Are you intellectually honest?

True, Trained polyglots and linguists often study duck quacking videos to examine onomatopoeias and the theory of "quaxents" (duck regional accents). While native English speakers write the sound as "quack", different languages render this vocalization phonetically in entirely different.

Yes, quack is undoubtedly onomatopoeic.

Whereas coin-coin suggests a two for one offer.

As for anatidae sonus, thank goodness that the bible was translated into English.

It gave us an insight into the mind of the Jews and their struggles with their god.

And also traipsing backwards and forwards across seas and semi-dessert...Cultists liked to make things difficult for themselves...Still do in fact...Especially circumcision cults.

Dogs are not favoured in circumcision cults. I wonder why?

Too perverse perhaps?

They cannot be circumcised.

You clearly  have in depth knowledge of circumcisional  issues.

I bow to your greater knowledge of doggy situations.

But dogs  can be castrated.

Well yes, might as well go the whole hog and prevent a whole lot of future angst.

Dogs give in to easily. They were the first animals to be domesticated.

Hmmmm. Maybe they saw value in doing so.

Surrendering is a common value in dogs.

Well yes, dominance and submission is a commonplace species predicament.

Especially in dogs.

In all species methinks.

Dogs were the first animals to be domesticated.

Perhaps dogs were the first to see benefit in befriending humans.

That’s why they have an advantage over ducks.

That and four legs.

Only very fat dogs waddle.

So, you cannot pass off as a duck till you learn to waddle.

Whereas obese people are naturally adept.

So my advice is to regulate poutine input.

Poutine is the wrong diet for a dog.

Dogs will eat anything. Whereas humans like to pick and choose on the dogs behalf.

Though lazy dogs are the result of lazy people.

So lazy fat people will tend to have lazy fat dogs.

You look like an abandoned dog.

I'm not sure that you are being intellectually honest.

Why, because I haven’t barked back at you?

Barking back would be a submissive posture and indictive of the intensity of the situation.

Though I'm not certain what questioning intellectual honesty is all about.

Perhaps  inserting the cream pot  into the chocolate dispenser and whipping thoroughly...Having circled appropriately after being subliminally instructed  via pheromonic messaging systems.

Is my guess.

What say you?

Cooking for someone is showing submission.

Maybe, but circumstances vary.