Earth is round because that’s how the Magrathean made it, I think it was in the work order or something.

Aaaah, nothing like a bit of ad hominem to round of your reasoned discourse.

Ad hominem is one of my favorite spices.

If that guy is the stupid twin, and there’s also an evil twin, does that make Les the bastard twin?

Saying that reminds me of Douglas Adams “Fourth book in the trilogy”.

6) Stupid parents
Aaaah, nothing like a bit of ad hominem to round of your reasoned discourse.

Hope thats not for me- I was quoting the guy.  Look I had to watch that blasted video 3 times to formulate the answers.  Surely above and beyond.

I notice Lord Klegg is quiet about the actual drink he is offering me.  I’m going to have to put him on my Christmas Card list, so I can take him off it.

What a pity this man’s brother was not an only child. Then again, maybe he was. 

If that guy is the stupid twin, and there’s also an evil twin, does that make Les the bastard twin?

Saying that reminds me of Douglas Adams “Fourth book in the trilogy”.

More accurate than you think, if there’s a ninja twin nobody has seen.

6) Stupid parents
Aaaah, nothing like a bit of ad hominem to round of your reasoned discourse.

Why should it be about you Last Hussar? I bet your parents are nowhere near this guy’s.

Whoops, here I go insulting the poor fellow’s parents (at least not my own, I am a SECOND-Generation atheist, BTW).

But then, from the evidence of that video, his parents did allow him to inherit certain… abilities. Like: “Protection from Reason” and “+5 Facial Hair”

Don’t say that, he’ll probably try to beat the devil out of them or something.

You’re telling me that, after that big statement he made about not hating your family, you’re telling me that you think he would beat his own children for being atheists?  Yeah, okay, I rescind the blessing.  May his children be just as dumb as he is, and not a single drop smarter, for their own safety.

You’re telling me that, after that big statement he made about not hating your family, you’re telling me that you think he would beat his own children for being atheists?

Since when have religious nutjobs had a problem with hypocrisy?  The only amazing thing about that is that they expect us not to notice.

You’re telling me that, after that big statement he made about not hating your family, you’re telling me that you think he would beat his own children for being atheists?

I don’t know if it was just me, but I was picking up some pretty strong hatred from that video.

Klegg changed jobs and has less time for commenting and for drinking, however, Klegg likes this recipie: 1 Can frozen fruit juice (your choice), place in blender, fill said can with tequila/vodka/rum (coconut rum works best IMHO) and place in blender, fill blender with ice, blend, SMILE slurpies!
As I am unable to deliver, I ofer this bit of sunshine instead.  I hope all your weekends ROCK!

CHEERS! Finally some intelligence on this thread. 

I’ll agree, alcohol certainly has its place as an entheogen, but it can be addictive and harmful, if not treated with respect.  For safer highs, stick with marijuana.

For safer highs, stick with marijuana.

Seriously?

Seriously.  By any criterion you care to measure: addictiveness, health risks, and loss of motor control while high, alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana.  It’s ridiculous that alcohol is legal and marijuana illegal most places, and it’s a crime and mindboggling waste of money and lives that so many people are in jail for possession of marijuana.

/* begin soapbox */

The only reason alcohol is legal and pot isn’t is because pot is relatively new to western civilization compared to alcohol.  If booze was something that was discovered when people settled the America’s, Prohibition would have worked.  Instead, there were too many Irish and Norwegians already living here, to whom liquor is simply another food group.

Think about it.  If marijuana was used for a thousand years by Europeans and associated with strength and vitality (or at least extreme hunger), we’d have smoke houses instead of liquor stores all over the place where people could go to get stoned.  Cocaine might also have caught on if it hadn’t been pretty much been restricted to the upper classes.  Look what happened to Absinthe… outlawed because only “strange” people drank it, and it isn’t even dangerous.

The “Drug War” has very little to do with drugs.  It’s a political football, just like immigration and gun control.  There’s no benefit to any politician in actually solving those issues.  The worst thing that could happen is for them to cease to be issues.

/* end soapbox */

watching Stonedcommander reminded me of a joke about two rednecks:

Two Rednecks, Jim and Dave, are sitting at their favorite bar, drinking beer. Jim turns to Dave and says, ‘You know, I’m tired of going through life without an education.

Tomorrow I think I’ll mosey on over go to the Community College and sign up fer some classes. Dave thinks it’s a good idea, and the two leave.

The next day, Jim goes down to the college and meets Dean of
Admissions, who signs him up for the four basic classes: Math,
English, history, and Logic.

‘Logic?‘ Jim says. ‘What’s that?

The Dean says, ‘I’ll give you an example. Do you own a weed eater? ‘Yeah.‘ ‘Then logically speaking, because you own a weed eater, I think that you would have a yard.‘

‘That’s true, I do have a yard’

‘I’m not done,‘ the dean says. ‘Because you have a yard, I think
logically that y ou would have a house.‘

‘Yep, I do have a house.‘

‘And because you have a house, I think that you might logically
have a family.‘

‘Yep, I have a family.‘

‘I’m not done yet. Because you have a family, then logically you
must have a wife. And because you have a wife, then logic tells me you must be a heterosexual.‘

‘I am a heterosexual. That’s amazing, you were able to find out
all of that because I have a weed eater.‘

Excited to take the class now, Jim shakes the Dean’s hand and
leaves to go meet Dave at the bar. He tells Dave about his classes,
how he is signed up for Math, English, History, and Logic.

‘Logic?‘ Dave says, ‘What’s that?‘

Jim says, ‘I’ll give you an example. Do you have a weed eater?‘

‘No.‘

‘Then you’re a queer.‘

Stonedcommander must be Jim. Gotta be.

Yep! That be Jim, awright. 

This guy needs to stop thinking in a fixed 6,000 years timeframe and move on to a larger scale of life, like 6 trillion+ years, possibly trillions of trillions for what speck of knowledge we have accumulated.

He also needs to figure out that other “theory” called gravity.

I can’t even finish the video. Its just too sad.

I can’t bear to watch.  And Moloch, I think 6 trillion+ years might be a bit overkill, 15 billion should be more than sufficient (15 billion for the whole shebang, 4.5 billion for the earth, 1-2 billion for life on earth).

Maybe Moloch believes in the “many-big-bangs-and-then-crunchies-again”-theory.

Exactly. It would be foolish to think there has been only ONE cycle. You don’t get that kind of compression and energy release out of nowhere!

Until we find out exactly what created the universe, where the energy/matter came from and what the universe exists within we can’t do more than guess the actual age of the universe.

Who knows, it could have already done a few billion crunch/bang/expand/collapse cycles before we came along.

So, after the next collapse/crunch/bang cycle we may not have to put up with this kind of stupidity? Hey, I can dream, can’t I? 

Until we find out exactly what created the universe, where the energy/matter came from and what the universe exists within we can’t do more than guess the actual age of the universe.

If “this universe” is what is occurring between the bang and the next crunch, then absolutely we can figure out the age of the universe.

The only problems I have with the collapse/crunch/bang cycle is that you’re still looking for where everything in the cycle came from (ie how the cycle began) and you’ve got the same questions you would have with just one big bang.  It all comes down to one thing eventually, unless you want to throw out the idea of any big bang to start this universe (or this cycle) and go with some other form of universe creation…. one in which there is NO evidence for.  So if you can’t accept the idea of one big bang and you have to entertain the notion of a cycling universe, then you can’t be satisfied with just one cycling universe.  It has to be part of something else larger than that, which in turn has to be part of something else even bigger.  You’ve also got the slight problem that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, implying there can’t be a cycle because this universe isn’t going to crunch.  If you want to say that this universe can be traced back to the big bang and there was nothing ‘before’ it, that may be wrong, but it’s not foolish.  It is simply where all the evidence we’ve got is currently pointing.

Right. There is “something” out there that the universe exists in but no matter how the question is looked at it results in a never ending cycle of “what caused/created it”.

Thats the problem with all the religions, they believe that THEIR deity(ies) are what made everything but they don’t consider what made their deity(ies) or what made the deity(ies) maker(s), etc etc on into the night. Its not as simple as “Yep, thats what made everything” the way they proclaim it to be.

The little micro-speck of actual evidence we have is not enough to make more than plausible guesses.