Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Was Darwin Gay ?
843 views
Skip to first unread message
Loirbaj
Feb 15, 2012, 4:58:57 PM2/15/12
to
I am often asked, Was Darwin Gay, by students.
To be candid, it appears yes Darwin was homosexual.
And here is what I base this on. Darwin actually came
aboard ship (the Beagle) with the job description of
'Gentlemans Companion to the Captain' (Fitzroy). Then
for 5 solid years, Darwin shared intimate cabin space
exclusively with the young Capt Fitzroy. Neither of them,
during that time, was ever seen in the company of a
woman. While most all the other ship's crew would go
ashore and engage women, yet Darwin and the Captain
were inseparable. In all his journals and diaries and letters
Darwin never once speaks of dating or meeting or engaging
any woman --this in the vast space of a 5 year voyage.
Later on back in england, after the stint as 'Gentlemans
Companion', Darwin never once dated or saw or met any
women at all. Instead, he moved into an arranged marriage
with his sister --no, it was his own First Cousin. He married
his first cousin Emma Wedgwood solely to keep the vast
Wedgwood fortune in the family. His own mother also was
a Wedgwood. They had several children. The Captain also
married, but he committed suicide. And Darwin fell into a
lifelong languor and unspecified 'illness', himself. Remember
that in that time frame, that a man convicted of homosexuality
(as with Oscar Wilde) was put into prison. Likely, as ever more
Darwin notes and letters are released, more light will be thrown
and confirming Charles Darwin's homosexuality.
To be candid, it appears yes Darwin was homosexual.
And here is what I base this on. Darwin actually came
aboard ship (the Beagle) with the job description of
'Gentlemans Companion to the Captain' (Fitzroy). Then
for 5 solid years, Darwin shared intimate cabin space
exclusively with the young Capt Fitzroy. Neither of them,
during that time, was ever seen in the company of a
woman. While most all the other ship's crew would go
ashore and engage women, yet Darwin and the Captain
were inseparable. In all his journals and diaries and letters
Darwin never once speaks of dating or meeting or engaging
any woman --this in the vast space of a 5 year voyage.
Later on back in england, after the stint as 'Gentlemans
Companion', Darwin never once dated or saw or met any
women at all. Instead, he moved into an arranged marriage
with his sister --no, it was his own First Cousin. He married
his first cousin Emma Wedgwood solely to keep the vast
Wedgwood fortune in the family. His own mother also was
a Wedgwood. They had several children. The Captain also
married, but he committed suicide. And Darwin fell into a
lifelong languor and unspecified 'illness', himself. Remember
that in that time frame, that a man convicted of homosexuality
(as with Oscar Wilde) was put into prison. Likely, as ever more
Darwin notes and letters are released, more light will be thrown
and confirming Charles Darwin's homosexuality.
Budikka666
Feb 15, 2012, 5:02:37 PM2/15/12
to
"And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart
thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
them..." (Mark 6:11)
Do we see the Usenet theists doing this? Do we see them moving on,
having failed so very dismally here? NO! They continue to spam
Usenet with their desperate lies. They have to lie, you see, because
they know as well as we do that their blind mythology has been
thoroughly and soundly beaten by science.
And every one of them is a hypocrite because not a single one of them
follows, even remotely, the teachings of the mythical Jesus - who,
BTW, was not a Christian, but a Judaist!
End of story, case closed.
Budikka
thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
them..." (Mark 6:11)
Do we see the Usenet theists doing this? Do we see them moving on,
having failed so very dismally here? NO! They continue to spam
Usenet with their desperate lies. They have to lie, you see, because
they know as well as we do that their blind mythology has been
thoroughly and soundly beaten by science.
And every one of them is a hypocrite because not a single one of them
follows, even remotely, the teachings of the mythical Jesus - who,
BTW, was not a Christian, but a Judaist!
End of story, case closed.
Budikka
Loirbaj
Feb 15, 2012, 5:09:20 PM2/15/12
to
Ian Wood frantic to divert
Loirbaj said,
Sir, you tell us we must NOT look 'at the man
behind the curtain', Darwin. Instead you say
that Jesus never existed and yet at the same
time 'Jesus is a liar'. Mr.Wood, if Jesus never
lived or if he is now living in Cincinnatti, how
does any of that touch upon the subject here.
What do you have to contribute to THIS dialog?
Loirbaj said,
Sir, you tell us we must NOT look 'at the man
behind the curtain', Darwin. Instead you say
that Jesus never existed and yet at the same
time 'Jesus is a liar'. Mr.Wood, if Jesus never
lived or if he is now living in Cincinnatti, how
does any of that touch upon the subject here.
What do you have to contribute to THIS dialog?
Tronscend
Feb 15, 2012, 5:12:17 PM2/15/12
to
"Budikka666" <budi...@netscape.net> skrev i melding
news:618f2ef0-700c-4da6...@qt7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
Phlip
Feb 15, 2012, 5:01:50 PM2/15/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Feb 15, 1:58 pm, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> I am often asked, Was Darwin Gay, by students.
OMG! I just realized...
> I am often asked, Was Darwin Gay, by students.
MAYBE DARWIN DID ABE LINCOLN!!!
Paul David Wright
Feb 15, 2012, 5:46:29 PM2/15/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in
news:3eaf676c-f84c-42fa...@i2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com:
>
> I am often asked, Was Darwin Gay, by students.
> To be candid, it appears yes Darwin was homosexual.
And guess what, even if he was, that in no way invalidates his theory,
loser.
Keep flinging those arrows. Maybe once you'll hit something.
--
PDW
Check out my blog:
The first is a preview of my superhero comic book.
http://incognitoheroes.blogspot.com/
http://corneliusaddaptionproject.blogspot.com/
And my books:
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/pdwright42
news:3eaf676c-f84c-42fa...@i2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com:
>
> I am often asked, Was Darwin Gay, by students.
> To be candid, it appears yes Darwin was homosexual.
loser.
Keep flinging those arrows. Maybe once you'll hit something.
--
PDW
Check out my blog:
The first is a preview of my superhero comic book.
http://incognitoheroes.blogspot.com/
http://corneliusaddaptionproject.blogspot.com/
And my books:
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/pdwright42
Duggy
Feb 15, 2012, 5:48:30 PM2/15/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Feb 16, 7:58 am, Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> he moved into an arranged marriage
> with his sister
Such a mistake shows how little you know about Darwin.
> he moved into an arranged marriage
> with his sister
Was Darwin gay?
Who cares?
===
= DUG.
===
Spartakus
Feb 15, 2012, 7:39:55 PM2/15/12
to
I'll bet you are.
Phlip
Feb 15, 2012, 8:49:24 PM2/15/12
to
> And guess what, even if he was, that in no way invalidates his theory,
> loser.
Furtherless, a Victorian Era gentleman would NEVER have advertised his
> loser.
gayness. The nautical designation "Gentlemans Companion to the
Captain" merely indicated Darwin's rank & status to officers and crew.
He could not order them around, but he COULD ask the Captain to!
Smiler
Feb 15, 2012, 9:25:27 PM2/15/12
to
to never have had sex with a woman.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
Rich
Feb 15, 2012, 10:45:34 PM2/15/12
to
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:3eaf676c-f84c-42fa-a32b-
9a0017...@i2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com:
, more light will be thrown
> and confirming Charles Darwin's homosexuality.
>
If true, too bad he failed to live up the standards set by the nature he
studied.
9a0017...@i2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com:
, more light will be thrown
> and confirming Charles Darwin's homosexuality.
>
studied.
cinga...@me.com
Feb 15, 2012, 11:52:00 PM2/15/12
to
On Feb 16, 2:25 am, Smiler <Youmus...@JoeKing.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:12:17 +0100, Tronscend wrote:
>
> > "Budikka666" <budik...@netscape.net> skrev i melding
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:12:17 +0100, Tronscend wrote:
>
2881 Dead
Feb 16, 2012, 12:34:59 AM2/16/12
to
--
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution
inevitable” -JFK
--
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution
inevitable” -JFK
Phlip
Feb 16, 2012, 1:03:50 AM2/16/12
to
On Feb 15, 7:45 pm, Rich <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:3eaf676c-f84c-42fa-a32b-
> 9a0017aa6...@i2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com:
understanding is we now know the gene is not selfish. It is not
arbitrarily programmed only to reproduce itself. It is, in fact, tuned
to ensure that relatives bearing similar genes reproduce. Nature is
primarily cooperative.
> Loirbaj <Rhodi...@wmconnect.com> wrote in news:3eaf676c-f84c-42fa-a32b-
> 9a0017aa6...@i2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com:
>
> , more light will be thrown
>
> > and confirming Charles Darwin's homosexuality.
>
> If true, too bad he failed to live up the standards set by the nature he
> studied.
The main difference between D's original theories and modern
> , more light will be thrown
>
> > and confirming Charles Darwin's homosexuality.
>
> If true, too bad he failed to live up the standards set by the nature he
> studied.
understanding is we now know the gene is not selfish. It is not
arbitrarily programmed only to reproduce itself. It is, in fact, tuned
to ensure that relatives bearing similar genes reproduce. Nature is
primarily cooperative.
Buddythunder
Feb 16, 2012, 1:39:23 AM2/16/12
to
anything at all in service of his strangely-unprincipled god, but man
are you BRAZEN!! Fun for the whole family, I'm sure.
Yap
Feb 16, 2012, 2:02:04 AM2/16/12
to
On Feb 16, 10:25 am, Smiler <Youmus...@JoeKing.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:12:17 +0100, Tronscend wrote:
>
> > "Budikka666" <budik...@netscape.net> skrev i melding
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:12:17 +0100, Tronscend wrote:
>
> >news:618f2ef0-700c-4da6...@qt7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> >> "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart
> >> thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
> >> them..." (Mark 6:11)
>
> >> Do we see the Usenet theists doing this? Do we see them moving on,
> >> having failed so very dismally here? NO! They continue to spam
> >> Usenet with their desperate lies. They have to lie, you see, because
> >> they know as well as we do that their blind mythology has been
> >> thoroughly and soundly beaten by science.
>
> >> And every one of them is a hypocrite because not a single one of them
> >> follows, even remotely, the teachings of the mythical Jesus - who,
> >> BTW, was not a Christian, but a Judaist!
>
> >> End of story,
>
> > Weeeeellll .... was Jesus gay?
>
> Much more likely. He supposedly hung around with 12 other men and claimed
> to never have had sex with a woman.
So, in fact Lairbag worships a gay who was a criminal............
> >> "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart
> >> thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
> >> them..." (Mark 6:11)
>
> >> Do we see the Usenet theists doing this? Do we see them moving on,
> >> having failed so very dismally here? NO! They continue to spam
> >> Usenet with their desperate lies. They have to lie, you see, because
> >> they know as well as we do that their blind mythology has been
> >> thoroughly and soundly beaten by science.
>
> >> And every one of them is a hypocrite because not a single one of them
> >> follows, even remotely, the teachings of the mythical Jesus - who,
> >> BTW, was not a Christian, but a Judaist!
>
> >> End of story,
>
> > Weeeeellll .... was Jesus gay?
>
> Much more likely. He supposedly hung around with 12 other men and claimed
> to never have had sex with a woman.
Loirbaj
Feb 16, 2012, 2:06:16 AM2/16/12
to
Furtherless, a Victorian Era gentleman would NEVER have advertised
his
gayness. The nautical designation "Gentlemans Companion to the
Captain" merely indicated Darwin's rank & status to officers and
crew.
He could not order them around, but he COULD ask the Captain to!
Not so. In fact, Darwin paid at least one of the
shipmen for favors including using the man as
a 'valet' and certainly giving him direct orders.
His name was Syms Covington. When Darwin
writers present their 'sanitized' narratives in pop
magazines, they rarely mention Darwin actually
had a valet to attend to personal matters.
Yap
Feb 16, 2012, 1:59:32 AM2/16/12
to
How could Budikka respond to LIES?
Your jesus was nothing but a criminal Judaist who was killed by the
Roman authority at the time.
You worship a criminal, a criminal..........
Roman authority at the time.
You worship a criminal, a criminal..........
Jeanne Douglas
Feb 16, 2012, 2:34:39 AM2/16/12
to
In article
<57f6d5b0-2844-48aa...@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
Why would they?
--
JD
"the lybian lier"
<57f6d5b0-2844-48aa...@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
--
JD
"the lybian lier"
trotsky
Feb 16, 2012, 6:54:56 AM2/16/12
to
straightest"?
LOL.
Ray Fischer
Feb 17, 2012, 2:04:45 AM2/17/12
to
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>I am often asked, Was Darwin Gay, by students.
>To be candid, it appears yes Darwin was homosexual.
_____________________
>I am often asked, Was Darwin Gay, by students.
>To be candid, it appears yes Darwin was homosexual.
/| /| | |
||__|| | Do not feed the |
/ O O\__ | trolls. Thank you. |
/ \ | --Mgt. |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
--
Ray Fischer | None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
rfis...@sonic.net | Goethe
Paul David Wright
Feb 17, 2012, 5:09:19 PM2/17/12
to
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in
news:57f6d5b0-2844-48aa...@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com:
>
> Furtherless, a Victorian Era gentleman would NEVER have advertised
> his
> gayness. The nautical designation "Gentlemans Companion to the
> Captain" merely indicated Darwin's rank & status to officers and
> crew.
> He could not order them around, but he COULD ask the Captain to!
>
> loirbaj said,
> Not so. In fact, Darwin paid at least one of the
> shipmen for favors
Coming from 'you', we need to see real evidence.
Yer word is not enough.
news:57f6d5b0-2844-48aa...@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com:
>
> Furtherless, a Victorian Era gentleman would NEVER have advertised
> his
> gayness. The nautical designation "Gentlemans Companion to the
> Captain" merely indicated Darwin's rank & status to officers and
> crew.
> He could not order them around, but he COULD ask the Captain to!
>
> loirbaj said,
> Not so. In fact, Darwin paid at least one of the
> shipmen for favors
Yer word is not enough.
Paul David Wright
Feb 17, 2012, 5:11:46 PM2/17/12
to
Smiler
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:12:17 +0100, Tronscend wrote:
>
>>
afb707...@qt7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:12:17 +0100, Tronscend wrote:
>
>>
>> "Budikka666" <budi...@netscape.net> skrev i melding
>> news:618f2ef0-700c-4da6-99dd-
afb707...@qt7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
>> ...
>>> "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart
>>> thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
>>> them..." (Mark 6:11)
>>>
>>> Do we see the Usenet theists doing this? Do we see them moving on,
>>> having failed so very dismally here? NO! They continue to spam
>>> Usenet with their desperate lies. They have to lie, you see,
>>> because they know as well as we do that their blind mythology has
>>> been thoroughly and soundly beaten by science.
>>>
>>> And every one of them is a hypocrite because not a single one of
>>> them follows, even remotely, the teachings of the mythical Jesus -
>>> who, BTW, was not a Christian, but a Judaist!
>>>
>>> End of story,
>>
>> Weeeeellll .... was Jesus gay?
>
> Much more likely. He supposedly hung around with 12 other men and
> claimed to never have had sex with a woman.
>
Gives a whole new spin on 'Jesus Christ Superstar'...
>>> "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart
>>> thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
>>> them..." (Mark 6:11)
>>>
>>> Do we see the Usenet theists doing this? Do we see them moving on,
>>> having failed so very dismally here? NO! They continue to spam
>>> Usenet with their desperate lies. They have to lie, you see,
>>> because they know as well as we do that their blind mythology has
>>> been thoroughly and soundly beaten by science.
>>>
>>> And every one of them is a hypocrite because not a single one of
>>> them follows, even remotely, the teachings of the mythical Jesus -
>>> who, BTW, was not a Christian, but a Judaist!
>>>
>>> End of story,
>>
>> Weeeeellll .... was Jesus gay?
>
> Much more likely. He supposedly hung around with 12 other men and
> claimed to never have had sex with a woman.
>
Tronscend
Feb 18, 2012, 12:10:35 AM2/18/12
to
"Paul David Wright" <pauldav...@yahoo.com> skrev i melding
news:Xns9FFCAEF091443pa...@178.63.61.175...
> Smiler
>
>
>> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:12:17 +0100, Tronscend wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Budikka666" <budi...@netscape.net> skrev i melding
>>> news:618f2ef0-700c-4da6-99dd-
> afb707...@qt7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
>>> ...
>>>> "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart
>>>> thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
>>>> them..." (Mark 6:11)
>>>>
>>>> Do we see the Usenet theists doing this? Do we see them moving on,
>>>> having failed so very dismally here? NO! They continue to spam
>>>> Usenet with their desperate lies. They have to lie, you see,
>>>> because they know as well as we do that their blind mythology has
>>>> been thoroughly and soundly beaten by science.
>>>>
>>>> And every one of them is a hypocrite because not a single one of
>>>> them follows, even remotely, the teachings of the mythical Jesus -
>>>> who, BTW, was not a Christian, but a Judaist!
>>>>
>>>> End of story,
>>>
>>> Weeeeellll .... was Jesus gay?
>>
>> Much more likely. He supposedly hung around with 12 other men and
>> claimed to never have had sex with a woman.
>>
>
> Gives a whole new spin on 'Jesus Christ Superstar'...
"...We dare not leave him to his own devices.
>
>
>> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:12:17 +0100, Tronscend wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Budikka666" <budi...@netscape.net> skrev i melding
>>> news:618f2ef0-700c-4da6-99dd-
> afb707...@qt7g2000pbc.googlegroups.com
>>> ...
>>>> "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart
>>>> thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against
>>>> them..." (Mark 6:11)
>>>>
>>>> Do we see the Usenet theists doing this? Do we see them moving on,
>>>> having failed so very dismally here? NO! They continue to spam
>>>> Usenet with their desperate lies. They have to lie, you see,
>>>> because they know as well as we do that their blind mythology has
>>>> been thoroughly and soundly beaten by science.
>>>>
>>>> And every one of them is a hypocrite because not a single one of
>>>> them follows, even remotely, the teachings of the mythical Jesus -
>>>> who, BTW, was not a Christian, but a Judaist!
>>>>
>>>> End of story,
>>>
>>> Weeeeellll .... was Jesus gay?
>>
>> Much more likely. He supposedly hung around with 12 other men and
>> claimed to never have had sex with a woman.
>>
>
> Gives a whole new spin on 'Jesus Christ Superstar'...
His half-witted fans will get out of control. ..."
Right...
Jesus was Jesus was Jesus was gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay..
Loirbaj
Feb 18, 2012, 2:29:35 AM2/18/12
to
mike said,
I was stunned, and yes you are right.
Darwin certainly was Gay. Wow, he never once
dated or went out until he married his own
sister, that is 'first cousin'.
loirbaj said,
Sad, but true. Remember the 'wife' Wedgwood
inherited huge monies and was his mother's
niece. She was very homely.
I was stunned, and yes you are right.
Darwin certainly was Gay. Wow, he never once
dated or went out until he married his own
sister, that is 'first cousin'.
loirbaj said,
Sad, but true. Remember the 'wife' Wedgwood
inherited huge monies and was his mother's
niece. She was very homely.
Jabrioil
Feb 18, 2012, 3:04:06 AM2/18/12
to
Except for you, who would care?
Phlip
Feb 18, 2012, 9:56:13 AM2/18/12
to
> > If true, too bad he failed to live up the standards set by the nature he
> > studied.
>
> What standards might those be?
In between claiming evolution is fiction, the right-wing homophobes
> > studied.
>
> What standards might those be?
claim that evolution endows all individuals with a lust to reproduce
themselves...
Loirbaj
Feb 18, 2012, 10:49:26 AM2/18/12
to
When a whole 'science' puts forward a litany of
glowing fables for Darwin, I suspect it is not science.
Darwin earned NO degree in any known science.
Darwin flunked out of medical school.
Darwin could not even define Species in his book.
Darwin never said in his book On the Origin of Species
what IS 'the origin of species', not in all 6 editions.
Darwin hated blacks, called them niggers and
looked forward to them all being 'exterminated'.
Yet, year after year, the evolution lobbyists publish
more books, and all with the same fabrications.
glowing fables for Darwin, I suspect it is not science.
Darwin earned NO degree in any known science.
Darwin flunked out of medical school.
Darwin could not even define Species in his book.
Darwin never said in his book On the Origin of Species
what IS 'the origin of species', not in all 6 editions.
Darwin hated blacks, called them niggers and
looked forward to them all being 'exterminated'.
Yet, year after year, the evolution lobbyists publish
more books, and all with the same fabrications.
Ray Fischer
Feb 18, 2012, 4:03:27 PM2/18/12
to
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>When a whole 'science' puts forward a litany of
>glowing fables for Darwin, I suspect it is not science.
When you babble irrational nonsense and try to equate Darwin
>When a whole 'science' puts forward a litany of
>glowing fables for Darwin, I suspect it is not science.
with evolution you brand yourself as just another stupid troll.
Jeanne Douglas
Feb 18, 2012, 4:08:52 PM2/18/12
to
In article
<7c110f7c-9bac-4824...@z31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com>,
And, btw, what fables are you talking about?
<7c110f7c-9bac-4824...@z31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com>,
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> When a whole 'science' puts forward a litany of
> glowing fables for Darwin, I suspect it is not science.
What does Darwin's personal life have to do with the fact of evolution?
> When a whole 'science' puts forward a litany of
> glowing fables for Darwin, I suspect it is not science.
And, btw, what fables are you talking about?
Christopher A. Lee
Feb 18, 2012, 4:58:28 PM2/18/12
to
he was - she was one of the reasons he delayed publishing Origin, he
didn't want to upset her.
But in any case he could be evil incarnate and his explanations would
still be just as valid.
Loirbaj
Feb 18, 2012, 7:39:35 PM2/18/12
to
Christopher A. VIRGIL said,
Nonsense. Darwin simply lived and slept
with Captain Fitzy for 5 years, to keep warm.
loirbaj dropped pipe laughing
Nonsense. Darwin simply lived and slept
with Captain Fitzy for 5 years, to keep warm.
loirbaj dropped pipe laughing
BarbaraOldGrandBagBush
Feb 19, 2012, 8:31:03 PM2/19/12
to
There is no evidence that Darwin was gay. He did, however, practice
bestiality. Especially with the slow-moving tortoises.
bestiality. Especially with the slow-moving tortoises.
Loirbaj
Feb 19, 2012, 8:49:41 PM2/19/12
to
Charles Darwin's 'lover' Capt Fitzroy later
had several insane episodes, and he
committed suicide.
had several insane episodes, and he
committed suicide.
Homoskeptical
Feb 19, 2012, 9:53:43 PM2/19/12
to
turns out you just have a crack pipe in hand!
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Jeanne Douglas
Feb 19, 2012, 11:06:00 PM2/19/12
to
Loirbaj
Feb 20, 2012, 10:05:04 AM2/20/12
to
Why did Darwin's lover kill himself?
Where are those 'lost letters'?
Where are those 'lost letters'?
Homoskeptical
Jul 21, 2013, 9:51:36 PM7/21/13
to
-- Christopher A. VIRGIL said,
Nonsense. Darwin simply lived and slept
with Captain Fitzy for 5 years, to keep warm.
loirbaj dropped pipe laughing
Well that explains everything! I was wondering if you were insane but it
turns out you just have a crack pipe in hand!
with Captain Fitzy for 5 years, to keep warm.
loirbaj dropped pipe laughing
Well that explains everything! I was wondering if you were insane but it
turns out you just have a crack pipe in hand!
Homoskeptical
Jul 21, 2013, 9:51:36 PM7/21/13
to
Bill Steele
Jul 22, 2013, 4:56:57 PM7/22/13
to
In article <op.w0losave6hex79@tilemaster>,
bear. If there's a correlation it may explain why so many straight
people are bigots.
Homoskeptical <m.i....@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:58:57 -0800, Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>
> -- Christopher A. VIRGIL said,
> Nonsense. Darwin simply lived and slept
> with Captain Fitzy for 5 years, to keep warm.
>
> loirbaj dropped pipe laughing
>
>
> Well that explains everything! I was wondering if you were insane but it
> turns out you just have a crack pipe in hand!
Well, all we really know is that Darwin was smarter than the average
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:58:57 -0800, Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>
> -- Christopher A. VIRGIL said,
> Nonsense. Darwin simply lived and slept
> with Captain Fitzy for 5 years, to keep warm.
>
> loirbaj dropped pipe laughing
>
>
> Well that explains everything! I was wondering if you were insane but it
> turns out you just have a crack pipe in hand!
bear. If there's a correlation it may explain why so many straight
people are bigots.
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
Jul 22, 2013, 6:56:19 PM7/22/13
to
that their contents would have been a lot more mild in his day.
--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Limbo? How low can you go..."
-- FreeThink (May 23, 2012)
Father Haskell
Jul 23, 2013, 8:26:00 PM7/23/13
to
On Sunday, February 19, 2012 9:53:43 PM UTC-5, Homoskeptical wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:58:57 -0800, Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Christopher A. VIRGIL said,
>
> Nonsense. Darwin simply lived and slept
>
> with Captain Fitzy for 5 years, to keep warm.
>
>
>
> loirbaj dropped pipe laughing
>
>
>
>
>
> Well that explains everything! I was wondering if you were insane but it
>
> turns out you just have a crack pipe in hand!
You've just managed to insult both crackheads AND
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:58:57 -0800, Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Christopher A. VIRGIL said,
>
> Nonsense. Darwin simply lived and slept
>
> with Captain Fitzy for 5 years, to keep warm.
>
>
>
> loirbaj dropped pipe laughing
>
>
>
>
>
> Well that explains everything! I was wondering if you were insane but it
>
> turns out you just have a crack pipe in hand!
insane people with one sentence.
Paul David Wright
Feb 15, 2012, 5:47:52 PM2/15/12
to
Loirbaj <Rhod...@wmconnect.com> wrote in
news:5721ee1c-e2c7-465f...@eb6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com:
>
> Ian Wood frantic to divert
>
And Loirbaj, frantic to lie about it.
> Loirbaj said,
> Sir, you tell us we must NOT look 'at the man
> behind the curtain', Darwin.
Nope.
His personal life in no way invalidates his theory, no matter how many
desperate lies you pull out of yer ass.
news:5721ee1c-e2c7-465f...@eb6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com:
>
> Ian Wood frantic to divert
>
> Loirbaj said,
> Sir, you tell us we must NOT look 'at the man
> behind the curtain', Darwin.
His personal life in no way invalidates his theory, no matter how many
desperate lies you pull out of yer ass.
0 new messages