The lack of religion is basically a form of religion in itself.
I'm happy to know that even though I don't follow baseball, have no interest in it, and describe it as boring and stupid if asked about it, I am actually a fervent fan of the sport. If you don't support any baseball team, then you're actually a new team in denial. Wait... What? Ah... religion.
So when is the first not-training? And what is not our team-logo?
"Some motherfuckers are always trying to ice skate uphill."
Duane: You know what they say about love and war.
Tim: Yes, one involves a lot of physical and psychological pain, and the other one's war.
That's a great logo. What we really need though, is some kind of absence of logo that is instantly recognizable as being a logo no matter where it's not seen.
That last sentence gave me a headache...
Symmetry wrote:That's a great logo. What we really need though, is some kind of absence of logo that is instantly recognizable as being a logo no matter where it's not seen. That last sentence gave me a headache...
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
For some reason I have stopped receiving emails when there are posts to this topic. I just wanted to checkup and see if there was any happenings (i have been busy). AND WOW!! 5 new pages. I will look over it and respond when I can.
And again thanks for the response Neoteny. I will read over your post carefully.
Carebian Knight wrote:How many evolutionists here have read the Bible?
I have.
So anyway, have any of the creationists have read The Origin Of Species?
I'm going to be honest: reading Darwin was almost as painful as reading the Bible. I couldn't finish Origin or the Bible, but they were painful for completely different reasons. One was due to the Victorian writing style, the other was due to... well... a lot of things.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Carebian Knight wrote:How many evolutionists here have read the Bible?
I have read Mother Goose and Grimm's Fairy Tales. I should at least get 1/2 credit.
I certainly hope you're not suggesting that the bible is little more than a fairy story used to teach morality to the less mentally capable members of society
Neoteny wrote:I'm going to be honest: reading Darwin was almost as painful as reading the Bible. I couldn't finish Origin or the Bible, but they were painful for completely different reasons. One was due to the Victorian writing style, the other was due to... well... a lot of things.
Yeah, definitely. Found the bible a real struggle at times (only read it because it was literally the only book I had to read! Gotta love those gibons that went round my uni depositing their religious load ) and it took me nearly 3 months to manage to read the The Origin of Species. Fascinating book, but it takes it out of you reading it.
Carebian Knight wrote:How many evolutionists here have read the Bible?
I have read Mother Goose and Grimm's Fairy Tales. I should at least get 1/2 credit.
I certainly hope you're not suggesting that the bible is little more than a fairy story used to teach morality to the less mentally capable members of society
Never. Who would think that?
The Pro-Tip®, SkyDaddy® and are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.
Carebian Knight wrote:How many evolutionists here have read the Bible?
I have.
So anyway, have any of the creationists have read The Origin Of Species?
I'm going to be honest: reading Darwin was almost as painful as reading the Bible. I couldn't finish Origin or the Bible, but they were painful for completely different reasons. One was due to the Victorian writing style, the other was due to... well... a lot of things.