RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (10) < ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] >   
  Topic: Top Tard Quotes, Surely you save them too....< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 15 2009,18:09   

Quote (Dr.GH @ Jan. 15 2009,10:17)
Quote (Peter Henderson @ Jan. 15 2009,05:01)
Since Phil is a maths teacher I wonder if i should bring up the fact that the bible states that pi is 3.0 ? :angry:  :angry:  :angry:

The creato BS regarding pi is that the ratio was not pi, but the "calculated" ratio of the inner and outer diameters of the "bowl." Thus, the ratio is purely descriptive and yields (IIRC) a metal thickness of ~4 inches.

Thanks for that Gary. I've already had the reply:

Quote
Why ignore 1 Kings 7:26 which says it was 1 hand breadth thick? About 4 inches. If you subtract the 2 x 4 inches from 10 x 18 inch it gives 172 inches across. The circumference is 540 inches (30 x 18). Pi now comes to 3.14.


http://www.premiercommunity.org.uk/forum....omments

Personally, I think Jason's explanation is more plausable:

http://evolutionblog.blogspot.com/2006....al.html

although I've been told off for linking to the evolution blog !!!!


:angry:  :angry:  :angry:

  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 15 2009,18:12   

Quote (Richard Simons @ Jan. 15 2009,12:59)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Jan. 15 2009,10:17)
The creato BS regarding pi is that the ratio was not pi, but the "calculated" ratio of the inner and outer diameters of the "bowl." Thus, the ratio is purely descriptive and yields (IIRC) a metal thickness of ~4 inches.

This means that the circumference was measured inside the bowl and the diameter was measured over the total width. It is very hard to measure the interior circumference of something. My own idea is that the container was more spherical, with a narrower opening than the maximum diameter.

I wonder if the cretins would accept that one Richard ? I very much doubt it .  :(

  
stevestory



Posts: 8898
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 15 2009,18:35   

Quote (Peter Henderson @ Jan. 15 2009,19:09)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Jan. 15 2009,10:17)
 
Quote (Peter Henderson @ Jan. 15 2009,05:01)
Since Phil is a maths teacher I wonder if i should bring up the fact that the bible states that pi is 3.0 ? :angry:  :angry:  :angry:

The creato BS regarding pi is that the ratio was not pi, but the "calculated" ratio of the inner and outer diameters of the "bowl." Thus, the ratio is purely descriptive and yields (IIRC) a metal thickness of ~4 inches.

Thanks for that Gary. I've already had the reply:

 
Quote
Why ignore 1 Kings 7:26 which says it was 1 hand breadth thick? About 4 inches. If you subtract the 2 x 4 inches from 10 x 18 inch it gives 172 inches across. The circumference is 540 inches (30 x 18). Pi now comes to 3.14.


http://www.premiercommunity.org.uk/forum....omments

Personally, I think Jason's explanation is more plausable:

http://evolutionblog.blogspot.com/2006....al.html

although I've been told off for linking to the evolution blog !!!!


:angry:  :angry:  :angry:

I've got to take Heddle's side over Rosenhouse on that one. Kings is not supposed to be an engineering textbook. The difference between 3 and pi is ~4%. In common discussion that's not unusual. It actually came up in my life this week, when my friend Lee told me he does Web Development consulting for a company. They bill him out at $80 per hour and give him 60% of that. "That's 50 bucks an hour" I said off the top of my head (I am a math tutor, after all). Turns out it's $48. That, coincidentally, is also a 4% error. But Lee didn't email me later to say "You fool! You were off by 4%! Clearly your notions of math are erroneous!"

Now I happen to believe that the bible is bogus for numerous reasons, but not because there's a 4% error in a discussion of a kettle.

Edited by stevestory on Jan. 15 2009,19:37

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3559
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 15 2009,19:11   

My guess the number reflects the accuracy of the measurement. Significant digits and so forth.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
MIchael Roberts



Posts: 13
Joined: Oct. 2003

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2009,01:14   

Quote (Peter Henderson @ Jan. 15 2009,18:12)
Quote (Richard Simons @ Jan. 15 2009,12:59)
 
Quote (Dr.GH @ Jan. 15 2009,10:17)
The creato BS regarding pi is that the ratio was not pi, but the "calculated" ratio of the inner and outer diameters of the "bowl." Thus, the ratio is purely descriptive and yields (IIRC) a metal thickness of ~4 inches.

This means that the circumference was measured inside the bowl and the diameter was measured over the total width. It is very hard to measure the interior circumference of something. My own idea is that the container was more spherical, with a narrower opening than the maximum diameter.

I wonder if the cretins would accept that one Richard ? I very much doubt it .  :(

Peter

They have got so moronic recently I cant reply.

Still I have been busy as I am writing up a 4 day trail in Snowdonia for a walking magazine on Darwin's long geolgical walk in 1831. He got home to open a letter which said "Beagle"

(If any are going to Britan this year and want details of the route Darwin did in 1831 I can e-mail an article I wrote for a history of science journal)

Also I am cahir of Governors of a school and they have had school inspectors in this week.

So I asked the teacher the difference between plastic surgeons and school inspectors.

As they dint know I told them that palstic surgeons tuck up features :D

  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2009,06:07   

Feel free to e-mail the article Michael. I'm not sure where we'll be this year but we'll probably be back in North Wales at some stage (quite easy to get to from here if you go via the ROI).

i see what you mean about the replies becoming more moronic. When I tried to explain some basic cosmology (covered by the OU) to Martin he started waffling on about Talkorigins. Phil really ought to have more sense though, simply because he's a maths teacher. I've advised them to go and do some science via the Open University but i'm sure they wont listen. They seem to rely on AiG for most of their scientific knowledge. I'm sure if the creo museum was in the UK they'd be the first to visit.

The bats being classified as birds in Levitcus didn't go down at all well. I cant understand what Martin's point is on this.

  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2009,11:08   

We've also a moon landing conpiracy theorist on the discussion thread. The next lot of comments from Andrew should be interesting. By the way Michael, how was my basic geology course for Andrew ?

  
MIchael Roberts



Posts: 13
Joined: Oct. 2003

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2009,14:44   

More wacko stuff from Premeir Forum (It should hearten Americans to see that Brits are as stupid)

Posted by Jie-Xuan on 18 January 2009 at 6:34pm in Premier Christian Radio

Just wanted to post something which I has been in discussion since Darwinism flooded our lives. The root of the discussion has just a simple deductum(I wonder if this is latin for deduction).

Here is my most recent thought:

The difference between Creation and Evolution is not really very much.

The only difference between Creation and Evolution is like the difference between atheism and theism.

The similarity between us is that while we both agree that man has a common ancestor and that life as we know must have had a source.

The real difference between Creationism and Evolution is that Creationists believe God created everything from NOTHING, but evolution says nothing created everything from NOTHING. Who needs more substantiating fact(evidence)?

--
which ever works for you
--

The similarity between us is that that we both agree that life came from nothing. While we believe that everything was created from nothing by God, you believe everything came from nothing by nothing. Who needs more faith?

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3559
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2009,15:23   

Now if theists could just stop killing each other over which goddidit, we could all get on with our lives.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
JohnW



Posts: 2235
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2009,13:20   

Quote (MIchael Roberts @ Jan. 18 2009,12:44)
The similarity between us is that that we both agree that life came from nothing. While we believe that everything was created from nothing by God, you believe everything came from nothing by nothing. Who needs more faith?

Well, even if we accept that silly strawman, there are no documented, credible instances of the existence of a god.  There are many documented, credible instances of the existence of nothing.  Between the ears of the average creationist, for example.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Leftfield



Posts: 98
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2009,11:22   

Tard quote from "EvilSnack" at UD. Maybe a sock puppet?

 
Quote
I have wondered if the angels that designed the megafauna of Africa and Australia tended to drink a bit. The ones in charge of Europe and North America were much better artists.

 :O

http://www.uncommondescent.com/philoso....-302381 :O

--------------
Speaking for myself, I have long been confused . . .-Denyse O'Leary

  
Marion Delgado



Posts: 89
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 30 2009,18:21   

You science fascists say there are no simple answers. No!! As President Reagan said, there ARE simple answers, just no EASY answers. I post this here because in addition to hating special needs children (euthanazis!), I realize you can only accept the truth about evolution in a context of derision.

http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=92630


1) How does random change (mutation) in the genome add information to a genome to create progressively more complicated organisms? It Doesn't.

2) How is evolution able to bring about drastic changes so quickly?  An example is the Cambrian Explosion. It Can't.

3) How could the first living cell arise spontaneously to get evolution started? It couldn't.

4) The Human Genome Project showed that only 1-2% of Human DNA codes for proteins, or about 25,000 genes.  These are not enough  to account for the complexity of the organism.  What is the other 98% of the genome's function?  We don't know.

See, that took, what, 8 words? And yet, Darwinisim is in ruins.

  
Marion Delgado



Posts: 89
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 30 2009,18:25   

And take warning heed, scifascis!

Quote
Apparently, the above article touched a frayed nerve in a University of Minnesota biologist, Paul Z Meyers, on the Pharynula blog.  I was flattered that he would expend all the time and energy to write about the above article, even though his rebuttal was a dismal failure.   See my reply to this guy.  He typically uses Nazi Style smear tactics, an example of which he calls Dr. Dach "an embarrassment to the medical profession",  and then degenerates into childish name calling.  This is a clear case of libel, so any attorneys out there interested in taking the case on contingency basis contact me.  This could lead to a large settlement from the University of Minnesota.


Dr. Jeffrey M. Dach MD!

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 30 2009,19:14   

Quote (Marion Delgado @ Jan. 30 2009,18:21)
You science fascists say there are no simple answers. No!! As President Reagan said, there ARE simple answers, just no EASY answers. I post this here because in addition to hating special needs children (euthanazis!), I realize you can only accept the truth about evolution in a context of derision.

http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=92630


1) How does random change (mutation) in the genome add information to a genome to create progressively more complicated organisms? It Doesn't.

2) How is evolution able to bring about drastic changes so quickly?  An example is the Cambrian Explosion. It Can't.

3) How could the first living cell arise spontaneously to get evolution started? It couldn't.

4) The Human Genome Project showed that only 1-2% of Human DNA codes for proteins, or about 25,000 genes.  These are not enough  to account for the complexity of the organism.  What is the other 98% of the genome's function?  We don't know.

See, that took, what, 8 words? And yet, Darwinisim is in ruins.

BWA HA HAH!!!

I followed the link, and after all his whining, and special pleading, one of his "citations" is A WIKIPEDIA / UD LINK!!!

REAL SCIENCEY !

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Marion Delgado



Posts: 89
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 30 2009,20:05   

I agree he's very science-y. I knew nothing about the benefits of bioidentical hormones before reading him. And he's a continuing source of inspiration for me:

Quote
The bible does have an explanation for Newton and Maxwell. It's called Genesis or the first book of the old testament. Amazingly the Big Bang Theory seems to have a lot in common with Genesis which was written 2000 years ago or so. See Genesis and the Big Bang by Gerald Schroeder. I have heard him lecture and he comes to my town to visit every once in a while.


jeffrey dach md
JANUARY 30, 2009 07:53 AM

Comments are now closed.

  
Sealawr



Posts: 54
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 31 2009,00:46   

Quote
This is a clear case of libel


No, Doctor, it's defecation of character.  Keep your torts straight.

But truth is an absolute defense to both.

--------------
DS: "The explantory filter is as robust as the data that is used with it."
David Klinghoffer: ""I'm an IDiot"

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 1956
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 31 2009,02:12   

Quote (Marion Delgado @ Jan. 30 2009,16:21)
You science fascists say there are no simple answers. No!! As President Reagan said, there ARE simple answers, just no EASY answers. I post this here because in addition to hating special needs children (euthanazis!), I realize you can only accept the truth about evolution in a context of derision.

http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=92630


1) How does random change (mutation) in the genome add information to a genome to create progressively more complicated organisms? It Doesn't.

2) How is evolution able to bring about drastic changes so quickly?  An example is the Cambrian Explosion. It Can't.

3) How could the first living cell arise spontaneously to get evolution started? It couldn't.

4) The Human Genome Project showed that only 1-2% of Human DNA codes for proteins, or about 25,000 genes.  These are not enough  to account for the complexity of the organism.  What is the other 98% of the genome's function?  We don't know.

See, that took, what, 8 words? And yet, Darwinisim is in ruins.

You are kidding, right? Or are you really that stupid?

You can not be that stupid and type. Or feed yourself, or wipe your own asshole.

If you insist that you really are that stupid, I can cover all of your supposed killer objections to reality. But it has all been done before, so I hope your are just jerking us around, please?

Pick the exact "eight words" for me, K?

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 31 2009,03:05   

Quote
Jeffrey Dach MD is founder of TrueMedMD, a clinic in Hollywood Florida specializing in Natural Medicine and Bio-Identical Hormones.


The word 'natural' immediately makes my woo/quack/snake oil/charlatan alarm bell go off.

From Dach's website
Quote

TrueMedMD was founded with the idea of offering medical services ignored or not offered by mainstream medicine.

Included in this list are:

1) Bio-identical hormone replacement.
2) Natural thyroid for low thyroid.
3) Natural occurring supplements rather than patented drugs.


ETA: I have nothing to add.

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 31 2009,09:48   

Quote (dnmlthr @ Jan. 31 2009,03:05)
Quote
Jeffrey Dach MD is founder of TrueMedMD, a clinic in Hollywood Florida specializing in Natural Medicine and Bio-Identical Hormones.


The word 'natural' immediately makes my woo/quack/snake oil/charlatan alarm bell go off.

From Dach's website
 
Quote

TrueMedMD was founded with the idea of offering medical services ignored or not offered by mainstream medicine.

Included in this list are:

1) Bio-identical hormone replacement.
2) Natural thyroid for low thyroid.
3) Natural occurring supplements rather than patented drugs.


ETA: I have nothing to add.

What?  Come on Doc!

Not even a reference to a "miracle cure"?

What about 3 easy payments of only $59.99?

Act now and recieve - absolutey free - a Glow In Teh Dark Jesus!"

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
noncarborundum



Posts: 320
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 31 2009,10:07   

Quote (Dr.GH @ Jan. 31 2009,02:12)
 
Quote (Marion Delgado @ Jan. 30 2009,16:21)
You science fascists say there are no simple answers. No!! As President Reagan said, there ARE simple answers, just no EASY answers. I post this here because in addition to hating special needs children (euthanazis!), I realize you can only accept the truth about evolution in a context of derision.

http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=92630


1) How does random change (mutation) in the genome add information to a genome to create progressively more complicated organisms? It Doesn't.

2) How is evolution able to bring about drastic changes so quickly?  An example is the Cambrian Explosion. It Can't.

3) How could the first living cell arise spontaneously to get evolution started? It couldn't.

4) The Human Genome Project showed that only 1-2% of Human DNA codes for proteins, or about 25,000 genes.  These are not enough  to account for the complexity of the organism.  What is the other 98% of the genome's function?  We don't know.

See, that took, what, 8 words? And yet, Darwinisim is in ruins.

You are kidding, right? Or are you really that stupid?

You can not be that stupid and type. Or feed yourself, or wipe your own asshole.

If you insist that you really are that stupid, I can cover all of your supposed killer objections to reality. But it has all been done before, so I hope your are just jerking us around, please?

Pick the exact "eight words" for me, K?

Methinks he is trying to count the words in his snappy answers.  This would work if they were each two words long.  Except they aren't:

 
Quote (Marion Delgado @ Jan. 30 2009,16:21)


1) How does random change (mutation) in the genome add information to a genome to create progressively more complicated organisms? It Doesn't.

2) How is evolution able to bring about drastic changes so quickly?  An example is the Cambrian Explosion. It Can't.

3) How could the first living cell arise spontaneously to get evolution started? It couldn't.

4) The Human Genome Project showed that only 1-2% of Human DNA codes for proteins, or about 25,000 genes.  These are not enough  to account for the complexity of the organism.  What is the other 98% of the genome's function?  We don't know.


Maybe if he changed that last one to "We're ignorant."

BTW I didn't realize we hate special-needs children.  Bummer, since I have one.

--------------
"The . . . um . . . okay, I was genetically selected for blue eyes.  I know there are brown eyes, because I've observed them, but I can't do it.  Okay?  So . . . um . . . coz that's real genetic selection, not the nonsense Giberson and the others are talking about." - DO'L

  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 31 2009,10:25   

Quote
BTW I didn't realize we hate special-needs children.  Bummer, since I have one


Me too:

http://www.glencraig.org.uk/

Although I suppose they would claim they are a result of the fall, which really does make me angry.

  
Marion Delgado



Posts: 89
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 31 2009,20:14   

Despite all persecution I stand shoulder-to-shoulder with my brother in faith and sound science, Logan Strain.

  
Tony M Nyphot



Posts: 230
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 02 2009,21:02   

Quote (J-Dog @ Jan. 30 2009,18:14)
   
Quote (Marion Delgado @ Jan. 30 2009,18:21)
You science fascists say there are no simple answers. No!! As President Reagan said, there ARE simple answers, just no EASY answers. I post this here because in addition to hating special needs children (euthanazis!), I realize you can only accept the truth about evolution in a context of derision.

http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=92630


1) How does random change (mutation) in the genome add information to a genome to create progressively more complicated organisms? It Doesn't.

2) How is evolution able to bring about drastic changes so quickly?  An example is the Cambrian Explosion. It Can't.

3) How could the first living cell arise spontaneously to get evolution started? It couldn't.

4) The Human Genome Project showed that only 1-2% of Human DNA codes for proteins, or about 25,000 genes.  These are not enough  to account for the complexity of the organism.  What is the other 98% of the genome's function?  We don't know.

See, that took, what, 8 words? And yet, Darwinisim is in ruins.

BWA HA HAH!!!

I followed the link, and after all his whining, and special pleading, one of his "citations" is A WIKIPEDIA / UD LINK!!!

REAL SCIENCEY !


Jeffrey Dach, MD, did have one recent citation of some repute in his article:  
Quote
http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/2008/12/top-ten-darwin-and-design-stories-of.html
The top ten Darwin and Design stories of the year


Doesn't that make it science?

--------------
"I, OTOH, am an underachiever...I either pee my pants or faint dead away..." FTK

  
Marion Delgado



Posts: 89
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2009,14:25   

Quote (Tony M Nyphot @ Feb. 02 2009,21:02)
Jeffrey Dach, MD, did have one recent citation of some repute in his article:      
Quote
http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/2008/12/top-ten-darwin-and-design-stories-of.html
The top ten Darwin and Design stories of the year


Doesn't that make it science?

Finally! An objective question that can actually be tested.

And I immediately have. I asked Dr. Science himself about what makes something science:



And as soon as I hear a definitive response, at least one question will be settled.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2009,16:01   

looking forward to hearing back about that MD.

Bringing that brand new flavor in your ear, this is too rich to only be chronicled in the daily.  Henceforth it shall be found in these annals of assinity, chronicles of chronically stupid, the tomes of tard.  Top Tomes.

Quote
Behe *chose* to “accept” common ancestry and human evolution in order for his IC evidence to not be dismissed as originating from a Creationist. His strategy has failed and now he is stuck.


Courtesy Richard Hughes, Master Tard Miner

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 15 2009,17:54   

I thought these were good from Premier Radio's discussion forums. First of all from Linda:

Quote
Before the flood there was huge flying type birds and 3 foot millapeds. Scientist say it was impossible for these birds to fly because they were so huge. After much study by creationists they found that the air was denser because there was more oxygen so the birds could fly. The flood destroyed most of the dinosaurs but the few that survived were probably quite rare. They are mentioned in Job.


I had been challenging the YECs to produce bible verses where dinosaurs are descibed/mentioned. With so many dino fossils kicking around you would have thought they would have been commonplace pre-flood. If this was the case as YECs claim, surely there would have been far more talk of dinos in the bible, rather than a couple of verses which speak vaguely of creatures which most bible translators interpret as either mythical or modern animals ????


This one by poster ALLAN PORCHETTA on stellar evolution surely deserves a mention:

Quote
By the way did you read how Gary's friend called creationists alchemists - when that is exactly what evolutionists are.

They believe that siver, gold , platinum , iron , uranium etc etc all evolved from the hydrogen and helium that came
out of a tiny dot in a few minutes ( for no reason at all) -

Those big star factories in space far far away can make gold out of hydrogen - if only the alchemists in the middle ages
had kept trying we would all be rich .
Course you cant see this going on because its all far far away and long long ago.


Clearly Allan has never heard of spectroscopy.

  
Henry J



Posts: 4061
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 15 2009,21:38   

Quote
Quote
Those big star factories in space far far away can make gold out of hydrogen - if only the alchemists in the middle ages had kept trying we would all be rich .


Making gold that way (via particle accelerators) costs more than the gold is worth.

Henry

  
k.e..



Posts: 2883
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 15 2009,23:12   

Quote (Henry J @ April 16 2009,05:38)
Quote
Quote
Those big star factories in space far far away can make gold out of hydrogen - if only the alchemists in the middle ages had kept trying we would all be rich .


Making gold that way (via particle accelerators) costs more than the gold is worth.

Henry

ppphhhhhhtttt

God is the richest man in the universe if he wanted to he could set up a parallel universe with huge huge accelerators and use starships to transport gold over here and mix it up in his tempory Earth baking kitchen using a big bowl and spoon and just tip the bowl upside down between Venus and Mars and viola!

Fuck it, he wouldn't have to even that.

He could just buy an Earth off one of his buddies in a parallel universe

...no screw that...

All he had to do was buy a whole frikken universe off some dude ready made.

What am I talking about here?

God wouldn't need to buy anything be's the mostest powerfulest right?

...right?

OK here's what he does,

... he just walks right on over to the dude who had a universe and said to him "get lost twink or you'll get a knuckle sandwich"

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror" DAVE TARD
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
  297 replies since June 28 2007,14:01 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (10) < ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]