" um... is that code for illegitimate rape? Come on man. Talk english, it aren't that hard.

Originally Posted by tw

Another question not yet answered.

At last, a true statement. This should be your signature, or at least your disclaimer

Originally Posted by tw

But that trend is also clear. Another trend suspected to be related to survival of the species.

Do you feel those are also wrong ... without first learning facts? Responsible denial means first learning facts before condemning.

Since I'm not a child, I learn from other ways--not just from the pedantic repetition of dogma (or dog crap). I'd be happy to deny your claims responsibly if you would just share some actual facts. Let's see some facts from you. Until you do, your claims remain unsubstantiated. Show us some of the facts and proof you esteem so highly.