... when you just want to argue rather than reasonably discuss.
In order to "reasonably discuss" you first have to have a position that is reasonable enough to discuss. You and Peter continue to shoot yourselves in the foot with arguments so flimsy that a high school student could see the flaws in them. Your point is a half-truth at the very best. You try to make the point that your own species is your greatest enemy because you compete againt them to mate... WITH YOUR OWN SPECIES! If you're failing to see that your argument contains internal contradictions, then you're just too fucktarded to have an intelligent conversation with in the first place.
That's the point I'm making. Jesus.
1) Mating is the BIGGEST competition most social mammals have;
2) You don't compete against other species for that right for the precise reason you pointed out-- however, its simplicity doesn't make the argument circular.
THAT'S MY FUCKING POINT. For humans and other sexual animals-- particularly social animals--, the biggest evolutionary battle is fought WITHIN one's own species because that's who's vying for the prize and that prize is SEX. And for humans ESPECIALLY since we're one of the most sex-oriented species on earth. Why is this such a hard concept for you?
Whether you think it's a circular argument or not doesn't change the fact that you DON'T compete against a polar bear to win over a pretty woman. You compete against other men for that woman's attentions. Therefore other men, other humans, are your main source of competition.
You're just stuck in the old evolutionary thought pattern that interspecies competition is what drives the majority of selection and that selection acts at a species level rather than at the level of the individual organism. Which is absolute bullcrap. It doesn't matter how well your species is doing as a whole, how long you personally live, how much territory you have, or how much you eat; if you're a sexually reproducing organism that can't get laid then you're screwed and your line dies right there with you. Unlike you were lucky enough to have a proliferative identical twin.
Maybe the simplicity of this concept is too much for you.
In which case, maybe something more extensive than a Evolution 101 course (which sounds to be about the extent, if that, of the training you've had) might behoove you. Go back to the literature, look not just at Dawkins but at Trivers, Van Valen, and read up more on Sexual Selection and theory about evolution of the Social Brain. Just give it all a good hard think. And then if you're capable, try and tie that asinine tongue back of yours which is more prone to throw insult before intelligence. Intensity doesn't mean that you HAVE to be a dickhead; it just means you can be one if necessary.
Anyways, act superior if you need to. It probably just means you have a pathetic ego, suck with women, have a small dick, haven't been laid (ever or in years), or in general are just a little prick with nothing better to do than insult the intelligence of attractive women you'd never have a chance with and on topics you seem to know little about.
(That insult, btw, was necessary, because you're acting like an asshole with little provocation.)
