 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2012-08-27 05:10, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 27/08/2012 10:33 AM, Tim Cook wrote:
>> Read elsewhere on the internet:
>>
>> Armstrong died.
>
> That was kind-of my point, yes.
You missed the punchline.
There's another Armstrong in the news, an athlete involved in a doping
scandal.
See also: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DontExplainTheJoke
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:01:24 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 27/08/2012 2:01 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 21:06:56 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 26/08/2012 8:33 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> Ah, well, that is a nut IIRC. Unlike a peanut.
>>>
>>> Ah! You did not listen to the third clip. The coconut is a fruit not a
>>> nut.
>>
>> I listened to bits of all the clips, but had recently read something
>> about this from The Book of General Ignorance (Volume 1), so I may have
>> misremembered. :)
>>
> You are forgiven. ;-)
Oh, good. ;)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/08/2012 4:04 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> You are forgiven.;-)
> Oh, good.;)
I know that you will sleep well tonight, now. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 16:12:08 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 27/08/2012 4:04 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> You are forgiven.;-)
>> Oh, good.;)
>
> I know that you will sleep well tonight, now. ;-)
Tonight? I might sleep well today. <yawn> ;)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/08/2012 4:37 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Tonight? I might sleep well today. <yawn>;)
Tell me about it. I get up at 05:30 during the week and with this being
a bank holiday weekend I thought I could have a lie in. But I've woken
up at 5 am every day.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 17:13:24 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 27/08/2012 4:37 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Tonight? I might sleep well today. <yawn>;)
>
> Tell me about it. I get up at 05:30 during the week and with this being
> a bank holiday weekend I thought I could have a lie in. But I've woken
> up at 5 am every day.
Hate when that sort of thing happens.
But last night was the first Sunday night I've gotten a decent night's
sleep in in quite a while.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26/08/2012 05:47 PM, Darren New wrote:
> On 8/26/2012 1:06, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> The trouble is, if you get an experimental result and say "it must
>> have been caused by magic"... that explains EVERY POSSIBLE RESULT.
>
> Only if you don't further refine magic.
Well, see, this is the thing. Before science came along, every time
somebody saw something they couldn't explain, they said "it must be
magic". And then people would pluck theories out of thin air for how
this "magic" actually works. Which theory is "correct" depends on who is
the biggest authority figure, or who is the best at arguing.
The central, *central* tenement of science is that you *test* these
theories. Any theory that fails testing is wrong. Any theory, no matter
how crazy it sounds, that passes testing is deemed correct (until we
find out otherwise). Most particularly, it does not *matter* who thought
of the theory; it only matters whether it passes reasonable tests or not.
Of course, what ID does is say "Look at this stuff. It's so amazing, it
was *obviously* made by a God!" That's not really science. At all.
>> A lot of people don't seem to understand this. Science is not the
>> study of
>> things which are TRUE, only things which are PROVABLE. So even if God DID
>> create the universe, we can never prove nor disprove this,
>
> Depends on the details. Certainly one can imagine scientific evidence
> for the existence of someone having created the universe.
Sure. If you found a row of galaxies arranged in such a way that, when
viewed from Earth, it happens to spell out intelligible English text,
that would be a pretty big clue. But it's hard to imagine anything that
could prove that /nobody/ created the universe.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/28/2012 0:54, Invisible wrote:
> Sure. If you found a row of galaxies arranged in such a way that, when
> viewed from Earth, it happens to spell out intelligible English text, that
> would be a pretty big clue. But it's hard to imagine anything that could
> prove that /nobody/ created the universe.
You should definitely read Calculating God. People find evidence that
implies the evidence we already have (e.g., fossils) is evidence of the
existence of God. (I'm not spoiling anything - this is all pretty much in
the first chapter, IIRC.)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/08/2012 6:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> But last night was the first Sunday night I've gotten a decent night's
> sleep in in quite a while.
Lordy, tell me which God you sacrifice to? ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 21:35:59 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 27/08/2012 6:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> But last night was the first Sunday night I've gotten a decent night's
>> sleep in in quite a while.
>
> Lordy, tell me which God you sacrifice to? ;-)
None. ;)
Sometimes it's Advil PM, but as the weather has somewhat cooled down
that's helped a lot.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
