Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

[Buck Crick]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
Ah, fudge. I'd rather be motivated and hardworking than fashionable.

Me too.

...throw in "well-hung".

[Buck Crick]

Happy Lesbo wrote:

<quoted text>
.. are you trying to say my writing is as atrocious as Catcher's or Clementia's? If so, I resent that. I received an "A" in English, Catcher a "B" and Clementia flunked. She's always been somewhat slow. How did you do in English ??..

I always had good vowel movements.

[Hidingfromyou]

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
Walter Mitty is a fictional character in James Thurber's short story "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty", first published in The New Yorker on March 18, 1939.
Mitty is a meek, mild man with a vivid fantasy life: in a few dozen paragraphs he imagines himself a wartime pilot, an emergency-room surgeon, and a devil-may-care killer. The character's name has come into more general use to refer to an ineffectual dreamer, appearing in several dictionaries.[2] The American Heritage Dictionary defines a Walter Mitty as "an ordinary, often ineffectual person who indulges in fantastic daydreams of personal triumphs". The most famous of Thurber's inept male protagonists, the character is considered "the archetype for dreamy, hapless, Thurber Man".

Hey, thanks for that bit of cultural knowledge!

[Hidingfromyou]

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
Me too.
...throw in "well-hung".

Hi Buck!

You'd rather be motivated and hardworking than fashionable and well hung?

[Buck Crick]

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
Muy bien entonces. Me quedare esperando ese dia.

I don't speak mexican.

I don't even speak TO mexicans.

Drink mexican beer. That's it.

Slept with two mexican women once. Didn't say anything, though.

[Buck Crick]

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
Walter Mitty is a fictional character in James Thurber's short story "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty", first published in The New Yorker on March 18, 1939.
Mitty is a meek, mild man with a vivid fantasy life: in a few dozen paragraphs he imagines himself a wartime pilot, an emergency-room surgeon, and a devil-may-care killer. The character's name has come into more general use to refer to an ineffectual dreamer, appearing in several dictionaries.[2] The American Heritage Dictionary defines a Walter Mitty as "an ordinary, often ineffectual person who indulges in fantastic daydreams of personal triumphs". The most famous of Thurber's inept male protagonists, the character is considered "the archetype for dreamy, hapless, Thurber Man".

Does someone who is not "hapless" have haps?

Just wondering.

[Buck Crick]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
Hi Buck!
You'd rather be motivated and hardworking than fashionable and well hung?

I was assuming it fashionable to be well hung.

[Buck Crick]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>

Hey, thanks for that bit of cultural knowledge!

Anytime, sweetie.

[Catcher1]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
Hey, thanks for that bit of cultural knowledge!

You're very welcome.

My purpose, my motivation for participating in these threads is to help.

In any way I can.

:)

[Catcher1]

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
I was assuming it fashionable to be well hung.

That's our Buck.

[AustinHook]

Divine Alien wrote:

When we leave this world, we are going back to God himself.

I thought we were going back to being dust. I guess it must have been a very heavenly existence not having all the present doubts and worries. God is a clod?

[timn17]

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't speak mexican.
I don't even speak TO mexicans.
Drink mexican beer. That's it.
Slept with two mexican women once. Didn't say anything, though.

Same time, of course, right?

[Hidingfromyou]

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
I was assuming it fashionable to be well hung.

Huh. Probably depends on the industry you're in.

[Hidingfromyou]

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
Anytime, sweetie.

ahhhhhh

<hug>

[Hidingfromyou]

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
You're very welcome.
My purpose, my motivation for participating in these threads is to help.
In any way I can.
:)

Wooohooo!

[Hidingfromyou]

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
Does someone who is not "hapless" have haps?
Just wondering.

I don't know for certain, you'll probably have to correct me on this, but I would assume the "hapless" would be without hap.

[Double Fine]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
um..... What?
A whale couldn't survive for a year on a boat. Are you forgetting that?
Are you also forgetting that God made it rain?
How do you know it was raining fresh water? Were you there? Did you take some samples?
My point is your whole thesis is based on assumption, not facts.
Your scientific analysis is flawed.

Okay.

So here we are at the global flood:

1) You assume that the biggest, most catastrophic flood in history happens, without leaving evidence verifiable evidence by acclaimed geologists?

2) You assume that the biggest, most catastrophic flood in history happens, and destroys every living being, save those on a wooden boat?

3) You assume that the most animals and biggest variety of species ever assembled survived with only have 8 cartakers. This, while modern zoos need hundreds of employees to feed and clean after the animals.

4) You assume that the earth gains trillions of tonnes of water and suddenly it vanishes? If the entire earth was filled with water, just where would water recede to?

5) Somehow, the two specimens of every spcies of animal makes it to their continent safely (Are you really going to suggest that koalas, sloths, leopards and wallabies swam across oceans?)

6) Further, you assume that these species would inhabit the land without having the food pyramid collapse. Think of it. What would the herbivores eat? Are you assuming that trees survived 40 days underwater? What did the carnivores eat? If they ate just one animal, that would destroy a breeding pair and the species go extinct. Are you going to assume that carnivores "just were not very hungry" for about ten years until the population stabilised?

7) Lastly, you are implying that it rained salt water. Do you understand how rain water is formed? Do you understand that water vapour cannot hold any salt crystals, that is why rain is ALWAYS is fresh water.

Trust me, mate. Noah's Ark is a fib. Any ONE of these 7 assumptions will shoot pieces in any theory.

[HeHe]

Double Fine wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay.
So here we are at the global flood:
1) You assume that the biggest, most catastrophic flood in history happens, without leaving evidence verifiable evidence by acclaimed geologists?
2) You assume that the biggest, most catastrophic flood in history happens, and destroys every living being, save those on a wooden boat?
3) You assume that the most animals and biggest variety of species ever assembled survived with only have 8 cartakers. This, while modern zoos need hundreds of employees to feed and clean after the animals.
4) You assume that the earth gains trillions of tonnes of water and suddenly it vanishes? If the entire earth was filled with water, just where would water recede to?
5) Somehow, the two specimens of every spcies of animal makes it to their continent safely (Are you really going to suggest that koalas, sloths, leopards and wallabies swam across oceans?)
6) Further, you assume that these species would inhabit the land without having the food pyramid collapse. Think of it. What would the herbivores eat? Are you assuming that trees survived 40 days underwater? What did
the carnivores eat? If they ate just one animal, that would destroy a breeding pair and the species go extinct. Are you going to assume that carnivores "just were not very hungry" for about ten years until the population stabilised?
7) Lastly, you are implying that it rained salt water. Do you understand how rain water is formed? Do you understand that water vapour cannot hold any salt crystals, that is why rain is ALWAYS is fresh water.
Trust me, mate. Noah's Ark is a fib. Any ONE of these 7 assumptions will shoot pieces in any theory.

You just don't understand magic at all, do you?

[Thinking]

Sorry, I don't use a PC so I can't replicate your problem.

I run Mac OS and heard that BBC iPlayer would stop downloading with the latest Adobe Air so that's a month old but but my Flash is up to date and working fine on Safari and Firefox.

Clementia wrote:

Hey thinking, are you having problems with adobe flash player?
Can any of you guys help? I have internet explorer 9 and i downloaded flash player 11... something, but everything I restart my laptop and then i go on youtube, it tells me to upgrade every bloody time.
Thank you!
P.S. Thinking, all us uk people have to stick together!!

[-Skeptic-]

Buck Crick wrote:

<quoted text>
I always had good vowel movements.

Your bowel movements seem to be interpreted by your fingers when you type your creationist rubbish in this forum.