Someone's Abusing Entropy

[Entropy 5]

Honestly, there are creationists out there who really are too stupid to live.

 

Look at this:

 

"One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

 

http://smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=1073734&postcount=232

 

Yes! Scientists DO know about it! The Sun is a little hard to miss.

 

Well, maybe not for some people...

[Banshees Scream 110]

So what are you trying to say Entropy? That your boyfriend

is abusing you?

 

This shall not be allowed. Violence against beautiful but bitchy

Royal Forum Administrators shall not be tollerated.

 

Now give me his number and his home adress and

this guy will become a distant memorie.

[Entropy 5]

Thank you for the kind offer, but my husband is pretty good at keeping boyfriends at bay.

 

Now, if you know of somewhere that a second-hand brain could be obtained, I think that idiot of a creationist could do with a transplant.

[Banshees Scream 110]

Thank you for the kind offer, but my husband is pretty good at keeping boyfriends at bay.

I'm glad to hear your husband loves you.

 

Because Windsor and all of us love you too.

[Lady Die 63]

Isn't it ironic that believers in "intelligent design" are prime examples of why it isn't true?

[Star Crossed 33]

Creationism is clearly the way forward. Why bother disputing the evidence?

[Windsor 2,233]

Indeed, it would seem that Entropy and myself are getting more alike everyday.....

[Tempus Fugit 214]

Honestly, there are creationists out there who really are too stupid to live.

 

Look at this:

 

"One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

 

http://smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=1073734&postcount=232

 

Yes! Scientists DO know about it! The Sun is a little hard to miss.

 

Well, maybe not for some people...

Well that poster sounds like a pretty simple organism,

 

surely Evolution went wrong there.

 

Unless of course they are some kind of throw back, to an evolutionary dead end.

[Harvester Of Souls 40]

surely Evolution went wrong there.

Maybe it's an evolutionary test case? To see the direction of humanity? I shall observe these cases with interest incase there is a possibility that the gene pool is about to gain a little chlorine.

[BrunoBrimley 86]

but my husband is pretty good at keeping boyfriends at bay.

Your husband has a boyfriend? Is this in a romantic way or stricltly platonic? Even more though I am curious as to why they are always kept at bay, is he a sailor?

[Josco 49]

but my husband is pretty good at keeping boyfriends at bay.

Your husband has a boyfriend? Is this in a romantic way or stricltly platonic? Even more though I am curious as to why they are always kept at bay, is he a sailor?

[Entropy 5]

Your husband has a boyfriend?

 

No.

 

 

Is this in a romantic way or stricltly platonic?

 

See above.

 

 

Even more though I am curious as to why they are always kept at bay, is he a sailor?

 

No.

 

Hope that's all perfectly clear now.

[Tuber Mirum 125]

Entropy's husband works for NASA.

 

That stands for "Not A Sailor Atall".

 

 

(I do hope that wasn't a secret, Entropy)

[Entropy 5]

Actually these days, NASA is getting to be more like Not A Success At all. This Great Vision of George Bush's is going to send it down the tubes along with just about everything else he's turned his attention to.

 

They used to do science at NASA, not just send yet more fancy tin cans into space for the sake of giving a few ex-military folk a chance to play astronaut. The way they're going, you might as well put the entire crew of the next shuttle on your 2006 Death List.

[Magere Hein 1,400]

The way they're going, you might as well put the entire crew of the next shuttle on your 2006 Death List.

 

Unfortunately, that's against the Unwritten Rules. If it's already known which astronauts will fly the Shuttle in 2006 (if any), we may want to have a peek at the list, though.

 

regards,

Hein

[Life Begins at 5 o'clock 7]

The problem with the bible is that it is an incomplete account of the formation of the universe. It makes no mention of the noodley appendage. A glaring (dare I say, damning) omission.

 

For the truth, click below:

 

http://www.venganza.org/

[Entropy 5]

Ramen.

 

[Gunjaman5000 30]

The problem with the bible is that it is an incomplete account of the formation of the universe. It makes no mention of the noodley appendage. A glaring (dare I say, damning) omission.

 

And, might I add, the problem with Christians, more particularly the fundamentalist crowd, is the bible. If by definition Christians are the followers of Christ, why is any heed paid to what went on before he turned up?The first five books of the Christian bible, the Old Testament (including Genesis, wherein lies the basis of much of the creationists' arguements), are the Hebrew Torah. What does that have to do with Christianity?

 

Could someone brainy please explain.

[Josco 49]

The problem with the bible is that it is an incomplete account of the formation of the universe. It makes no mention of the noodley appendage. A glaring (dare I say, damning) omission.

 

For the truth, click below:

 

http://www.venganza.org/

I particularly like the bit about pirates and global warming. Whilst under the influence of some Swiss beer some years ago I formulated a theory regarding snow ploughs. It seemed to me that the reason Switzerland (and Austria) had so much snow was because thay had many snow ploughs, and these attracted the snow. To prove the theory it would have been necessary to remove all the ploughs (perhaps to Slough) and see if the snow followed. Regretably the authorities were not keen and supposition remains unproven.

[Life Begins at 5 o'clock 7]

The problem with the bible is that it is an incomplete account of the formation of the universe. It makes no mention of the noodley appendage. A glaring (dare I say, damning) omission.

 

For the truth, click below:

 

http://www.venganza.org/

I particularly like the bit about pirates and global warming. Whilst under the influence of some Swiss beer some years ago I formulated a theory regarding snow ploughs. It seemed to me that the reason Switzerland (and Austria) had so much snow was because thay had many snow ploughs, and these attracted the snow. To prove the theory it would have been necessary to remove all the ploughs (perhaps to Slough) and see if the snow followed. Regretably the authorities were not keen and supposition remains unproven.

 

That is a brilliant observation. Have you any other ways to improve society?

[Life Begins at 5 o'clock 7]

The problem with the bible is that it is an incomplete account of the formation of the universe. It makes no mention of the noodley appendage. A glaring (dare I say, damning) omission.

 

And, might I add, the problem with Christians, more particularly the fundamentalist crowd, is the bible. If by definition Christians are the followers of Christ, why is any heed paid to what went on before he turned up?The first five books of the Christian bible, the Old Testament (including Genesis, wherein lies the basis of much of the creationists' arguements), are the Hebrew Torah. What does that have to do with Christianity?

 

Could someone brainy please explain.

 

Well, there isn't a lot of verifiable evidence for it all. God was in a chattier mood back then, perhaps modern man isn't as good at conversation. (I blame the internet and reality TV) The crux of the whole thing is that you must take it all on faith. Which is at odds with the scientific tactic of trying to test everything that they can, or at least make logical conclusions based on the evidence at hand while continuing to refine our knowledge. Scientific knowledge can change and improve as more information becomes available. Faith is forever rooted in the dogma that spawned it until God decides to do something about it.

[Tuber Mirum 125]

I would take great pleasure in seeing the floor wiped with Martin from Skye

 

Sadly it's a bit beyond my somewhat limited creationist-flaming skills.

 

Anyone care to lend a hand?

[Magere Hein 1,400]

I would take great pleasure in seeing the floor wiped with Martin from Skye

 

Sadly it's a bit beyond my somewhat limited creationist-flaming skills.

 

Anyone care to lend a hand?

At the moment I don't have time for such a discussion, nor do I feel like one. May I, however, point to the talk.origins Index to Creationist Claims, a handy list of claims and their refutations? It seems CC200 and CC200.1 are on topic here.

 

regards,

Hein

[Entropy 5]

Wonder if it's worth registering over there. I see Notapotato is trying to convert him to Pastafarianism. I suppose that NOTapotato very well could be pasta, couldn't it?

 

I HATE seeing people being as pig-ignorantly closed-minded as these bloody creationists. I mean, he's rejecting a significant part of modern rational thought just because some charlatan has fed him this line that Jesus wants his personal friends to be driven by superstition, not by reason.

[maryportfuncity 10,657]

As Bill Hicks once remarked; 'Have you noticed how a lot of creationists look unevolved?'