No one should have any kind of discussion with Mr Ball unless it is in the form of contradictions and disagreements.
When he demands that you "respond" or "answer the question" never acknowledge his request, just restate and instigate to infuriate - it is all Mr Ball is here for, an excuse for abuse. Give this
asshole what he deserves.

Let's see who can **** with him best. Female names on your header is irresistible to him. The more you love animals and show it the more abuse he will hurl your way. Draw him in and spit him out.
The guy is pure vomit!

Jonathan Ball wrote:

> Lying Larry Forti wrote:
>
> > Jonathan Ball > wrote in message
> > om...
> >
> >
> >>>The Los Angeles Times
> >
> >**** Ah yes, a well known source of valid scientific information.
>
> The Times reported on a peer-reviewed article in the
> Quarterly Review of Biology, Lying Larry.* Are you
> claiming the Times got the story wrong, Lying Larry?
> Prove it.
>
> >
> >
> >>>Chomping too many fatty steaks is unhealthy for the
> >>>heart - but the consequences would be worse if human
> >>>beings hadn't evolved special, "meat-adaptive" genes to
> >>>help manage saturated fat, cholesterol and other
> >>>hazards of meat-eating, according to two USC scientists.
> >
> >**** With "heart disease" being responsible for 29%, and cancers responsible
> > for 22.9%, of all deaths, it seems these imaginary "meat-adaptive genes"
> > have not "adapted" us very well.
>
> Try to refute the conclusions of Drs. Finch and
> Stanford, Lying Larry.* Leave your ignorance of
> EVERYTHING connected with this topic aside, and try to
> refute the two Ph.D.s if you think you can - with
> SCIENCE, Lying Larry, not your polemical miscitation of
> some health statistics you don't understand in the
> first place.
>
> >
> http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe?_service=v8prod&_server=lscb5500&_port= 5094&_sessionid=/Fxm7Dh1pt1&_program=wisqars.percents10.sas&age1=.& age2=.&agetext=AllAges&category=ALL&_debug=0>****
> IF humans had "adapted" to flesh-eating, the unhealthy conditions and
> > terminal diseases it causes would have been reduced to zero
>
> PROVE that, Lying Larry.* An adaptation to something
> doesn't require that the adaptation be what you, in
> your infinite ignorance, would consider "perfect".
>
> > IF any "adaptation" had occurred.* Epidemiology proves that no such "adaptation"
> > ever occurred.
>
> No, it doesn't.* And YOU, Lying Larry Forti, have ZERO
> expertise in epidemiology.* Stop pretending you have any.
>
> >
> >
> >>>... anthropologist Craig Stanford said they had identified at least
> >>>eight genes ...
> >
> >**** Hmmm.* Anthro-apologists are not qualified to do genetic research.
>
> In fact, Lying Larry, if you had bothered to do even
> some cursory research instead of running your fat
> ignorant hate-filled mouth, you would have learned that
> Dr. Caleb Finch, with a Ph.D. in BIOLOGY, is the lead
> author of the PEER-REVIEWED article:
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0322081608.htm
>
> If you had done just a tiny bit more research, Lying
> Larry, instead of running your ignorant mouth, you'd
> have learned that Professor Stanford is the head of the
> Ph.D. program in BIOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY at the
> University of Southern California.
>
> You stink, Forti.
>
> >**** Unencumbered by real science, as a group, anthro-apologists
>
> Prove that, Lying Larry.* You can't even get started.
> Those guys have forgotten more science from their first
> semester of university than you have even dreamed of in
> your entire shit-stained life, Forti, because YOU
> HAVEN'T DONE ANY SCIENCE.
>
> [snip fatuous references to Forti's own pages of deceit]
>
> >
> >
> >>>"Even though we have this idea that we are
> >>>hypersensitive to cholesterol and fat, the fact is that
> >>>humans as a species are relatively immune to the
> >>>harmful effects of these things," Stanford said.
> >
> >**** Yet, such "immunity" is disproven by current epidemiology.
>
> No, it isn't, Forti, and YOU are completely UNQUALIFIED
> to discuss epidemiology, as you have never studied it
> AT ALL:* a great big ZERO.
>
> >
> >
> >>>One of the genes is called apoE. A particular form of
> >>>that gene, known as apoE3, evolved in humans some time
> >>>after the divergence of humans from chimps. ApoE3 is
> >>>known to help protect human beings against heart
> >>>disease.
> >
> >**** Not much "protection" if "heart disease" is responsible for 29% of all
> > deaths in the US.
> >
> >
> >>* You asshole -
> >
> >**** Jon-a-thug noBalls,
>
> You go eat shit and die, Forti, you piece of filth.
>
> >
> >
> >>haven't you
> >>maintained, in your utter IGNORANCE of science, that there is no
> >>genetic adaptation in humans for meat eating?
> >
> >**** I still maintain
>
> ...with ZERO support for your polemical contention, and
> NO ****ING PRAYER of finding any...
>
> > that there is NO "genetic adaptation in humans for meat
> > eating",
>
> Dr. Caleb Finch, with a Ph.D. in BIOLOGY, and Dr. Craig
> Stanford, with a Ph.D. in BIOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY, say
> you're wrong.* They say you're wrong in their recently
> published PEER-REVIEWED article in a prestigious
> journal of BIOLOGY, Lying Larry.
>
> Uh...where's YOUR peer-reviewed article, Forti, you
> filthy lying polemicist?* Haw haw haw!
>
> > and you have not ever been able to provide ANY evidence of such.
>
> Dr. Finch and Stanford, both Ph.D.s, have INDEED
> provided evidence of "such", Lying Larry.* Stop lying.
>
> >**** Current epidemiology proves
>
> Shut your ****ING MOUTH about "current epidemiology",
> you lying asshole.* You don't know ANYTHING about
> epidemiology.* You aren't qualified to wash the toilets
> at any journal of epidemiology.
>
> >
> >
> >>Yet here we see REAL scientists -* asserts there is indeed a
> >>genetic adaptation in humans for meat eating.
> >
> >**** They did not say anything in a authoritative or conclusive manner.
>
> Prove that, Lying Larry.* You HAVE NOT read their
> article, so you are in no position to say.
>
> >**** They did not assert there is a "genetic adaptation in humans for meat
> > eating",
>
> They certainly did.
>
> > they did not PROVE that it exists, they hypothesized it.
>
> RIGHT, science-illiterate Lying Larry:* because REAL
> science, unlike the tea-leaf reading and totem-touching
> crapola you stupidly and IGNORANTLY miscall "science",
> doesn't EVER claim to have "proved" something.* REAL
> science, Lying Larry, is ALWAYS presented as hypotheses.
>
> You wouldn't know anything about that.
> >
> >
> >>Are you going to admit you were wrong, Loser Larry?* Not just wrong,
> >>but *knowingly* ignorant?* You didn't know ANYTHING about whether or
> >>not there is a genetic adaptation in humans for eating meat, Lying
> >>Loser Larry; you were just running your ignorant mouth.
> >
> >**** Such [snip Lying Larry's blah-blah-blah hand-waving]
>
> Admit it NOW, Forti you cheap charlatan:* you don't
> know ANYTHING about genetics, epidemiology, nutrition,
> or ANY of the crap on your "ecologicfree" pages.
>
> You're a sick, juvenile JOKE, Forti.
>
> When you have a PEER-REVIEWED article that refutes the
> conclusions of Dr. Finch and Dr. Stanford, Lying Larry,
> get back to us.* Until then, shut up.