- Joined:
- Nov 27, 2014
- Posts:
- 18,792
- Liked Posts:
- 4,649
Yes, of course. Maybe that is the Bears way. He would not even make the team in Detroit.
**OFFICAIL** Bears 2024 Regular Season News & Schleisse - FTO Preferred - No ALTS! Derailing Is Discouraged!
- Thread starter Anytime23
- Start date
- Joined:
- May 18, 2014
- Posts:
- 10,011
- Liked Posts:
- 12,115
- Location:
- murica
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 9,792
- Liked Posts:
- 14,398
My favorite teams
can someone please ban @nc0gnet0 from this damn thread? Didnt know this was Lions offseason talk
@Rush @zack54attack
@Rush @zack54attack
Payton!34
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 18, 2013
- Posts:
- 2,528
- Liked Posts:
- 1,303
wow are you a moron! Only you and the ONLY other proven dipshit disagree with me on these issues.
I know what throwback means and it’s not the inverse of evolution! WRONG
I never said that evolution was caused by a catastrophic event! I’m not you stupid! I said that catastrophic events caused the opposite of evolution which is where we actually went backwards in time as far as evolution is concerned proving that there are indeed times where the world/circulation did not evolve!
Yes, if a nuclear event killed all of man, we would devolve as a civilization!! Wow, you cannot have an IQ above 10 and that’s probably over estimating your intelligence.
If the population was wiped out by nuclear war, there couldn’t be a better example of devolving. If some did exist, would they have a better or worse life? Would they have the same quality of life? No Noooooooooo
Therefore things would devolve as a result of the nuclear event. People would descend into the dark ages. No cars, no gas, no or barely any food, no computers, no internet( which in your case might actually help evolution of others as they wouldn’t have to waste their time explaining simple things to you!)
Thank you for playing “Should we or should we not follow the advice of the fucking galactically stupid”!!!!!!!
- Joined:
- May 18, 2014
- Posts:
- 10,011
- Liked Posts:
- 12,115
- Location:
- murica
dabears70
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Dec 31, 2013
- Posts:
- 35,082
- Liked Posts:
- 10,878
- Location:
- Orlando
My favorite teams
#Triggered much?
#Crying
- Joined:
- Apr 22, 2015
- Posts:
- 14,428
- Liked Posts:
- 12,183
How much time did you have to serve in prison?
- Joined:
- Nov 27, 2014
- Posts:
- 18,792
- Liked Posts:
- 4,649
Devolution is the statutory delegation of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to govern at a subnational level, such as a regional or local level. It is a form of administrative decentralization.
Devolution, de-evolution, or backward evolution (not to be confused with dysgenics) is the notion that species can revert to supposedly more primitive forms over time. The concept relates to the idea that evolution has a purpose (teleology) and is progressive (orthogenesis), for example that feet might be better than hooves or lungs than gills. However, evolutionary biology makes no such assumptions, and natural selection shapes adaptations with no foreknowledge of any kind. It is possible for small changes (such as in the frequency of a single gene) to be reversed by chance or selection, but this is no different from the normal course of evolution and as such de-evolution is not compatible with a proper understanding of evolution due to natural selection.
Now STFU
In the event of a nuclear war, or any other catastrophic event, civilization would "regress" or even possibly be exterminated, not devolve, you moronic dumbass.
I never claimed a "throwback" was the opposite of evolution, dumbass. I said this" A throwback is when traits reappear which had disappeared generations ago." So, not only are you a complete moron, you suffer from a severe lack of reading comprehension. Throwbacks are rare occurrences, such as a baby born with a tail, etc.
Nice attempt at moving the goal post, when the original topic of debate was if devolution (in the genetic sense), was the opposite of evolution. LMAO at you trying to use the ice age as an example of devolution, you really are a clueless fuck, and I have not had this good of a laugh in a long time.
In closing, " Evolution does not necessarily equal progress or represent climbing to a higher state. Evolution is simply a slow change. If a species undergoes evolution, then by definition the species changes somewhat — but there is no requirement that the new state must be “higher” than the previous state”.
The Word “Devolve” Makes Me Cringe!
These days the word “devolve” has gotten quite popular in the media. Every few days I encounter the word in a news report or a printed…
The irony of all this is I was chastised for what some believe to be improper usage of the phrase" I could not care less" yet, some moron, when criticizing me for it, made the same mistake.
Last edited:
SugarWalls
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Sep 17, 2013
- Posts:
- 6,661
- Liked Posts:
- 6,471
Devolution is the statutory delegation of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to govern at a subnational level, such as a regional or local level. It is a form of administrative decentralization.
Devolution, de-evolution, or backward evolution (not to be confused with dysgenics) is the notion that species can revert to supposedly more primitive forms over time. The concept relates to the idea that evolution has a purpose (teleology) and is progressive (orthogenesis), for example that feet might be better than hooves or lungs than gills. However, evolutionary biology makes no such assumptions, and natural selection shapes adaptations with no foreknowledge of any kind. It is possible for small changes (such as in the frequency of a single gene) to be reversed by chance or selection, but this is no different from the normal course of evolution and as such de-evolution is not compatible with a proper understanding of evolution due to natural selection.
Now STFU
In the event of a nuclear war, or any other catastrophic event, civilization would "regress" or even possibly be exterminated, not devolve, you moronic dumbass.
I never claimed a "throwback" was the opposite of evolution, dumbass. I said this" A throwback is when traits reappear which had disappeared generations ago." So, not only are you a complete moron, you suffer from a severe lack of reading comprehension. Throwbacks are rare occurrences, such as a baby born with a tail, etc.
Nice attempt at moving the goal post, when the original topic of debate was if devolution (in the genetic sense), was the opposite of evolution. LMAO at you trying to use the ice age as an example of devolution, you really are a clueless fuck, and I have not had this good of a laugh in a long time.
In closing, " Evolution does not necessarily equal progress or represent climbing to a higher state. Evolution is simply a slow change. If a species undergoes evolution, then by definition the species changes somewhat — but there is no requirement that the new state must be “higher” than the previous state”.
The Word “Devolve” Makes Me Cringe!
These days the word “devolve” has gotten quite popular in the media. Every few days I encounter the word in a news report or a printed…medium.com
The irony of all this is I was chastised for what some believe to be improper usage of the phrase" I could not care less" yet, some moron, when criticizing me for it, made the same mistake.
I’m so confused rn. When you changed from a bears fan to a lions fan is that considered a ‘throwback’ or ‘devolution’ ???
Thx in advance
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 13,694
- Liked Posts:
- 15,741
- Location:
- United Club
My favorite teams
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 13,694
- Liked Posts:
- 15,741
- Location:
- United Club
My favorite teams
I think Claypool has evolved. Renaissance man…
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 13,694
- Liked Posts:
- 15,741
- Location:
- United Club
My favorite teams
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 21,220
- Liked Posts:
- 26,217
- Location:
- Mountains to Sea
My favorite teams
as long as his soft tissue injuries don't devolve while walking the runway.
- Joined:
- Aug 17, 2011
- Posts:
- 43,248
- Liked Posts:
- 23,489
- Location:
- Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
True but natural selection does and it's considered a significant component of evolution. De-evolution is not a real thing as it is still evolution but it's a common usage to imply returning to and previous or lessor state due to recessive throwback genes randomly showing up (not species significant) or a reversal of environmental triggers(species significant) that seemingly cause evo to look like de-evo.Devolution is the statutory delegation of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to govern at a subnational level, such as a regional or local level. It is a form of administrative decentralization.
Devolution, de-evolution, or backward evolution (not to be confused with dysgenics) is the notion that species can revert to supposedly more primitive forms over time. The concept relates to the idea that evolution has a purpose (teleology) and is progressive (orthogenesis), for example that feet might be better than hooves or lungs than gills. However, evolutionary biology makes no such assumptions, and natural selection shapes adaptations with no foreknowledge of any kind. It is possible for small changes (such as in the frequency of a single gene) to be reversed by chance or selection, but this is no different from the normal course of evolution and as such de-evolution is not compatible with a proper understanding of evolution due to natural selection.
Now STFU
In the event of a nuclear war, or any other catastrophic event, civilization would "regress" or even possibly be exterminated, not devolve, you moronic dumbass.
I never claimed a "throwback" was the opposite of evolution, dumbass. I said this" A throwback is when traits reappear which had disappeared generations ago." So, not only are you a complete moron, you suffer from a severe lack of reading comprehension. Throwbacks are rare occurrences, such as a baby born with a tail, etc.
Nice attempt at moving the goal post, when the original topic of debate was if devolution (in the genetic sense), was the opposite of evolution. LMAO at you trying to use the ice age as an example of devolution, you really are a clueless fuck, and I have not had this good of a laugh in a long time.
In closing, " Evolution does not necessarily equal progress or represent climbing to a higher state. Evolution is simply a slow change. If a species undergoes evolution, then by definition the species changes somewhat — but there is no requirement that the new state must be “higher” than the previous state”.
The Word “Devolve” Makes Me Cringe!
These days the word “devolve” has gotten quite popular in the media. Every few days I encounter the word in a news report or a printed…
The irony of all this is I was chastised for what some believe to be improper usage of the phrase" I could not care less" yet, some moron, when criticizing me for it, made the same mistake.
Everyone here knows that species don't revert to a previous genome but it doesn't prevent an understanding of the term de-evolve.
How many times have you gone to 'define your terms' in this very thread. It's the wieniest common debate tactic ever. Yes I'm aware that wieniest isn't a word. Maybe I'll start a Wiki page with your pic in it to make it so. Irrefutable!
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,559
- Liked Posts:
- 51,385
Wonder if he has fern game...
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 13,694
- Liked Posts:
- 15,741
- Location:
- United Club
My favorite teams
Come on, you know he does for sure. They probably calm him before he heads to fashion week.
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 13,694
- Liked Posts:
- 15,741
- Location:
- United Club
My favorite teams
Notice the low heels… This designer is thoughtful.
Nelly
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Mar 13, 2018
- Posts:
- 7,171
- Liked Posts:
- 8,321
The Bears' roster was quite bad, so there was almost no way it didn't get big-time upgraded almost no-matter who else you brought in to man some of these positions. Nonetheless, I love the moves, none of which were obvious "get me wins right now only" type of moves made out of desperation. Every single guy brought in has a future here beyond the following 3 seasons if they play well and aren't just beaten out by someone else on the roster (Herbert/Foreman/Roshon for example).
In fact, I think the only way most of these guys aren't on the team still in a few years is that they play well enough to earn big deals that don't make sense for us to match cause we've already got a guy at that position. It's possible that Robert Tonyan for example earns another starting shot elsewhere while we need to prioritize Kmet at the position. Another example might be Braxton Jones taking another big step to be Trent Williams-esque while Wright looks like a beast as well, and possibly having to let one of them walk cause we can't tie $50 million AAV into the starting tackle spot alone. That'd be a great problem to have. It looks like Poles has his eye on that as well with prioritizing accumulating draft picks, and having guys like Tyler Scott who could (maybe) step into a spot vacated by Mooney who earns a big-time deal elsewhere next season.
Last edited:
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 7,797
- Liked Posts:
- 6,577
- Location:
- Montgomery, TX
Well clearly I have a poorly developed fashion sense.
MikeDitkaPolishSausage
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 12, 2013
- Posts:
- 9,158
- Liked Posts:
- 6,962
- Location:
- Black Rainbow’s Grandma’s house.
Stop saying that! Cargo pants and your phone holder that clips to your belt are still in and cool. F*ck whatever everyone else thinks!
Members online NOW
- Member
- Admin
- Mod
- Donor
- HOF
Staff online NOW
-
bamainatlantaYou wake him up, you keep him up