Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 20:33 On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 00:21:49 +0200, "Frank Bemelman" <f.bemelmanq(a)xs4all.invalid.nl> Gave us: >Sure, simple casualties. Imagine piling them up in your back yard, 650.000 >bodies. The number is off, and so was the claim as to the way they died as well as the reason.
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 20:36 On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:32:38 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> Gave us: >Perhaps because the ones the Iraqis had didn't make a single mention of >Creationism...erm, Intelligent Design... and therefore didn't live up to US >standards.... You're an idiot. You don't even know what types of books were included, and I'd bet that none of them have been published recently enough to include your baby bullshit claims.
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 20:37 On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:33:41 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> Gave us: >Profanity: the last resort of the braindead. Being a wuss about profanity: The only resort of a pointless twit. My baby fingertip has more brains than you do.
From: Michael A. Terrell on 14 Oct 2006 20:39 rtngw wrote: > > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:21:21 -0700, John Larkin wrote: > > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 05:40:23 +0100, Eeyore > >>John Larkin wrote: > >> > >>> And sometimes 2 is fundamental and just can't be 2.00000001. > >> > >>I suggest you see a psychiatrist. > > > > I'm having fun and you're not. Which one of us needs therapy? > > > > (The question is actually serious.) > > Well, it is theoretically possible to have 2.00000001 apples, albeit > a little challenging to get it accurate. ;-) > > But can you go to the store 3.14159 times? ;-P > (yeah, I know, only if it's a "pi" shop...) > > Cheers! > Rich This makes the 16th time I've had to plonk you, 15 are for changing your nym. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 20:40
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:44:02 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> Gave us: > >"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >news:gng2j25g6c3qm53pnl00un48fjdi4tkbrt(a)4ax.com... >> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:23:35 -0700, John Larkin >> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> Gave us: >> >>>On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:09:07 +0100, "T Wake" >>><usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>2 is still not a precise number. To this day we can not say it is exactly >>>>2 >>>>with an infinite amount of zeros after the decimal place. >>> >>>Out of context, that constitutes a collectable quotation! Actually, it >>>ain't bad in context. >>> >> >> You're right. That remark is anti-profound! Quite collectable! > >Have you *ever* had an opinion that didn't just parrot what someone else >says? > Show me where anyone stated "anti-profound", you retarded twit! |