00:00:00 --- log: started forth/16.10.26 01:42:39 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@180.183.132.197) joined #forth 01:42:39 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 01:45:07 --- quit: mark4 (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) 01:56:02 --- quit: proteusguy (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 03:13:21 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@node-wif.pool-125-24.dynamic.totbb.net) joined #forth 03:13:21 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 03:30:41 --- quit: nighty (Quit: Disappears in a puff of smoke) 03:30:55 --- quit: proteusguy (Remote host closed the connection) 03:41:25 --- join: dys (~dys@x5f725f29.dyn.telefonica.de) joined #forth 04:36:21 --- join: nighty (~nighty@s229123.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp) joined #forth 05:44:50 --- quit: karswell (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 05:54:38 --- join: karswell (~user@146.198.67.144) joined #forth 06:07:54 --- join: rgrinberg (~rgrinberg@blk-212-79-74.eastlink.ca) joined #forth 06:24:09 --- quit: nerfur (Quit: Coyote finally caught me) 06:28:04 --- join: nerfur (~nerfur@mail.freeside.ru) joined #forth 06:44:28 --- join: moby (~moby@187-127-179-194.user.veloxzone.com.br) joined #forth 06:49:43 --- part: moby left #forth 07:05:11 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@49.229.55.89) joined #forth 07:05:11 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 07:14:22 --- quit: proteusguy (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) 07:20:56 --- quit: rgrinberg (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) 07:22:34 --- join: mark4 (~mark4@99-164-75-34.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net) joined #forth 07:42:07 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@180.183.45.69) joined #forth 07:42:07 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 07:54:17 --- join: rgrinberg (~rgrinberg@24.222.87.130) joined #forth 08:07:00 --- join: moby (~moby@187-127-179-194.user.veloxzone.com.br) joined #forth 08:12:26 --- quit: moby (Quit: Leaving) 08:14:47 --- join: neceve (~ncv@86.125.241.206) joined #forth 08:14:48 --- quit: neceve (Changing host) 08:14:48 --- join: neceve (~ncv@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 09:00:18 --- join: true-grue (~true-grue@176.14.222.10) joined #forth 09:48:27 --- quit: backer_ (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 10:07:08 --- quit: rgrinberg (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) 10:13:31 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@152.179.131.166) joined #forth 10:14:10 --- quit: mnemnion (Remote host closed the connection) 10:14:24 --- join: mnemnion (~mnemnion@152.179.131.166) joined #forth 12:23:19 --- quit: neceve (Quit: Konversation terminated!) 13:31:21 --- quit: OriansJ`` (Remote host closed the connection) 13:45:40 --- join: the_count (~weston@172-1-66-81.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net) joined #forth 13:45:59 mark4: Are you around, I'll be here for about a half hour. 13:52:10 --- join: rgrinberg (~rgrinberg@blk-212-79-74.eastlink.ca) joined #forth 14:05:41 im here 14:06:09 i was thinking of sending you my forth for arm, i know it runs on the PI2 and PI3 but i have no idea about the zero 14:07:24 does the zero run linux? 14:10:20 Yes. I don't actually have it, but I like the looks of it a lot better than the full sized Pi. I believe it has the same IC as the PI 3 14:10:26 Yes, It runs linux 14:12:06 It is the same package as the PI 3, just a shrunk package from what I can see 14:14:37 I could get any of them though 14:14:59 I don't think so: http://elinux.org/RPi_Hardware 14:16:37 i have a PI2 and want a PI3 but im not getting it yet 14:16:50 let me push the zip somewhere you can download it from 14:16:56 So, incramentally, the processors increase from the Zero to Pi 2 to Pi 3 14:17:48 mark4.anapnea.net/t4.tar.bz2 14:18:00 thats not going to be staying there tho. thats not the purpose of that site :) 14:18:17 i would get a pi3 14:18:25 its only 40 dollars or so 14:20:32 Ok 14:21:22 are you in the states? 14:21:50 California 14:21:53 www.adafruit.com is a good place to get all PI related stuff 14:21:56 im in texas 14:22:19 Yes. I have bought from Adafruit before and like them 14:23:48 So, how complicated would it be to write a Forth like you have from scratch? 14:25:20 You have code such as: ' code "?dup", qdup ' Are these Assembly definitions, I'm not at all in the state of knowing how assembly works in the first place 14:25:25 when i started isforth which is what that one is based off i had zero knowledge of linux coding and only about 50% understanding of the internals of forth 14:25:36 it took me a month to get the initial version of isforth working 14:25:45 that arm version took about a week to get up and running initially 14:25:52 its never been formally released yet tho 14:26:20 did you download it? 14:26:26 For isforth, how did you get started? 14:26:29 I did download it 14:26:44 I'm here looking through the source tree 14:27:04 the best place to start is the kernel sources. learn to read the asm by reading he asm 14:27:26 when you can read and understand how all those 3 or 4 line functions work you can start to see how forth works internally 14:27:29 Is there any good documentation on assembly I could read? 14:27:36 the extensions are a good place to go for examples on how to use it 14:28:01 google arm assembler tutorials, im not impressed with many of them but thats because im "expert" at asm lol 14:28:09 asm is NOT difficult to read 14:28:12 or understand 14:28:28 the bit that youo wont fully understand is the macros, ignore them 14:28:47 they are extremely complex becuase its freeking gnu asm 14:28:49 which sucks 14:28:56 their assembler sucks i mean 14:29:19 Any specific tutorials you are impressed with? 14:29:31 when you can look at the definitions for dup swap rot etc and understand how they work i can explain the macros 14:29:36 and the way forth "threads" 14:30:02 dont think of threadsd as execution pipelines like "multi threaded" tho 14:30:13 it LOOKS daunting 14:30:15 but its not 14:30:29 you can learn those entire kernel sources in under a week no problem 14:30:46 some of the extensions are highly advanced forth however 14:30:56 and my code is NEVER ans compliant 14:31:15 its not far off but i have some issues with the ans std 14:31:25 I see 14:31:58 a very simple wrapper layer would solve the ans compliance 14:32:05 im just not interested in it myself 14:32:13 but if someone else wrote one for it i would include it 14:32:26 How is this? http://simplemachines.it/doc/arm_inst.pdf 14:32:39 i already have a github site for the compiler, i just have not uploaded there yet 14:33:01 ok actually yes thats kind of OK but its out of date 14:33:15 arm is a bit confusing, there are multiple definitions for "arm asm" 14:33:24 thers the original ARM 32 bit mode 14:33:29 then theres the 16 bit thumb mode 14:33:40 then thers the 32bit/16bit mixed up thumb2 mode 14:33:43 my code is thumb2 14:33:47 find a thumb2 tutorial 14:33:58 but the pdf you linked is a good place to start 14:34:33 dont STUDY the tutorial 14:34:40 read it through then study the sources 14:34:49 --- join: the_coun1 (~weston@172-1-66-81.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net) joined #forth 14:34:58 http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.qrc0001m/QRC0001_UAL.pdf Is this one better? 14:35:24 no because thats talking specifically about the ARM assembler 14:35:45 the gnu assembler does use the unified asm but its not the same as arm's assembler 14:35:48 look for a thumb2 tutorial 14:35:52 --- join: OriansJ (~user@107.170.205.175) joined #forth 14:36:07 For learning definitions of ASM keywords, is that ok? 14:36:44 theres too much in there thats specific to arm assembler 14:37:01 you would have to put it all through a mental filter 14:37:09 http://read.pudn.com/downloads159/doc/709030/Thumb-2SupplementReferenceManual.pdf 14:37:18 that might be a good place but its VERY in depth 14:37:24 not really a beginner doc 14:37:39 but if your not scared of reading things your not understanding yet it will be fine 14:37:47 if you dont understand something you read IGNORE THAT 14:37:50 just keep reading lol 14:38:05 https://www.raywenderlich.com/37181/ios-assembly-tutorial 14:38:20 --- quit: the_count (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) 14:38:23 thats specific to the ios operating system but it IS very basic 14:38:38 Ok. 14:38:38 The video which was posted last night was really good. I like how he praised emacs 14:38:40 you can ignore the calling conventions however, i dont follow them 14:39:13 btw, do you code c? 14:39:21 I do not 14:39:37 I am actually in 12th grade 14:39:55 i started to code at 18 14:39:57 So, I am developing experience 14:40:00 Stay in school don't do.drugs 14:40:08 i taught myself 6502 assembly language in 2 weeks 14:40:13 then i bought my first computer 14:41:20 http://www.coranac.com/tonc/text/asm.htm this tutorial is specific to arm and thumb (not thumb2) and is geared towards gameboy dev 14:41:25 but THAT is a good tutorial 14:41:44 or leave school and DONT do drugs :P 14:41:59 https://xivilization.net/~marek/blog/2012/09/30/first-steps-in-arm-assembly/ 14:42:07 there is a lot out there 14:42:11 Too late for drugs 14:42:15 Just Kidding 14:42:21 just READ those tutorials, study the code 14:42:21 I am not that type 14:42:26 the tutorials are simplistic 14:42:34 the code is real life 14:42:46 --- join: ASau (~user@netbsd/developers/asau) joined #forth 14:44:02 my ghod 14:44:14 ? 14:44:25 that's the longest I've seen a conversation go on without hypothetical mathematical constructs being brought up as a practical means of computing 14:44:37 were getting to that! 14:44:39 :p!~ 14:44:42 don't do it 14:44:52 friends don't let friends do lambda calculus 14:44:57 erm r=1/r+1 is beyond me 14:45:04 i have no clue about math 14:45:15 or krevine machines 14:45:19 tho i do know that r is 1.618803499... . . . 14:45:26 to be honest most of the "maths" you encounter in general purpose computing is arithmetic 14:45:39 r as in Correlation? 14:45:52 I don't think I've used anything more complicated than high-school maths in 30 years of writing all sorts of software 14:45:52 r is equal to one more than its own reciprocal 14:46:03 the only number that works is the golden ratio 14:46:05 masses of trig 14:46:10 1.61803499... . . . 14:46:21 mark4: o_O 14:46:23 you're right 14:46:28 that's pretty clever 14:46:44 its one of those mathematical factoids that stuck. there are not many 14:47:13 SDR has some funny maths in it, complex numbers 14:47:16 i never went beyond ultra basic algebra and i never got that 14:47:21 but then you realise it's still just arithmetic 14:47:30 or -0.61803 14:47:43 you've just got to to it twice, one for real and one for imaginary 14:47:49 THat was pretty clever. however, thank you mark4 for your time, I neet to go now, but will be back later this evening. Have a good one! 14:47:57 the_coun1: have fun :-) 14:48:01 (1/-0.61803)+1 ~= -0.61803 14:48:09 s/neet/need 14:48:39 r=(1/r)+1 not 1/-r 14:48:53 but r == -0.61803 14:49:08 your saying there is a negative golden ratio 14:49:08 k 14:49:18 (1/-r) would be (1/0.61803)+1 = -0.61803 14:49:21 and that's wrong 14:50:08 1/1.61803499 = 0.61803499 14:51:12 start with r = 2.. 1/2 +1 is 1.5 not 2. so feed 1.5 back into the equasion and try again 14:51:12 (1/-0.61803398875) = -1.61803398875 14:51:21 you will home in on the correct result 14:51:30 -1.61803398875 + 1 == -0.61803398875 14:51:52 your proving my original statement 14:52:15 nothing but a value of 1.61803499.... works 14:52:16 I'm saying that r=1/r+1 has 2 solutions 14:52:33 how does -0.61803398875 not work? 14:52:55 oh i see 14:53:06 but thats just a negative golden ratio 14:53:14 my original statement holds 14:55:44 gordonjcp: ``hypothetical mathematical constructs''? You mean `square' example? 14:55:49 meanwhile back at the ranch: read my book! 14:56:04 mark4.anapnea.net 14:59:09 mark4: is it about Forth? 14:59:37 erm... maybe? lol 14:59:41 /me hides 15:00:01 however, this channel is never moderated as to topic 15:00:07 anyone can talk any subject at all in here 15:00:17 thats been one of my prime directives since i started the channel 15:00:51 fairy nerf 15:01:09 mark4: doesn't look like a topic that would be relevant to me 15:01:13 but good luck with that 15:02:04 i assume your somewhere other than the continental u.s. :) 15:02:36 Scotland 15:02:56 i grew up in the north of england 15:03:42 do the scottish courts still enforce common law mariage? 15:04:25 mark4: yeah, the law is pretty different up here from the rest of the UK 15:05:09 yes. 15:05:28 i reference the "you fsck her one time and your married like it or not" law in my book :) 15:07:26 yeah, that's not really how it works 15:08:05 wait, why would checking her filesystem mean you married her? 15:08:22 is PC maintence some kind of taboo there? 15:08:58 ancient custom says that if you sleep with a woman she is your wife. ancient custom IS the common law 15:09:05 mark4: no 15:09:14 that is not now and has never been the case 15:09:17 they may not enforce it unless you impregnate her but that IS the common law 15:09:20 nope 15:09:43 it's a little bit more complicated than that 15:09:57 for one thing you'd have to actually be living together for a certain period of time 15:10:00 "The original concept of a "common-law marriage" is a marriage that is considered valid by both partners, but has not been formally recorded with a state or religious registry, or celebrated in a formal religious service." 15:10:23 vendan thats the modern interpretation 15:10:33 not the original concept 15:11:03 mark4: like, do you understand the whole thing about finding a blacksmith, for example? 15:11:32 not relevant to the discussion in my book :) 15:11:44 but it's relevant to common-law marriage in Scotland 15:11:55 "In ancient Greek and Roman civilization, marriages were private agreements between individuals and families. Community recognition of a marriage was largely what qualified it as a marriage." 15:12:19 mark4: not these days of course, but it's a pretty good tourist draw for Gretna 15:12:20 vendan i would say ANY mariage today is between the man, his wife and GOD 15:12:22 not the goverenment 15:13:01 for example goldie hawn and curt russel 15:13:05 uh, no and no and no 15:13:17 a) same sex marriage 15:13:22 no such thing 15:13:23 Coldstream actually had more "border marriages" than Gretna 15:13:26 not now. not ever 15:13:27 then fuck you 15:13:31 fuck whatever the supreme court says 15:13:37 but since Gretna is right off the M74, it's a big tourist thing now :-) 15:13:56 mark4: God isn't really relevant here 15:14:05 he is relevant everywhere 15:14:21 how so? 15:15:28 I like how your website says a goal is "restoring the rights of the People" 15:15:47 but you immediately take away rights from a chunk of people that you don't like 15:16:25 I'd ban religious people from getting married 15:16:37 marriage is a serious business 15:16:44 rights of which people? 15:16:44 you need to go into it with a clear head 15:16:55 I'd split the idea of religious marriage and legal marriage 15:16:59 I'd ban atheists from getting married too 15:17:03 there is no such thing as GAY rights. you dont get any extra rights simply because you are gay 15:17:12 again, because it's a serious business and you need a clear head 15:17:20 mark4, no, you are taking away rights for being married 15:17:20 mark4: *exactly* 15:17:27 for being gay* 15:17:32 mark4: you'd agree that gay people should get the same rights as straight people then? 15:17:47 god defined mariage not man 15:18:01 the govenment defined marriage 15:18:04 god didn't define anything 15:18:07 for tax and legal purposes 15:18:12 Vendan: yup 15:18:23 the fact that it's the same name as the religious institution is a problem 15:18:58 and to me, indicates that the separation of church and state has failed to some extent 15:19:01 and that's a problem 15:19:08 it's not a problem for me 15:19:13 I live in Scotland 15:19:17 gay people can get married here 15:19:22 straight people can get married here 15:19:28 ill open my mind to the idea of gay maraige when you open your mind to god 15:19:35 people who are neither one nor t'other can get married here 15:19:51 mark4: my mind is entirely open to god 15:19:53 mark4, what, are you assuming that I'm not christian? 15:20:18 mark4: demonstrate that god actually exists in some way, and I'll weigh up the evidence 15:20:18 are you saying you can't be christian and be accepting of people that are different then you? 15:20:45 mark4: equally if you reckon you can prove that god *doesn't* exist, I'll take a look at the evidence for that, too 15:20:46 ok. if god does not exist please explain to me how the bacteria flagellum motor came into existence 15:20:47 why do you get to have the right to be married to someone, but a gay person doesn't? 15:20:52 mark4: evolution 15:21:10 where every component of that motor has use ONLY in that motor and the motor only works with ALL of them present 15:21:15 mark4: irreducable complexity doesn't work as an argument 15:21:22 mark4: no, that's bullshit 15:21:22 demonstrably so 15:21:24 that motor could NOT evolve 15:21:44 https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13663-evolution-myths-the-bacterial-flagellum-is-irreducibly-complex/ 15:21:46 try rationalise how that motor can evolve 15:22:01 mark4: how's your cellular biology? 15:22:10 "Whatâs more, of these 23 proteins, it turns out that just two are unique to flagella. The others all closely resemble proteins that carry out other functions in the cell." 15:22:16 heh ok lets do it this way 15:22:26 please explain to me how the "simple cell" can evolve 15:22:28 mark4: I mean this actually used to be may day job 15:22:31 *my 15:22:34 the simple cell is an entire city of machines 15:22:45 there is no "simple cell" 15:22:45 --- quit: the_coun1 (Remote host closed the connection) 15:22:50 DNA could not evolve 15:22:54 okay, what do you know about cellular biology? 15:22:56 anything at all? 15:23:00 nah 15:23:10 NOTHING ever evolved into anything except a degraded version of the original 15:23:21 biology is the ONLY science that refuses to accept the laws of entropy 15:23:31 he's just reading off the list of "here's things to ask someone that thinks evolution is real" 15:23:36 mark4: how so? 15:23:37 sorry for intruding but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent 15:23:47 also: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9841/ 15:23:51 nothing ever randomly changed into something bigger, better, stronger, smarter 15:23:57 mark4: correct 15:24:02 there's nothing random about it 15:24:22 no. it was god 15:24:24 how does biology "refuse to accept the laws of entropy"? 15:24:31 mark4: can you prove that? 15:24:32 you cannot go from no life to living by accident 15:24:36 well, it's random, it's just smaller, weaker, worse, dumber tends to not procreate as well 15:24:39 and things dont spring into being by themselves 15:24:39 well, it appears you can 15:24:43 Vendan: got it in one 15:25:04 the mere act of procreation implies engineering 15:25:11 Vendan: these days of course, smaller, weaker, worse and dumber procreates just fine because we have an excess of ability to provide for them 15:25:24 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9841/ is literally "The Origin and Evolution of Cells" 15:25:42 it would take trillions upon trillions upon trillions of years for the first beneficial trait to "evolve" if life could simply POOF into existence 15:25:52 and. whers all the new life poofing into existence? 15:25:52 mark4: evidently not 15:25:53 gordonjcp, yeah, "bigger, better, stronger, smarter" isn't the fitness function of life 15:26:06 mark4: that's not really how it works 15:26:07 "more likely to procreate" is the only fitness function 15:26:13 if you deny god as the creator then NO you are not a christian 15:26:21 mark4: do you have any idea how long evolutionary timescales *are*? 15:26:48 show me ANY positive evolutionary modifications ? 15:26:53 life of one form or another has been around on earth for 3700 million years 15:26:59 show me any species that POOFED from one to another ? 15:27:05 mark4: that's not how it works 15:27:07 charles darwin was a christian 15:27:16 which is less than a fraction of a blink of an eye 15:27:16 a 15:27:23 and darwin was NOT a darwinist 15:27:27 he was a damned good scientist 15:27:38 and every little thing he said would disprove his theory HAS 15:27:38 no, it's the entirety of the history of life on earth 15:27:49 mark4: okay, you know what cats are, right? 15:27:54 cats, little furry things, go meow 15:28:02 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/06/christians-evolution_n_4732998.html 15:28:04 natural selection works 15:28:07 use funny spelling and type in IMPACT FONT on photographs? 15:28:10 so does forced selection 15:28:12 cats 15:28:15 yeah? 15:28:22 which is why darwin had good homing pigeons 15:28:29 can we just focus on the cats for a moment? 15:28:30 what does not happen is a selection from a slug into a bat 15:28:36 mark4: correct 15:28:41 mark4: that's not how natural selection works 15:28:47 nor any gradual transition from one to the other 15:29:00 mark4: and things don't just change overnight from one thing to another, it's a gradual transition 15:29:14 oh, god, when are you going to ask "if humans evolved from apes, why are there still apes around?" 15:29:16 conditions favour one mutation more than another 15:29:28 Vendan: oh I do hope so, that's an easy one 15:29:36 darwinism also ignores creation, it assumes natural selection AFTER creation and sweeps the lack of creation under the rug 15:29:59 mark4: have you ever read On The Origin of Species? 15:30:03 ok how about this one 15:30:09 mark4: cats 15:30:12 mark4: do you know what cats are? 15:30:19 if humans evolved from apes in the same way dogs "evolved" from wolves 15:30:20 cats: how are they so fluffy? 15:30:24 nope 15:30:26 they didn't 15:30:30 why are apes and humans NOT genetically compatible? 15:30:32 mark4: humans didn't evolve from apes 15:30:36 http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html 15:30:38 cause: they didn't 15:30:43 dogs are still entirely compatible with wolves 15:30:46 they ARE wolves 15:30:51 mark4: the only people who think that humans evolved from apes are creationists 15:30:53 good im glad we agree 15:30:55 you are saying "if x == y", when x != y 15:31:04 mark4: humans and apes shared a common ancestor 15:31:10 which? 15:31:23 show me any ancestor that we have in common 15:31:26 mark4: they're not around any more, but they were probably something like a small gorilla 15:31:36 and if we did have a common ancestor we would be genetically compatible 15:31:41 no, we wouldn't 15:31:44 http://www.sci-news.com/othersciences/anthropology/science-homo-pan-last-common-ancestor-03220.html 15:31:55 mark4: our evolution has diverged too far for that to be the case 15:31:56 ALL dna, including plant dna is 90% the same or maybe its 90% 15:31:59 98% 15:32:01 or something 15:32:11 mark4: mmm, pretty close 15:32:24 mark4: but that's like saying that all electronic devices are the same because all transistors are the same 15:32:27 mark4: like 15:32:29 one definition of species is when two groups can no longer naturally produce offspring 15:32:40 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_radiation 15:32:42 mark4: you'll find a hell of a lot of common DNA between say a human and a dog 15:32:42 though it's much more complex then that 15:32:51 between a human and an oak tree 15:32:58 mark4: if you look closer you'll find that a human and a dog are made out of really rather similar proteins 15:33:01 --- quit: nighty (Remote host closed the connection) 15:33:16 which have to be manufactured 15:33:20 mark4: right 15:33:22 what manufactured the originals? 15:33:24 accident? 15:33:27 ROFL 15:33:29 pretty much 15:33:32 I mean we know this 15:33:38 those protines have to be folded EXACTLY right 15:33:39 it's not speculation 15:33:45 no, actually 15:33:50 they can be pretty approximate 15:34:06 you'd be amazed what you can get away with and still have replicating proteins 15:34:07 that is also why there are so many proteins, and so much life diversity 15:34:18 protines dont self replicate 15:34:19 mark4: we are not precision machines 15:34:19 and some proteins can self fold 15:34:22 they are manufactured 15:34:22 mark4: we are vague as fuck 15:34:48 mark4: anyway, going back to humans and apes 15:34:50 dna can self replicate 15:34:55 no 15:34:59 mark4: we know that we shared a common ancestor because we have to eat fruit 15:35:05 some smaller molecules also could before dna 15:35:10 a machine strips the two halfs apart and then fills in the other half on each of them 15:35:12 mark4: if we don't eat fruit we get scurvy because we can't synthesize DNA 15:35:30 mark4, that's how life does it 15:35:30 we know *why* we can't synthesize DNA, too 15:35:47 there's this little couple of bits of our DNA that are slightly wrong 15:35:50 but yeah, DNA can be split and copied through purely physical/chemical means 15:35:51 so the first DNA needed fruit to POOF into existence 15:35:57 there's the exact same error in chimpanzees 15:36:00 so DNA for fruit was required before DNA could POOF 15:36:06 but - crucially - not gorillas 15:36:22 mark4: for someone who dislikes gay people you sure do go on about poofs a lot 15:36:50 who said i dislike them ? 15:37:08 well, you said they shouldn't marry 15:37:09 you want to take rights away from them 15:37:16 what rights? 15:37:19 that seems like a fairly strong dislike 15:37:30 mariage is not a right. its a contract between a man, a woman and god 15:37:52 but marriage also entails specific rights in our legal system 15:37:52 mark4: can you prove that? 15:38:03 and you are refusing to allow them those rights 15:38:06 to you? 15:38:09