The Most Famous Fakes In Science

[Hollie]

What if you believed in a scientific principle....and became aware that it is only supported with lies and fabrications.
Would you continue to believe it?
It is....and you do. I'll prove it in this thread.



1.It would be amusing if it weren’t so tragic: the lies that have been perpetrated in government school. Like this...

“Evolution is a fact.” Science Believers

And this…

“Evolution [Darwin’s Theory] is a fact and is the basis of all of biology. The theory of evolution is the most robust, well supported scientific theory in the history of mankind.” The Pretense Called Evolution




2. The ’proof’ offered by a number of those fooled is the fossil record, and the mechanism of mutations, both of which have been proven false. Proof can be found here:

The Pretense Called Evolution

and

The Biology Term For History

Both scrupulously documented and supported.



3. The reason this thread should be in Politics, not Science, is because Darwin’s plan, colloquially referred to as evolution, is that it, like the hallmark of politics, is based on lies.
In fact, that alone should make every person of integrity furious! And curious….’why would lies be necessary whether the theory is true or not?’ What makes advancing it so important?



4. One example is this, from the textbook currently used in NYC high schools, and probably throughout the nation:

“By examining fossils from sequential layers of rock, one could view how a species had changed and produced different species over time.” Kenneth R. Miller and Joseph S. Levine, Prentice Hall Biology (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, 2002), 382.

The actual fossil record shows the opposite of Darwin’s beliefs: " A few of the gaps (which are systematic in the fossil record) they claim to fill, but there’s another deposit in the region that throws the whole evolutionary story into disrepute: the Chengyiang bed in southern China. Here, the Cambrian Explosion has been documented in fine detail; all the major animal phyla appear in the early Cambrian without precursors."
Chinese Fossil Beds Astound Paleontologists (http://www.nature.com/index.html?file=/nature/journal/v421/n6925/full/nature01420_fs.html)

Entirely new lines simply materialize without the myriad failed changes that Darwin predicted.


And, why is it acceptable, or necessary, to lie to make the point?
But there is an even greater fabrication used to advance Darwinian beliefs....you learned it....and believed it….I’ll get to it…

Chinese Fossil Beds Astound Paleontologists

www.freerepublic.com

The Cambrian Period

ucmp.berkeley.edu

Below is the rest of the story. The takeaway, never ever trust PC.

When you are as dumb as you are, you post things like the above.

The Cambrium Period proves Darwin WRONG!!!


And he admitted it, you moron.

"THE ABRUPT manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations, has been urged by several palæontologists—for instance, by Agassiz, Pictet, and Sedgwick—as a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species. If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution through natural selection." Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.302


“Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms.”ch.6


. To the question why we do not find records of these vast primordial periods, I can give no satisfactory answer.”
Darwin, "On The Origin of Speices," chapter nine

“The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained.”



Chinese paleontologist J.Y. Chen excavated a new discovery of Cambrian fossils in southern China, he brought to light an even greater variety of body plans from an even older layer of Cambrian rock than those of Burgess! And the Chinese fossils established that the Cambrian animals appeared even more explosively than previously imagined!!! " A few of the gaps (which are systematic in the fossil record) they claim to fill, but there’s another deposit in the region that throws the whole evolutionary story into disrepute: the Chengyiang bed in southern China. Here, the Cambrian Explosion has been documented in fine detail; all the major animal phyla appear in the early Cambrian without precursors." Chinese Fossil Beds Astound Paleontologists (http://www.nature.com/index.html?file=/nature/journal/v421/n6925/full/nature01420_fs.html)


There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.
A true imbecile.

Here we have another of the fraudulent “quotes” that the dishonest religionist dumps into multiple threads.

Quote Mine Project: Darwin Quotes

www.talkorigins.org

To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer. Several eminent geologists, with Sir R. Murchison at their head, were until recently convinced that we beheld in the organic remains of the lowest Silurian stratum the first dawn of life. Other highly competent judges, as Lyell and E. Forbes, have disputed this conclusion. We should not forget that only a small portion of the world is known with accuracy. Not very long ago M. Barrande added another and lower stage, abounding with new and peculiar species, beneath the then known Silurian system; and now, still lower down in the Lower Cambrian formation, Mr. Hicks has found in South Wales beds rich in trilobites, and containing various molluscs and annelids. The presence of phosphatic nodules and bituminous matter, even in some of the lowest azoic rocks, probably indicates life at these periods; and the existence of the Eozoon in the Laurentian formation of Canada is generally admitted. There are three great series of strata beneath the Silurian system in Canada, in the lowest of which the Eozoon is found. Sir W. Logan states that their "united thickness may possibly far surpass that of all the succeeding rocks, from the base of the palæozoic series to the present time. We are thus carried back to a period so remote that the appearance of the so-called primordial fauna (of Barrande) may by some be considered as a comparatively modern event." The Eozoon belongs to the most lowly organised of all classes of animals, but is highly organised for its class; it existed in count less numbers, and, as Dr. Dawson has remarked, certainly preyed on other minute organic beings, which must have lived in great numbers. Thus the words, which I wrote in 1859, about the existence of living beings long before the Cambrian period, and which are almost the same with those since used by Sir W. Logan, have proved true. Nevertheless, the difficulty of assigning any good reason for the absence of vast piles of strata rich in fossils beneath the Cambrian system is very great. It does not seem probable that the most ancient beds have been quite worn away by denudation, or that their fossils have been wholly obliterated by metamorphic action, for if this had been the case we should have found only small remnants of the formations next succeeding them in age, and these would always have existed in a partially metamorphosed condition. But the descriptions which we possess of the Silurian deposits over immense territories in Russia and in North America, do not support the view, that the older a formation is, the more invariably it has suffered extreme denudation and metamorphism.

The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained.To show that it may hereafter receive some explanation, I will give the following hypothesis. From the nature of the organic remains which do not appear to have inhabited profound depths, in the several formations of Europe and of the United States; and from the amount of sediment, miles in thickness, of which the formations are composed, we may infer that from first to last large islands or tracts of land, whence the sediment was derived, occurred in the neighbourhood of the now existing continents of Europe and North America. The same view has since been maintained by Agassiz and others. But we do not know what was the state of things in the intervals between the several successive formations; whether Europe and the United States during these intervals existed as dry land, or as a submarine surface near land, on which sediment was not deposited, or as the bed on an open and unfathomable sea. - Origin of Species, 6th Ed. John Murray, 1872, Chapter 10, pp. 286-288.

Darwin is concerned about the lack of fossils before the Cambrian, and seeks to explain it in terms of the wearing away of the earlier strata. He notes here (sixth edition, 1872) that he had said in 1859 (first edition) that fossils would be found in earlier strata, and they eventually were. However, Darwin was probably mislead about the Eozoon formations, as they are not currently considered a real fossil but a metamorphic feature formed from the segregation of minerals in marble through the influence of great heat and pressure.

Tectonic subduction, something that Darwin could not known of, has destroyed some of the relevant material but mostly he was right. The older the sediment, the greater the chance that it has either eroded away or been metamorphosed to an extent that fossils are destroyed. Even so, we have multicellular fossils now back to the Ediacaran (circa 580 million years before the present) and single cell fossils arguably back to 3.75 billion years. The valid argument no longer has any purchase, and Darwin has been vindicated.

Citing it out of the specific context suggests Darwin thought there were a lot of things he could not explain using evolution, and that he knew it was false. This is extraordinarily bad quote mining.

 

[Hollie]

What if you believed in a scientific principle....and became aware that it is only supported with lies and fabrications.
Would you continue to believe it?
It is....and you do. I'll prove it in this thread.



1.It would be amusing if it weren’t so tragic: the lies that have been perpetrated in government school. Like this...

“Evolution is a fact.” Science Believers

And this…

“Evolution [Darwin’s Theory] is a fact and is the basis of all of biology. The theory of evolution is the most robust, well supported scientific theory in the history of mankind.” The Pretense Called Evolution




2. The ’proof’ offered by a number of those fooled is the fossil record, and the mechanism of mutations, both of which have been proven false. Proof can be found here:

The Pretense Called Evolution

and

The Biology Term For History

Both scrupulously documented and supported.



3. The reason this thread should be in Politics, not Science, is because Darwin’s plan, colloquially referred to as evolution, is that it, like the hallmark of politics, is based on lies.
In fact, that alone should make every person of integrity furious! And curious….’why would lies be necessary whether the theory is true or not?’ What makes advancing it so important?



4. One example is this, from the textbook currently used in NYC high schools, and probably throughout the nation:

“By examining fossils from sequential layers of rock, one could view how a species had changed and produced different species over time.” Kenneth R. Miller and Joseph S. Levine, Prentice Hall Biology (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, 2002), 382.

The actual fossil record shows the opposite of Darwin’s beliefs: " A few of the gaps (which are systematic in the fossil record) they claim to fill, but there’s another deposit in the region that throws the whole evolutionary story into disrepute: the Chengyiang bed in southern China. Here, the Cambrian Explosion has been documented in fine detail; all the major animal phyla appear in the early Cambrian without precursors."
Chinese Fossil Beds Astound Paleontologists (http://www.nature.com/index.html?file=/nature/journal/v421/n6925/full/nature01420_fs.html)

Entirely new lines simply materialize without the myriad failed changes that Darwin predicted.


And, why is it acceptable, or necessary, to lie to make the point?
But there is an even greater fabrication used to advance Darwinian beliefs....you learned it....and believed it….I’ll get to it…

Chinese Fossil Beds Astound Paleontologists

www.freerepublic.com

The Cambrian Period

ucmp.berkeley.edu

Below is the rest of the story. The takeaway, never ever trust PC.

When you are as dumb as you are, you post things like the above.

The Cambrium Period proves Darwin WRONG!!!


And he admitted it, you moron.

"THE ABRUPT manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations, has been urged by several palæontologists—for instance, by Agassiz, Pictet, and Sedgwick—as a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species. If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution through natural selection." Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.302


“Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms.”ch.6


. To the question why we do not find records of these vast primordial periods, I can give no satisfactory answer.”
Darwin, "On The Origin of Speices," chapter nine

“The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained.”



Chinese paleontologist J.Y. Chen excavated a new discovery of Cambrian fossils in southern China, he brought to light an even greater variety of body plans from an even older layer of Cambrian rock than those of Burgess! And the Chinese fossils established that the Cambrian animals appeared even more explosively than previously imagined!!! " A few of the gaps (which are systematic in the fossil record) they claim to fill, but there’s another deposit in the region that throws the whole evolutionary story into disrepute: the Chengyiang bed in southern China. Here, the Cambrian Explosion has been documented in fine detail; all the major animal phyla appear in the early Cambrian without precursors." Chinese Fossil Beds Astound Paleontologists (http://www.nature.com/index.html?file=/nature/journal/v421/n6925/full/nature01420_fs.html)


There are the folks who know, and the folks who don’t know, but you belong to the third group: the ones who don’t know, and don’t know they don’t know.
A true imbecile.

Here we see the dishonest religionists tactic of selectively editing a “quote” in order to try and represent the author's intent as something else.

Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms.”ch.6

Here is the fuller context:
These difficulties and objections may be classed under the following heads:-Firstly, why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?

On the absence or rarity of transitional varieties. As natural selection acts solely by the preservation of profitable modifications, each new form will tend in a fully-stocked country to take the place of, and finally to exterminate, its own less improved parent or other less-favoured forms with which it comes into competition. Thus extinction and natural selection will, as we have seen, go hand in hand. Hence, if we look at each species as descended from some other unknown form, both the parent and all the transitional varieties will generally have been exterminated by the very process of formation and perfection of the new form.

 

[abu afak]

`

`

 

[abu afak]

Hurry up now......get that proof!!!

Chop chop!!!!

And that's what confirms your Dishonesty.
You can Never Prove god, even much worse, never even show Hard EVIDENCE of it.
Evolution OTOH, has Overwhelming evidence.
I suppose that's why you Never put up/Admit YOUR PHONY BELIEF in Biblical Literalism/YEC.

You can never defend, even admit your BS belief in Haysoos!
Because you cannot, and you know it.

Even in the unlikely event there's a god, at least 75% of believers are wrong about which one.
But of course, they're all made up, including 7/11 Adventism.

Politic Sheik, LYING/FRAUD-for-laughable-Biblical-Literalism. (she won't admit)


`

 

[james bond]

Humans are still evolving – and scientists don't know why

There is no evolutionary genetics nor beneficial mutations. Another BS article.

Does religionism always inspire ignorance?


Claim CB101:
Most mutations are harmful, so the overall effect of mutations is harmful.

CB101: Most mutations harmful?

Source:
Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 55-57.
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, pg. 100.

Response:

1. Most mutations are neutral. Nachman and Crowell estimate around 3 deleterious mutations out of 175 per generation in humans (2000). Of those that have significant effect, most are harmful, but the fraction which are beneficial is higher than usually though. An experiment with E. coli found that about 1 in 150 newly arising mutations and 1 in 10 functional mutations are beneficial (Perfeito et al. 2007).
   
   The harmful mutations do not survive long, and the beneficial mutations survive much longer, so when you consider only surviving mutations, most are beneficial.
   
   
2. Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merely selection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following:
   • Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995).
   • Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977).
   • Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983).
   • A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002).
   • Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000).
   • In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997).
3. Whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on environment. A mutation that helps the organism in one circumstance could harm it in another. When the environment changes, variations that once were counteradaptive suddenly become favored. Since environments are constantly changing, variation helps populations survive, even if some of those variations do not do as well as others. When beneficial mutations occur in a changed environment, they generally sweep through the population rapidly (Elena et al. 1996).
   
   
4. High mutation rates are advantageous in some environments. Hypermutable strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa are found more commonly in the lungs of cystic fibrosis patients, where antibiotics and other stresses increase selection pressure and variability, than in patients without cystic fibrosis (Oliver et al. 2000).
   
   
5. Note that the existence of any beneficial mutations is a falsification of the young-earth creationism model (Morris 1985, 13).

Another copy and paste job that you've done before. I asked you to explain it in your own words back then, but you couldn't do it. Can you do it now?

Generally speaking, evolutionists are confused over mutations and information. The evolutionist claims through natural selection the mutant form gradually, over many generations, takes over the population. Yet, such a process has never been shown, neither theoretically nor observationally, to lead to the addition of any new information in the genome.

Another failure on your part Hollie.

 

[james bond]

Geez, you have a super low threshold for "proof".

You farkin' idiot. How many times do I have to tell you there are no "proofs" in science. It's best theory you stupid POS .

We all see different types of living things every day and it was created by God. That is the only way it can happen. We can observe the universe, Earth, and everything in it and it was created by God in seven days. There is no other way. Evolution claims there is, but there is no evidence of big bang nor abiogenesis. The fine tuning facts prevent abiogenesis. Dr. Louis Pasteur's experiment showed only life begats life and God created life. That makes the life spirit supernatural. Ours will live forever. Mine in heaven. Yours in the other place as we've discussed before.

 

[james bond]

Indeed they are. The Holy Ghost is not a common representative of persons on earth, neither is any God. Both are represented in the Bible.

You are terribly confused. The Holy Spirit is part of the Trinity, i.e. one God. They are not space aliens. Who lives in the middle heavens, i.e. in outer space just above our atmosphere (lower space).

You’d have us believe there is a god of the entire universe of billions of objects yet ours and man is the only species he’s primarily concerned with, and only when he is naked and can tell what sex “he” is. How special are these “ aliens ?” And Satan(s) ? He’s/she is alien unless you think they are led by OAC.

Haha. What?

 

[james bond]

So, your god came from Mars, as was it the Branch Davidians, or the Mormans It’s hard tell which strange version of Christianity you believe in. They all believe in stupid stuff.

Lol. Atheism has led you to looney tunes land. It sounds like you're talking about your family of Branch Davidians, Mormans (sic), and those that believe in stupid shit because they have feces for brains like you and your relatives.

 

[james bond]

Holy Harun Yahya but you're a dishonest fraud

Haha. She called you a moron.

 

[percysunshine]

Poly water and cold fusion.

 

[Taz]

Geez, you have a super low threshold for "proof".

You farkin' idiot. How many times do I have to tell you there are no "proofs" in science. It's best theory you stupid POS .

We all see different types of living things every day and it was created by God. That is the only way it can happen. We can observe the universe, Earth, and everything in it and it was created by God in seven days. There is no other way. Evolution claims there is, but there is no evidence of big bang nor abiogenesis. The fine tuning facts prevent abiogenesis. Dr. Louis Pasteur's experiment showed only life begats life and God created life. That makes the life spirit supernatural. Ours will live forever. Mine in heaven. Yours in the other place as we've discussed before.

Wow, that's a lot of fartsmoke in one post, even for you! What proof do you have that everything was made by an invisible being in 7 days? And do you have a link to that Pasteur experiment that shows that god created life? And proof of hell please. I'll wait.

 

[Hollie]

Humans are still evolving – and scientists don't know why

There is no evolutionary genetics nor beneficial mutations. Another BS article.

Does religionism always inspire ignorance?


Claim CB101:
Most mutations are harmful, so the overall effect of mutations is harmful.

CB101: Most mutations harmful?

Source:
Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 55-57.
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, pg. 100.

Response:

1. Most mutations are neutral. Nachman and Crowell estimate around 3 deleterious mutations out of 175 per generation in humans (2000). Of those that have significant effect, most are harmful, but the fraction which are beneficial is higher than usually though. An experiment with E. coli found that about 1 in 150 newly arising mutations and 1 in 10 functional mutations are beneficial (Perfeito et al. 2007).
   
   The harmful mutations do not survive long, and the beneficial mutations survive much longer, so when you consider only surviving mutations, most are beneficial.
   
   
2. Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merely selection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following:
   • Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995).
   • Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977).
   • Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983).
   • A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002).
   • Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000).
   • In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997).
3. Whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on environment. A mutation that helps the organism in one circumstance could harm it in another. When the environment changes, variations that once were counteradaptive suddenly become favored. Since environments are constantly changing, variation helps populations survive, even if some of those variations do not do as well as others. When beneficial mutations occur in a changed environment, they generally sweep through the population rapidly (Elena et al. 1996).
   
   
4. High mutation rates are advantageous in some environments. Hypermutable strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa are found more commonly in the lungs of cystic fibrosis patients, where antibiotics and other stresses increase selection pressure and variability, than in patients without cystic fibrosis (Oliver et al. 2000).
   
   
5. Note that the existence of any beneficial mutations is a falsification of the young-earth creationism model (Morris 1985, 13).

Another copy and paste job that you've done before. I asked you to explain it in your own words back then, but you couldn't do it. Can you do it now?

Generally speaking, evolutionists are confused over mutations and information. The evolutionist claims through natural selection the mutant form gradually, over many generations, takes over the population. Yet, such a process has never been shown, neither theoretically nor observationally, to lead to the addition of any new information in the genome.

Another failure on your part Hollie.

More of your tirades. Your lack of study in the science fields leaves you at a disadvantage.

The process of evolution has been observed so your claim otherwise is just more denial that plagues the hyoer-religious.

 

[Hollie]

Holy Harun Yahya but you're a dishonest fraud

Haha. She called you a moron.

Haha that's the best religious extremists can offer.

 

[Dagosa]

So, your god came from Mars, as was it the Branch Davidians, or the Mormans It’s hard tell which strange version of Christianity you believe in. They all believe in stupid stuff.

Lol. Atheism has led you to looney tunes land. It sounds like you're talking about your family of Branch Davidians, Mormans (sic), and those that believe in stupid shit because they have feces for brains like you and your relatives.

Branch davidians, Mormons are not from my clan. They’re all true believers in Christianity. Own it.

 

[Dagosa]

You farkin' idiot. How many times do I have to tell you there are no "proofs" in science. It's best theory you

Ah. The true Christian who is commanded to life a Christ like existence in harmony with his brethren, compassion and no ill will.
“Farkin idiot?” Is that an example of true Christianity ? Sure as fk ain’t you.

 

[Dagosa]

So, your god came from Mars, as was it the Branch Davidians, or the Mormans It’s hard tell which strange version of Christianity you believe in. They all believe in stupid stuff.

Lol. Atheism has led you to looney tunes land. It sounds like you're talking about your family of Branch Davidians, Mormans (sic), and those that believe in stupid shit because they have feces for brains like you and your relatives.

You’re no Christian with language and posts like that . You’re a fraud hanging on to ignorance because somehow, you slept in the back row during bio classes.

 

[ChemEngineer]

You farkin' idiot (Taz). How many times do I have to tell you there are no "proofs" in science. It's best theory you stupid POS.

But James, he's cool. Check the sunglasses, flowing hair and condescending look at you. Chicks want him, bad..... [Snork, snork] Five to on he's either single or divorced.

"Almost nothing is known for certain except in pure mathematics." - Carl Sagan, whose books I critiqued and sent to his publisher. They forwarded them to Carl who replied to me by letter, ignoring his errors, and asking me to buy his newest book. I sold his letter on eBay for $125. Agnostic Carl is a believer now you betcha. His memorial service was held at St. John the Divine Cathedral in New York City.

 

[james bond]

Holy Harun Yahya but you're a dishonest fraud

Haha. She called you a moron.

Haha that's the best religious extremists can offer.

I still thought it was hilarious. You make a great comedy duo. She's the smart comedy person while you're the straight woman.

 

[Hollie]

Holy Harun Yahya but you're a dishonest fraud

Haha. She called you a moron.

Haha that's the best religious extremists can offer.

I still thought it was hilarious. You make a great comedy duo. She's the smart comedy person while you're the straight woman.

Haha, but you’re easily amused.

 

[Hollie]

You farkin' idiot (Taz). How many times do I have to tell you there are no "proofs" in science. It's best theory you stupid POS.

But James, he's cool. Check the sunglasses, flowing hair and condescending look at you. Chicks want him, bad..... [Snork, snork] Five to on he's either single or divorced.

"Almost nothing is known for certain except in pure mathematics." - Carl Sagan, whose books I critiqued and sent to his publisher. They forwarded them to Carl who replied to me by letter, ignoring his errors, and asking me to buy his newest book. I sold his letter on eBay for $125. Agnostic Carl is a believer now you betcha. His memorial service was held at St. John the Divine Cathedral in New York City.

Ain’t it great that posting on an anonymous message board means you can be a hero in your own mind, you betcha’.