Cell biology Intelligent Design

Viruses called phages, researchers say, are in a grey zone between life and non-life

Spread the love

They are called phages: because they eat bacteria:

Scientists have discovered hundreds of unusually large, bacteria-killing viruses with capabilities normally associated with living organisms, blurring the line between living microbes and viral machines.

These phages — short for bacteriophages, so-called because they “eat” bacteria — are of a size and complexity considered typical of life, carry numerous genes normally found in bacteria and use these genes against their bacterial hosts.

University of California, Berkeley, researchers and their collaborators found these huge phages by scouring a large database of DNA that they generated from nearly 30 different Earth environments, ranging from the guts of premature infants and pregnant women to a Tibetan hot spring, a South African bioreactor, hospital rooms, oceans, lakes and deep underground.

Altogether they identified 351 different huge phages, all with genomes four or more times larger than the average genomes of viruses that prey on single-celled bacteria.

Among these is the largest bacteriophage discovered to date: Its genome, 735,000 base-pairs long, is nearly 15 times larger than the average phage. This largest known phage genome is much larger than the genomes of many bacteria…

“Typically, what separates life from non-life is to have ribosomes and the ability to do translation; that is one of the major defining features that separate viruses and bacteria, non-life and life,” Sachdeva said. “Some large phages have a lot of this translational machinery, so they are blurring the line a bit.”

University of California – Berkeley, “Huge bacteria-eating viruses close gap between life and non-life” at ScienceDaily

Paper. (open access)

It’s not clear why phages are not just assumed to be life forms. If they turn out to communicate and learn from experience, as bacteria do, that would strengthen the case.

See also: In What Ways Are Bacteria Intelligent?
As antibiotic resistance grows, researchers are discovering that these microbes are not just single, simple cells. We must understand the surprisingly complex ways bacteria “think” in order to keep them in check.

48 Replies to “Viruses called phages, researchers say, are in a grey zone between life and non-life

  1. 1
    polistra says:

    There’s a lot of teleological and designy language in the paper:

    “It is fascinating how these phages have repurposed this system we thought of as bacterial or archaeal to use for their own benefit against their competition, ”

    The author didn’t even bother to say “have evolved to use…”

    Question: If these viruses are large, and commonly found in our mouth and gut, why didn’t anyone see them before? And since “virologists” demonstrably don’t know what’s in our own mouths, why should we base policies like forced imprisonment and forced strangulation and genocide on the findings of “virology”?

  2. 2
    martin_r says:

    the very same moment T4 bacteriophage was discovered, Darwinian theory was falsified. These things clearly DOES NOT LIVE. These things are molecular machines – created for one reason – to kill bacteria – to control bacteria population. So simple is that.
    These things have no use from killing the bacteria. These things don’t eat it, they kill it just for one reason – to control bacteria population.

    Or does anybody see any Darwinian reason why bacteriophages killing bacteria ?

    Viruses where created to control species population, that is why biologists will never find a common ancestor for T4 bacteriophages or any other virus – because viruses where created too …

    That is why Darwinian evolutionary theory can’t explain where the most abundant biological entities on Earth (viruses) come from. Darwin’s common ancestor idea does not work with viruses. Darwin had no idea that there is something like viruses. Such a useless theory …

    PS: even Darwinian clowns know, that T4 bacteriophage is an machine, here is a proof

    a mainstream article from 2004 titled:

    “The bacteriophage T4 DNA injection machine”

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15093831/

    Indeed, T4 bacteriophage, a DNA injection machine – THAT IS ALL WHAT IS IT !!!!

    A MACHINE !!!

  3. 3
    Pater Kimbridge says:

    @martin_r
    “created to control bacteria”

    Yeah? How’s that working out for them?

  4. 4
    martin_r says:

    Pater Kimbridge

    it supposed to be “[viruses] created to control a population of bacteria [by killing it]”
    obviously, viruses are a crucial part of Earth’s designed ecosystem.

    but could you answer my question ?

    Do you see any Darwinian reason why bacteriophages killing bacteria ?

  5. 5
    MatSpirit says:

    Martin_r: “Do you see any Darwinian reason why bacteriophages killing bacteria ?”

    Yes. They hijack the bacteria’s molecular machinery to reproduce themselves. This kills the bacteria, but the phage has reproduced itself.

    I don’t want to criticize, but if you can’t see this obvious fact, perhaps you should learn more about how evolution actually works before commenting on it. Saves embarrassment.

  6. 6
    martin_r says:

    MatSpirit @5: ” Saves embarrassment.”, “you should learn more about how evolution actually works”

    Everytime i debate a Darwinian fanatic, i am getting schooled, that i don’t know how evolution works. I bet, i know more about your Darwinian very absurd theory than you…

    I even run a blog, where you can see how absurd your theory is, and my blog also illustrates that you and the other Darwinians believe in miracles:

    http://www.stuffhappens.info

    (all blog’s quotes are from mainstream Darwinian papers)

    Now back to bacteriophages:

    Yes, perhaps you found a Darwinian answer, but, in general, it still does not make any sense. T4 bacteriophage is only a chemical envelope with DNA molecule in it. No brain, no neurons and, it does not eat, and IT DOES NOT LIVE.

    Why should it replicate? Why should it hijack a replication machinery, and first of all, WHY SHOULD IT RELY ON SOMEONE ELSE IN ORDER TO REPRODUCE ?

    HOW IS THAT DARWINIAN ?

    DO YOU REALIZE, THAT DARWIN HAD NO IDEA THAT THERE IS SOMETHING LIKE VIRUSES?

    Let me use your same words “I don’t want to criticize, but if you can’t see this obvious fact …”

    Indeed, you can’t see the obvious fact, that NON-LIVING viruses were made to regulate the population of other species. You and other Darwinians can’t see the obvious fact, that these things are pre-programmed nano-machines. NON-LIVING MACHINES.

    Let me remind you the title of the CELL’s article:
    “T4 bacteriophage – DNA injection machine”

    PS: and one more rhetorical question regarding viruses … what is the Darwinian theory good for, when it can’t explain the existence of the most abundant biological entity on Earth – the existence of viruses ?
    (The existence of cellular life is ‘explained’ by a common ancestor, but viruses are completely different system, non-cellular, moreover, most viruses are unique – like a Darwinian would say – many evolutionary origins)

    Corona virus turned the World upside down, but no Darwinian talks about where the viruses comes from ?

  7. 7
    JVL says:

    Martin_r: Corona virus turned the World upside down, but no Darwinian talks about where the viruses comes from ?

    Where do you think viruses come from? Are they part of the design?

  8. 8
    martin_r says:

    JVL @7

    “Where do you think viruses come from? Are they part of the design?”

    sure, how often should i repeat myself ?

    Viruses are part of Earth’s designed ecosystem. Viruses regulate/control populations of Earth’s species. E.g. mentioned T4 bacteriophage regulates/control a population of bacteria.

    Feel free to disagree, but then, you Darwinian should explain (using your Evo-theory), where the most abundant biological entity on Earth (viruses) come from. But here is an issue. Darwinian evolutionary theory and common descent concept does not work with viruses. What is more problematic, each virus is unique, so you have to explain the origin of each virus over and over ( a bigger issue than answering the origin-of-life question).

    Only recently, scientists found 200,000 new viruses never seen before… you Darwinians have a pretty huge problem … i am just wondering, why nobody seems to concerned … perhaps it is because lay Darwinians think, that scientists know where viruses come from … but they DO NOT, they think something… there is no scientific theory (backed up by scientific evidence) on viruses-origin…

  9. 9
    JVL says:

    Martin_r: sure, how often should i repeat myself ?

    I apologise, reading over your reply I realise you have answered a similar query before and I’d forgotten.

    So . . . the virus causing havoc is part of a program of population control? What about the ones that don’t kill their hosts? Is the common cold virus a degraded one that was designed to kill?

  10. 10
    Truthfreedom says:

    JVL

    Where do you think viruses come from?

    Martin_r has asked a question and you have no answer. Wasn’t “science” on your side?
    It seems that evolutionists have a “problem”.

  11. 11
    JVL says:

    Truthfreedom: Martin_r has asked a question and you have no answer. Wasn’t “science” on your side? It seems that evolutionists have a “problem”.

    I don’t have an answer. I would guess that viruses arose as ‘lucky’ molecular combinations that could infect living cells and use the cell’s chemicals to reproduce. But I really don’t know. Maybe someday mainstream science will find a plausible orgination path.

  12. 12
    Truthfreedom says:

    JVL

    I apologise, reading over your reply I realise you have answered a similar query before and I’d forgotten.

    He has replied this question dozens of times. It seems that you materialists/ evos tend to do that: ignoring what is written that challenge your views and, specially, ignoring questions that you obviously CAN NOT answer.
    (E.g: how is it possible for our brains to “escape” evolution if WE ARE OUR BRAINS AND WE(“BRAINS”) HAVE BEEN SHAPED BY EVOLUTION AND ONLY BY EVOLUTION?

    MatSpirit? Pater Kimbridge? Seversky? Bob O’H? Chuckdarwin?
    *Deafening silence*.

  13. 13
    JVL says:

    Truthfreedom: He has replied this question dozens of times. It seems that you materialists/ evos tend to do that: ignoring what is written that challenge your views and, specially, ignoring questions that you obviously CAN NOT answer.

    I apologised, what else do you want me to do? Do you call all the ID proponents out when they don’t answer questions? Nope.

  14. 14
    Truthfreedom says:

    JvL

    I don’t have an answer. I would guess that viruses arose as ‘lucky’ molecular combinations that could infect living cells and use the cell’s chemicals to reproduce. But I really don’t know. Maybe someday mainstream science will find a plausible orgination path.

    So much for “settled science”.
    Most people here have no problem with ‘evolution’ (as part of our human endeavor to understand the Universe, subject to changes/ reviews).

    The problem is with the toxic couple: “darwinism” + materialism
    (using evolutionary science to make people believe that science is “on your philosophical side”).

    Once you start scratching materialism’s surface, you see how fragile its pillars are.

  15. 15
    martin_r says:

    JVL @9
    ” Is the common cold virus a degraded one that was designed to kill?”

    A common cold virus does not kill ?

  16. 16
    JVL says:

    Martin_r: A common cold virus does not kill ?

    Not as often or as well as some other viruses. It’s not great as a population control device.

  17. 17
    martin_r says:

    Did YOU design Earth’s ecosystem ? Are you able to judge what amount of killing is needed (in order to regulate any population) ?

    Years ago, your Darwinian friends tried to design an ecosystem, it was a disaster.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2

  18. 18
    Truthfreedom says:

    JVL

    I’ve noticed that your bolding machine gets sometimes stuck (those times of course when your atheist-evo-materialist side starts to show its cracks).

    So I am doing the (bolding) homework for you:
    (E.g: how is it possible for our brains to “escape” evolution if WE ARE OUR BRAINS AND WE(“BRAINS”) HAVE BEEN SHAPED BY EVOLUTION AND ONLY BY EVOLUTION?

    MatSpirit? Pater Kimbridge? Seversky? Bob O’H? Chuckdarwin?
    *Deafening silence*.

    This is a thread about viruses, so inhale, breath deeply. You (mats) can escape this tricky question AGAIN.

  19. 19
    Truthfreedom says:

    Martin_r

    Did YOU design Earth’s ecosystem ? Are you able to judge what amount of killing is needed (in order to regulate any population)?

    Of course not. This pitiful line of reasoning is what they use to justify that the Universe has been poorly/ not designed.

    According to evos, we are:
    -“random assemblies of particles”
    – “random assembled brains”
    -“imperfect brains”
    -“imperfect animals”
    – plagued by “cognitive biases”
    -“never meant to anything apart from survival+reproduction”
    -“hallucinating our reality”
    -“illusions”

    But of course, they CAN ESCAPE ALL THE CRAP ABOVE, AND FLY TO ANOTHER PLANE OF REALITY, TO UNDERSTAND HOW A “GOOD UNIVERSE/ POPULATION CONTROL MECHANISM/ WHATEVER” should be designed (pun intended).
    AND TO TEACH US “POOR PEASANTS” HOW “DELUDED” WE ARE.

    Laughable if it were not pathetic.

  20. 20
    martin_r says:

    JVL ” Do you call all the ID proponents out when they don’t answer questions? Nope.”

    sure, but there is a difference,

    your Darwinian theory can’t answer pretty serious question – where THE MOST ABUNDANT biological entity on Earth (viruses) come from. This is so embarrassing, such an useless theory …

  21. 21
    martin_r says:

    JVL @11
    “viruses arose as ‘lucky’ molecular combinations”

    sure, what else… a lucky accident, after a lucky accident, after a lucky accident :)))
    Thats all what is left to believe in when you are a Darwinist.

    Did you read what i just wrote?
    According to modern Darwinian science, viruses have many evolutionary origins, so you have to believe in hundred of thousands of lucky molecular accidents. It is weird, that all that happened in deep past, and then never again. To be honest, i am not sure how many species of viruses exist. Like i said, only recently were 200,000 new virus-species discovered (never seen before), so, i would not be surprised, if there are millions of virus-species out there.

    So your faith in lucky molecular accidents has to be really strong :)))

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/priyashukla/2019/04/30/200koceanviruses/#146946af3942

  22. 22
    martin_r says:

    JVL @11
    “viruses arose as ‘lucky’ molecular combinations”

    Have you ever wonder, why modern Darwinian scientists are unable to replicate anything from your ‘lucky molecular combinations’ using fancy tools and fancy labs? Should be easy when it happened so many times just by coincidence somewhere in an uncontrolled chemical environment by blind unguided natural process … should be easy to create a virus from scratch …

  23. 23
    martin_r says:

    Truthfreedom

    “Once you start scratching materialism’s surface, you see how fragile its pillars are.”

    let me add the following:
    once you start scratching materialism’s surface, you will find out, that very clever people (e.g. Darwinian scientists) can believe in very absurd things … it is very concerning that this is happening in 21st century…

  24. 24
    MatSpirit says:

    Truthfreedom: “(E.g: how is it possible for our brains to “escape” evolution if WE ARE OUR BRAINS AND WE(“BRAINS”) HAVE BEEN SHAPED BY EVOLUTION AND ONLY BY EVOLUTION?

    MatSpirit? Pater Kimbridge? Seversky? Bob O’H? Chuckdarwin?
    *Deafening silence*.”

    Just a little tip: When you post a message at 4:49 AM, you aren’t likely to receive an answer for a few hours. We don’t usually call that a deafening silence, though.

    Just a few little questions: What are you asking? What makes you think the human brain has escaped evolution? Over what time frame do you think it’s escaped? Do you have a lot of problems with the UD logon Capcha?

  25. 25
    JVL says:

    Martin_r: Did YOU design Earth’s ecosystem ? Are you able to judge what amount of killing is needed (in order to regulate any population) ?

    I was just asking you about what you thought the role of viruses is and how the common cold virus fits into your view. If you don’t want to address that that’s okay. You’re not obligated.

  26. 26
    JVL says:

    Truthfreedom: So I am doing the (bolding) homework for you:
    (E.g: how is it possible for our brains to “escape” evolution if WE ARE OUR BRAINS AND WE(“BRAINS”) HAVE BEEN SHAPED BY EVOLUTION AND ONLY BY EVOLUTION?

    What do you mean by ‘escape evolution”? I think it would be good if you were to point to particular issues and transitions you find problematic.

  27. 27
    JVL says:

    Martin_r:Did you read what i just wrote?

    I was trying to figure out what your views are.

    Have you ever wonder, why modern Darwinian scientists are unable to replicate anything from your ‘lucky molecular combinations’ using fancy tools and fancy labs? Should be easy when it happened so many times just by coincidence somewhere in an uncontrolled chemical environment by blind unguided natural process … should be easy to create a virus from scratch …

    What I have noticed is that scientists are trying to see if small steps and transitions are possible or probable. I think that is happening. But it’s slow and complicated work and it takes time. Nothing controversial about that. Unless you’re in a hurry to come to a conclusion which I am not.

  28. 28
    MatSpirit says:

    JVL:
    I don’t have an answer. I would guess that viruses arose as ‘lucky’ molecular combinations that could infect living cells and use the cell’s chemicals to reproduce. But I really don’t know. Maybe someday mainstream science will find a plausible orgination path.

    I think mainstream science found a pretty plausible origination path decades ago. Viruses are DNA/RNA in a protein container. You find all three in bacteria and that’s probably where they came from. Think of a virus as a super parasite. It makes a living taking advantage of other organisms and has streamlined itself untill the only thing left is the DNA/RNA and a simple protein container.

    Look up Spiegelman’s Monster for details on how a parasite can simplify itself to aid reproduction. Or, if you want to be entertained, ask ET. He’s the local expert on the monster.

  29. 29
    MatSpirit says:

    I just noticed that News provided some cooboration to the “viruses originated from bacteria” theory in the OP:

    These phages — short for bacteriophages, so-called because they “eat” bacteria — are of a size and complexity considered typical of life, carry numerous genes normally found in bacteria and use these genes against their bacterial hosts.

    Sounds like we caught one in the act of evolving.

  30. 30
    Seversky says:

    Just a phage they’re going through.

  31. 31
    Truthfreedom says:

    MatSpirit

    Just a few little questions: What are you asking? What makes you think the human brain has escaped evolution?

    JVL

    What do you mean by ‘escape evolution”? I think it would be good if you were to point to particular issues and transitions you find problematic.

    This article is a perfect example of the problem with this line of thinking (to which I do not subscribe, because, well, makes no-sense):

    Science Writer Miraculously Escapes Ravages Of Evolution

    “A science writer at Discover magazine has managed to escape from the clutches of evolution and lived to tell us of it. This Bridget Alex has discovered humans—not her, but humans—have evolved to believe in gods. But, somehow, she did not. Therefore she is not human”.

    “Or if she is, I don’t know if that means evolution is broken or she is some sort of genetic mutant who has evolved not to believe in gods. Since God exists, and since this Bridget Alex has evolved out of believing in this part of Reality, both theories are plausible.”

    https://wmbriggs.com/post/25658/

  32. 32
    MatSpirit says:

    Truthfreedom, did you post a message with a link to your Blog? I thought I saw one, but my computer crashed and it wasn’t there when I restarted. Perhaps it’s in another thread?

  33. 33
    MatSpirit says:

    Truthfreedom @ 31: I’ll try to answer your question, but it’s going to be hard because Mr. Briggs seems to be a little confused himself. He also fails to link to the article he’s criticizing, so we have no idea what Bridget Alex at Discover magazine actually wrote. He’s also in snide mode which adds to the problems.

    Briggs seems to think that Bridget discovered that ALL humans have evolved to believe in “gods” and he implies that this belief is irresistible. He then says that since she doesn’t believe in gods, she is therefore not human. I don’t think Briggs is actually dumb enough to believe that, but as I said, he’s writing in Snide mode. I’ve heard theories about God modules and such, but they usually talk about things that increase group bonding. They have nothing to do with any particular god or a compulsion to believe in him/her/them. I don’t think Briggs understands this. In fact, that’s why what he writes makes no sense. He doesn’t understand what he’s talking about, so he makes errors like this.

    For a post where he gives enough of the opposing argument so you can clearly spot his misunderstanding, see https://wmbriggs.com/post/6102/.

  34. 34
    martin_r says:

    JVL @27
    “What I have noticed is that scientists are trying to see if small steps and transitions are possible or probable. I think that is happening.”

    really? I am pretty good informed, i can’t see any progress … perhaps you have an access to some confidential research … So please give me some example …

  35. 35
    JVL says:

    Truthfreedom:

    Since God exists, and since this Bridget Alex has evolved out of believing in this part of Reality, both theories are plausible.

    Oh dear, not a very objective place to start.

  36. 36
    JVL says:

    Martin_r: really? I am pretty good informed, i can’t see any progress … perhaps you have an access to some confidential research … So please give me some example …

    I’ll think about it because it’s really easy to find if you actually spend the time trying to find it.

    Making other people do your work for you is kind of passive aggressive don’t you think?

  37. 37
    martin_r says:

    MatSpirit @29 “These phages — short for bacteriophages, so-called because they “eat” bacteria ”

    i am confused, please explain to me, how T4 bacteriophage eats bacteria. I don’t get it.

    This is exactly the problem with viruses i talk about. Viruses don’t live. Don’t need to eat. Don’t need to replicate, don’t need to do anything, because they don’t live, unless someone (e.g. an engineer/designer/creator) pre-programmed viruses to execute certain things (e.g. to regulate species populations).

    So, explain to me, why viruses even exist if they don’t live / eat ? What sense does it make to you Darwinians ?

  38. 38
    martin_r says:

    JVL @36

    in general, i don’t think i am passive (i am running a blog on so called repeated evolution).
    But you are a liar.
    So, again, show me some examples – how life or a virus is created in lab (using your ‘small’ steps)
    Show me anything …

  39. 39
    JVL says:

    Martin_r: So, again, show me some examples – how life or a virus is created in lab (using your ‘small’ steps)

    I wasn’t referring to them being created in the lab.

    You know what, you are far too rude and aggressive to try and have a reasonable conversation with. Your anger will eat you up eventually.

  40. 40
    Truthfreedom says:

    MatSpirit

    He also fails to link to the article he’s criticizing, so we have no idea what Bridget Alex at Discover magazine actually wrote.

    The link is there. First paragraph, fifth line. Please, re-read.
    https://wmbriggs.com/post/25658/

    Briggs seems to think that Bridget discovered that ALL humans have evolved to believe in “gods” and he implies that this belief is irresistible.

    Wrong. What Mr. Briggs is saying is that evolutionary “theory” (not per se, but when is it illegitimately coupled with philosophical materialism), makes no sense. Why? Because this toxic couple (made in Hell) leads to the following:

    we are matter “programmed” to everything and the contrary
    -to believe in “gods” (the “poor peasants”) and “not to believe in them”(Bridget Alex types)
    -to “infer patterns/ design” (the “poor peasants”) and “not to infer them” (Richard Dawkins types)
    -to “seek purpose” (the “poor peasants”) and to “understand there is none” (Jerry Coyne fanatic types)
    Etc…

    What is the difference then between “evolution has created every single behavior under the sun” and “God did it”?

  41. 41
    Truthfreedom says:

    JVL

    Oh dear, not a very objective place to start.

    Lol.
    A materialist using the word “objective”, while according to their philosophy, “objectivity does not exist”.

    Have you ever heard of self-refuting statements, JVL?
    Here, for you (to instruct the ignorant, a work of mercy):

    In his Introduction to Logic, Harry Gensler defines a self-refuting statement as “[A] statement that makes negative claims so sweeping that it ends up denying itself.” [1] In other words, it results when an argument or position is undercut by its own criteria. (An example of this would be saying, “I cannot speak a word of English” in English).

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/winteryknight.com/2010/01/30/what-is-self-refutation-and-what-are-some-examples-of-self-refutation/amp/

  42. 42
    Truthfreedom says:

    JVL

    I wasn’t referring to them being created in the lab.

    You know what, you are far too rude and aggressive to try and have a reasonable conversation with. Your anger will eat you up eventually.

    Summed up: non-answer (or “I have nothing”).

  43. 43
    ET says:

    MatSpirit is confused, as usual. I am not an expert on the Monster. Unlike the anti-IDists I know it exists and what it means. And it means there isn’t any way molecular replicators evolved into living organisms. It also means there isn’t any way that prokaryotes evolved into eukaryotes.

    So evos have to ignore it because it proves they have nothing but faith.

  44. 44
    JVL says:

    Truthfreedom: Summed up: non-answer (or “I have nothing”).

    No, it means that I’m not about to spend time and effort just so that a) anything I find will be denied and disregarded and b) what’s the point when a person’s mind is already made up?

    You’re not really interested in a dialogue at all, clearly. So I’m not going to waste my time indulging people who have no intention of even considering that they might be wrong.

    And it means there isn’t any way molecular replicators evolved into living organisms. It also means there isn’t any way that prokaryotes evolved into eukaryotes.

    Like I said, why even bother to try and have a discussion when someone’s mind is made up?

  45. 45

    .

    I’m not about to spend time and effort just so that a) anything I find will be denied and disregarded and b) what’s the point when a person’s mind is already made up?

    I’m not going to waste my time indulging people who have no intention of even considering that they might be wrong.

    Pot. Kettle.

  46. 46
    Truthfreedom says:

    JVL

    No, it means that I’m not about to spend time and effort just so that a) anything I find will be denied and disregarded and b) what’s the point when a person’s mind is already made up?

    You’re not really interested in a dialogue at all, clearly. So I’m not going to waste my time indulging people who have no intention of even considering that they might be wrong.

    Summed up: non-answer (or “I have nothing”).

  47. 47

    .
    Next he’ll be telling you that you are “angry” or some such. This is his pattern.

  48. 48
    Truthfreedom says:

    Upright BiPed

    Next he’ll be telling you that you are “angry” or some such. This is his pattern.

    Maybe it’s true that some people are biological automatons?
    Is JVL the (boring) Terminator?

Leave a Reply