BTWAOS, I wonder how long it’ll take for a link to point here for the Best Blonde Joke Ever.

I never found the joke--I just kept coming upon more links promising “the best blonde joke ever!” Am I missing something, or is that the joke itself (that there isn’t one)?

Cute “Doonsebury,” by the way. I’m a big fan.

No, it’s there. You just have to keep clicking.

I give up. I never found it. After a while of clicking links, I became distinctly aware of the fact that I was going around in circles.

LOL, reminds me of a set of cards I used to have in junior and senior high school.  Both sides read, “do you know how to keep an idiot amused?  Turn card to find out”.  I swear, this one guy turned the card about a dozen times before it dawned on him.

I just read all of these comments, and I’m not blond.  Does this mean something?

I had blond hair once.  When I had hair.  Does this mean something?

If you found it amusing, it doesn’t speak well for your acquaintence with the subject matter.

Creationists don’t deny that organisms evolve- just that they turn into new species.

Trudeau, like so culturally aggressive materialists, doesn’t realize how ignorant he is of the subjects he satirizes- or how foolish he makes himself look in the eyes of those less smugly ignorant.

If you found it amusing, it doesn’t speak well for your acquaintence with the subject matter.

Is that so, huh? Well, sorry Robert, but I’d trust Garry Trudeau long before I trusted the scientifically ignorant, otherwise known as creationists.

Gee, Bob… we’ve never heard that one before.  So if environmental forces select thousands of small changes to a species over geologic time, until it is no longer recognizable and couldn’t possibly produce offspring with its original form, it’s still the same species?

Who knew?

I was blond as a small child.  It turned brown after I started school.  Does that mean something???

If you found it amusing, it doesn’t speak well for your acquaintence with the subject matter.

Blondes need friends, too.

Liberal, n.: Someone who has absolute faith in Intelligent Design and cannot accept the Theory of Evolution—unless the subject at hand is the origin of species.

Liberal, n.: Someone who has absolute faith in Intelligent Design and cannot accept the Theory of Evolution—unless the subject at hand is the origin of species.

Eh, I don’t subscribe to the Dictionary of Insecure Macho Asshattery. But maybe if you keep repeating your little nonsensical definition to yourself again and again and again, one day you’ll convince yourself of its veracity! At least one person on the planet will be convinced. Maybe you’ll even be able to convince yourself of all the things you say!

I was blond as a small child.  It turned brown after I started school.  Does that mean something???

It means you’re a lot like my life partner John, if that itself means anything to you. Blonde as a wee lad, beautifully dark-haired now. I, on the other hand, have had hair of one shade my whole life.  C’est la vie, I guess.

Intelligent design, huh? I think I’d have made it that the hole I breathe through wasn’t connected to the hole I eat through. The only proof that I can see that humans were made in anyone’s image is far from “intelligent”

So if environmental forces select thousands of small changes to a species over geologic time, until it is no longer recognizable and couldn’t possibly produce offspring with its original form, it’s still the same species?

Didn’t you know, DoF?  Of course we’re all the same species, since we all have the same father, Jehovah.  The only reason humans can’t interbreed with chimps, or tardigrades for that matter, is because of the Fall.

When Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, God was jealous, saying “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” So God mixed up their DNA, so that it was ashamed too, and twisted into helices to cover its insides; and God banned Adam and Eve from Eden (oneness with Nature).

Of course, God used exactly the same tactic later, when uppity humans built the Tower of Babel.  God felt threatened, and scrambled their languages.

And now that computers are developing godlike powers, God is obviously doing the same thing, what with Windows, and Linux, and Macintosh…

I normally don’t do this, but there are two comments I would like to address in this thread which caught my eye.

One:

Creationists don’t deny that organisms evolve- just that they turn into new species.

Bullshit. I have tried to be polite and I have tried to be eloquent in the past but for this I will drop the ruse and simply call a spade a spade. To deny that the end result of evolution is the creation of a new species is to deny evolution itself. You sir, are an ass.

Two:

Liberal, n.: Someone who has absolute faith in Intelligent Design and cannot accept the Theory of Evolution—unless the subject at hand is the origin of species.

Wow. Fucking wow. The last time I checked, those who had absolute faith in Intelligent Design included our President and a large majority of the GOP. You should be hit with something heavy and sharp. Possibly a bulldozer covered in broken glass and sprinkled with boric acid. Better yet, should you happen upon a tall building or maybe even a cliff, feel free to take a flying-fucking-leap off of it.

I pray the two of you have yet to breed.

Neodromos, I suspect Daryl was trying to be “funny”.  You know, witty, laughter-provoking.  He was contrasting the silly liberals with the down-to-earth conservatives, who scorn biological evolution, but embrace Social Darwinism: that is, cutthroat capitalism.  Hehe.

LMAO. Sounds like medicine is in a pickle.
Treat me for the ‘new and evolved’ TB please.

Could’ve went with ye olde medieval standby: leeches!

Yeah, Daryl’s definition lost me.  And my crack about hair color change looks like a dud.

You should be hit with something heavy and sharp. Possibly a bulldozer covered in broken glass and sprinkled with boric acid.

Well, I thought the endless clicking through cyclical links was a pretty good joke in itslef, but I tired of it quickly.  A brief Google search produced this one, which may not be THE joke in quiestion, but I laughed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A blonde female police officer pulls over a blonde gal in a convertible sports car for speeding. She walks up to the car and asks the blonde for her driver’s license. The blonde convertible driver searches through her purse in vain

Finally she asks, “What does it look like?”

The blonde officer tells her, “It’s that thing with your picture on it.” The blonde driver searches for a few more seconds, pulls out her compact, opens it and sure enough sees herself. She hands the compact to the blonde cop.

After a few seconds looking at the compact, the blonde cop rolls her eyes, hands the compact back to the blonde convertible driver and says, “If you would have told me you were a police officer when I first pulled you over we could have avoided this whole thing!”

Stop making fun of blondes.  Don’t you know that God designed blondes first?

Intelligent design came much later.

zilch: Neodromos, I suspect Daryl was trying to be “funnyâ€?.  You know, witty, laughter-provoking.  He was contrasting the silly liberals with the down-to-earth conservatives, who scorn biological evolution, but embrace Social Darwinism: that is, cutthroat capitalism.

Well, someone got it at least.

For all that liberals like to bash Intelligent Design when it comes to the past, they certainly are fond of it when it comes to the present and the future.

Evolution is their answer to the Walleyed Bass, but Intelligent Design is their answer to Wal-Mart.

“Cutthroat capitalism” is a term which people on the left will often trot out to denigrate free markets.  It implies that there is some other, more benevolent form of capitalism which liberals are ok with.

You don’t have to dig very deep to figure out that their idea of a kinder, gentler capitalism is just “Intelligent Design”.  Capitalism is fine, they will say, so long as there’s a big, paternal government telling all the capitalists what to do.  It is unthinkable to them that an incredibly efficient economic system could spring forth from an infinite series of uncoordinated decisions made by people who have no intention of designing an economic system, but only want to maximize their own wealth and happiness.  Yet they insist that a spider can evolve better venom through the actions of its prey (which certainly doesn’t want it to have more effective venom!).

Tell a liberal that some of the drugs on the market might not be safe, and they’ll immediately demand that the big, bloated FDA be given even more power and money than it already has.  I think it was Reagan who said that government is the only thing responds to failure by getting even bigger and richer.  Private companies just go out of business if they don’t meet customer needs.  As a libertarian / free market supporter, I know that drug consumers would be better off if we simply eliminated the FDA.  Over time, private certifying authorities would emerge to attest that this drug or that drug is “safe and effective”.  The ones which garnered consumers’ trust by being accurate would command huge fees from companies who want their seal of approval.  The ones who called it wrong would disappear.

So which is it, liberals?  Socialism (Intelligent Design)?  Or capitalism (evolution)?

So which is it, liberals?  Socialism (Intelligent Design)?  Or capitalism (evolution)?

Some of both, I think even you will agree, Daryl.  Or are you an anarchist?  Good luck in your hidey-hole then.  Show me a successful society with no government.

It is unthinkable to them [liberals] that an incredibly efficient economic system could spring forth from an infinite series of uncoordinated decisions made by people who have no intention of designing an economic system, but only want to maximize their own wealth and happiness.

I don’t know anyone, even the leftiest of my lefty friends, who doesn’t think that a market economy is the best way to distribute goods.  The failure of communist planned economies is obvious to all but the fundy marxhumpers.  But that doesn’t mean that laissez-faire capitalism is the summum bonum, either.

I think it was Reagan who said that government is the only thing responds to failure by getting even bigger and richer.

Ah yes, Reagan.  Environment: “Seen one redwood, seen them all”.  Student demonstrators: “If it takes a bloodbath, let’s get it over with”.  His idea of making government smaller was cutting school budgets and propelling the national debt to record heights, a policy continued by the Bushes.  Of course, our successful peacekeeping in Iraq is worth putting our children into debt…

There are no easy answers in trying to build societies.  While there are some useful analogies to be drawn with evolution, and with human design, ultimately we must see what works, and not succumb to the “pathetic fallacy” beloved of Social Darwinists: that because Nature is “red in tooth and claw”, that human societies should be too.

Equating Natural History and Creationism with Economic Politics is absurd.  Might as well say frogs are the environmental equivalent of market inflation while snakes consume the idea of free trade.

Each are in their separate category.  Liking frogs doesn’t mean I like inflation, or that hating snakes means I hate free trade.  Just because evolution exists doesn’t mean all you God-faring Creationists have to like it.  Take that up with your God.

In my rush to throw out a few witty insults, I failed to see the joke. For that, it would seem, I have become living proof that horses asses outnumber horses. As for Mr. Waters’ remark, I stand firm in my position the he is a prime candidate for head taste-tester at Dupont. Besides, I’ve heard their bleached chicken cordon bleu is divine.