![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Even the God Squad ought to check their facts occasionally, just in case :redface: |
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
in the end of our lives, we relive our youth
the world a new joy to our eyes disregarding days when we saw the truth in fear or dread of life's demise |
what did I do to deserve that? Go fuck yourself, it sounds like you're not getting many other takers.
|
"The banana-the atheist's nightmare."
Really??? Quote:
The pineapple the creationist's nightmare. ;) Note the pineapple Is NOT shaped for the human hand Is damn hard to hold on to If you've never seen one before, wouldn't know what was inside Greenish-yellow-too early Greenish-yellow-just right Greenish-yellow-too late Bloody hard to get into Likely to cut off own finger while trying to get into 3 pounds of wrapper 1 pound of food Good luck getting the whole thing in your mouth (and if you can... :love: ) Ease of entry... to WHERE?? Is pleasing to taste buds Likely to leave juice running down your chin :eek: A good rebuttal to the whole "test" here: http://www.atheistalliance.org/libra...eist_test.html And besides I can think of some other and more fun things that the banana might have been conveniently "designed" for... ;) and some of them might even loosen up a creationist :lol: |
Quote:
Popular, yes. Good, not by a longshot. |
Quote:
|
An interesting quoate from Richard Dawkins on the banana question:
"A banana is one of the wonders of the world. You could say that of any living object, and I could stop there. But I won't. A banana is a fruit, shaped by natural selection to be palatable, hence eaten and its seeds dispersed. But the bananas we eat are seedless. Artificial breeding has enhanced nature's means (palatability) while eliminating nature's end (seed dispersal). It's a metaphor for much that is special about humans. " |
I think I'm just too used to be randomly attacked. It's like that reflex thing where if someone taps you on the shoulder you elbow them in the nose and.....you mean not everyone does that?
|
An argument I have with IDiots all of the time...
...concerns the vast pool of creation myths in existance. Do we only teach one? Two? Two hundred?
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/themix/#28111 What about Vishnu? Posted by Joshua Holland on November 10, 2005 at 2:36 PM. Two points here. First, I don't see the need for a drawn out argument about whether or not "intelligent design" is legitimate science. By definition, it's not. Central to the scientific method is the dispositive principle - every theory can be disproved. Evolution, like gravity, is a theory that has withstood the test of time and numerous challenges. But if empirical evidence (that could be tested repeatedly) emerged tomorrow which disproved evolution or gravity, scientists would accept those data. They'd have to. ID begins with a given that can't be shaken. There's a designer, argue its advocates, and that's the end of the story. It's an article of faith. But more to the point, I've long believed that the way to fight these ID hacks is on their own terms. Allow me to repost part of an old argument, edited slightly: ...more... |
Bananas;
a - Has a tab for removal of wrapper b - Has a point at top for ease of entry Actually, most of the other primates eat it from the opposite end than Humans do. ;) |
Most other primates fling their poo. So?
Of course, we have scat porn. (if you have to ask, you don't want to know). |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:11 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.