I don’t normally read Doonesbury, but I thought this one was pretty amusing…
Doonesbury takes on creationism.
Posted by Les on Friday, January 06, 2006 at 12:39 PM. Read 5797 times. Tags: humor, religion Permalink · 60 Comments ·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
Comments:
Page 3 of 3 pages « First < 1 2 3
For those readers who don’t understand big words like “adaption” and “exaption”, here’s an adaption of the screenplay all y’all can follow.
So there’s a cartoon that ends in the punchline “because he jacks off a lot”. Gene goes into all hat, no cattle mode and makes a big fuss. “The cartoon is all wrong,” says he, “because it didn’t say whether he choked the chicken or spanked the monkey! And anyway, since he must have choked the chicken he didn’t jack off—they’re two different things!”
leguru 
Posted on 04/28/2008 at 04:23 PM
Posted on 04/28/2008 at 04:23 PM 
Careful, Elwed. You may get PETA mad at you. 
It depends whether the monkey likes that sort of thing…
But more importantly, will the monkey adapt to the spankings? Or is the monkey an exaptation because it wants to spanked? Questions, questions…
Ragman Posted on 04/28/2008 at 07:13 PM
Posted on 04/28/2008 at 07:13 PM 
Now it begs the question of species origination. If some spank the monkey whilst others choke the chicken, what then is the common ancestor of chickens and monkeys??
leguru Posted on 04/29/2008 at 01:26 AM
Posted on 04/29/2008 at 01:26 AM
Why are you guys making light of a serious site about a cartoon? Uhhh, let me rephrase that . . .
So Gene, does that mean you’re not gonna look up gene duplication? Because you’re clearly only reading the parts of the book that suit you. And twisting the meaning of those parts to boot.
Promises, promises.