Messages

McCain becoming president.

Palin becoming President

I pray to the Flying Spaghetti Monster that McCain/Palin will never get elected! Ever!

Then in two weeks we will know whether or not the FSM exists!

what are your rates for delivery to th UK?

Here's the link for CafePress's shipping information, including rates and international shipping:

http://www.cafepress.com/cp/info/help/shipping.aspx#1

Eek, customs scares me.

Kent Hovind

Kent Hovind.

That was the first person who came to my mind.

VenomFangX

That was the second.
The third person was that Janewt Folger, a.k.a. "Creationist Coffee lady"

Can I just be like god and make a super creature that can rule the world without all this evolution stuff?

No, no you may not.

Name: The Incredible

Parts: 50 x Jaws, 20x beady eye, 50x stalk eye, 10x button eye, 2x filter mouth, 300x long flagella, 900x short flagella.

HP: 6

Catchphrase: "It's a-bogosity!!" "I a-like a-this" and "It's a-time for my food!"

what are your rates for delivery to th UK?

The challenge is:
Think of someone who would be a worse VP/President than Sarah Palin, and say why, and guess the first thing they would do upon taking office.

Also, any McCain/Obama/Biden/Palin gaffes (esp. videos) and general election-related stuff here too, who thinks McCain is going to win?
[yt]QnE-YJ---GI[/yt]
The first of hopefully many McCainisms to come?

In my opinion, all the great names of paleontology are the best example of confusing Greek and Latin names used in modern science to confuse people.

There are millions of creatures, and when they find a new one, they open a Latin dictionary at a random page, take the next best word and ad -saurus.


Tada, new creature name.

Then one day they accidentally pick up a french dicitonary, and we get stuck with
Bonjourasaurus.

1. The moon.

Everyone make sequential suggestions.

"How do you know there's not a Baker under your bed?"

Damned supernautral, invisible bakers, and their tendency to live under people's beds.

I recommended this to Shane in a yt PM, but here are the videos in particular:
[yt]eZb_Y95uCtI[/yt]
Malcom Bowden and his "three covered-up experiments"
[yt]-_L_7wonky4[/yt]
[yt]oVkt5RlGgyI[/yt]

Personally, I think it was just an excuse.

It was, he didn't want to admit to thinking that "reducing by 50%" and "increasing by 50%" were the same operation but reversed.

Indeed, but increasing from 50% to 100% is still increasing by 200%

[yt]MW31fOWzY-E[/yt]
Our favorite maths expert has a video where he "worked out" how much the original apollo "jump salute" clip was "slowed down." He admitted that increasing a presumably half-speed video by 50% only increased it to 75% it's "original" speed, yet made the mistake again.
He increased the original video by 150%, and then "worked out" how much he needed to slow it down back to the original. It took him some fancy video software to work out he needed to slow it by 67%, or 2/3. So, whilst the "original speed" was 150%, or 3/2 (a number he pulled out of his ass) he basically proved that 3/2 * 2/3 = 1. That's it. He didn't prove anything other than that.