IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New God-Man\ufffd explains finally.. how it works
at [link|http://www.salon.com/comics/boll/2005/12/08/boll/index1.html| Salon]
Scripture illustrated by Tom the Dancing Bug - with a 25 Karat gold-plated flagellum.



I'd buy it. But would the Pope bid higher?

New I like the non sequitor version better
cant find the cartoon but involves a superior being adjusting pants then lighting smoke discarding match into outhouse.
thanx,
bill
"the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli

Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
     If you think being anti-OOP is controversial.... - (tablizer) - (113)
         well that pretty much sinks ID :-) - (boxley) - (100)
             No, it is not a "soft" science - (ben_tilly) - (74)
                 it is a philosophy, noted soft science much like psychology - (boxley) - (73)
                     how about theology. -NT - (bepatient) - (1)
                         subscience of philosophy -NT - (boxley)
                     No, it isn't. - (pwhysall) - (20)
                         Is sociology a science? -NT - (bepatient) - (2)
                             In places, yes. - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                 In part it is the same methodology - (bepatient)
                         point out differences between the examples - (boxley) - (16)
                             ID starts with a creator. - (pwhysall) - (15)
                                 Not really - (bepatient) - (14)
                                     And how is that not creationism? - (pwhysall) - (13)
                                         No. Well, sorta. - (drewk) - (4)
                                             How is a designer not a creator? -NT - (pwhysall) - (2)
                                                 If the universe designed itself in a fit of recursion -NT - (ChrisR)
                                                 That's what ID people say, and why I didn't say it - (drewk)
                                             Re: No. Well, sorta. - (danreck)
                                         Minor difference - (bepatient) - (7)
                                             Same difference - (Silverlock) - (6)
                                                 No again - (bepatient) - (5)
                                                     No again - (ben_tilly) - (4)
                                                         Sturgeon? -NT - (jake123)
                                                         (Could be fun - with chromosomes.) -NT - (Ashton)
                                                         If there is significance to the variable names, then - (jbrabeck) - (1)
                                                             It's fun seeing people guess but... - (ben_tilly)
                     I feel that the other examples are not sciences either - (ben_tilly) - (48)
                         Agreed, social science might be a better descriptive - (boxley) - (47)
                             You are right that those are missing... - (ben_tilly) - (46)
                                 Not interested enough to read the literature :-) - (boxley) - (45)
                                     Thats the issue - (bepatient) - (44)
                                         Can ID be experimentally disproven? - (imric) - (43)
                                             disagree - (boxley) - (31)
                                                 Don't think so. - (imric) - (30)
                                                     if you can predict results from the patterns then - (boxley) - (29)
                                                         Nope. That's just genetics. ID is not genetics. - (imric) - (28)
                                                             Q for ID-ers: How I is the D of, say, flightless birds? -NT - (Meerkat) - (27)
                                                                 I always use hemroids. - (Andrew Grygus)
                                                                 gotta have something easy to catch and consume - (boxley)
                                                                 Intelligent Design is a dead give away... - (ChrisR) - (2)
                                                                     Don't forget the other moral of the example you are quoting - (ben_tilly) - (1)
                                                                         Or even - - (Ashton)
                                                                 HD - Halfwit Design - (tablizer) - (21)
                                                                     ID is supernatural by definition - (pwhysall) - (20)
                                                                         That's just a fortunate side effect. -NT - (drewk) - (6)
                                                                             Not it's not. - (jake123) - (5)
                                                                                 I see I need to expand my Ministry. - (pwhysall) - (4)
                                                                                     I beleive he did, parts stamped made in mexico -NT - (boxley) - (2)
                                                                                         That would be where every third guy is named Jesus? - (hnick)
                                                                                         Philistine. -NT - (pwhysall)
                                                                                     Damn! You mean Janis Joplin was RIGHT?!? -NT - (jb4)
                                                                         Creator need not be supernatural. May be ultra-tech aliens. -NT - (warmachine) - (11)
                                                                             And they were 'designed' to produce us, of course... -NT - (imric) - (10)
                                                                                 ID makes no assertian of the designer, designed or not. - (warmachine) - (9)
                                                                                     Except it's basic tenet . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (1)
                                                                                         That's an extrapolation of ID itself, not a basic tenet. - (warmachine)
                                                                                     Here's you task for today, grasshopper: - (jb4) - (6)
                                                                                         You forgot: bring a bodyguard - - (Ashton) - (5)
                                                                                             What does the Prince of Peace have to do with ID? - (jb4) - (4)
                                                                                                 Nothing at all - we're talking GOD here . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (3)
                                                                                                     Heard a lengthy discussion re Yahweh - - (Ashton) - (2)
                                                                                                         look it doesnt apply to you gentiles, its a realestate - (boxley) - (1)
                                                                                                             DPRLCI (new thread) - (Another Scott)
                                                                         Nothing wrong with a creator - (hnick)
                                             Post of the Week (and it's only Tuesday...)! - (jb4)
                                             Falsifiable, Trueifiable - (tablizer) - (9)
                                                 Patterns... Pattern institute? - (imric) - (8)
                                                     fairies exist, saw one once - (boxley) - (7)
                                                         heh, knew where that was going -NT - (bepatient)
                                                         So the teacher asks the kid - (hnick)
                                                         They wear boots - ya gotta believe... -NT - (imric) - (3)
                                                             I saw it I saw it with my own two eyes -NT - (jake123) - (1)
                                                                 Well all right now! -NT - (imric)
                                                             And around here they ride Harleys. -NT - (Andrew Grygus)
                                                         Me too...I watch Bravo.... -NT - (jb4)
                     What's in a name? - (ChrisR)
             Google 'ontological proof of god' for some pithy links - (Ashton) - (4)
                 see my answer to Ben, -NT - (boxley) - (3)
                     Unsatisfying, just word/def'n pandering. - (Ashton) - (2)
                         look, if some mook wants to look at dna - (boxley) - (1)
                             Quite right-enough - (Ashton)
             Sep. of church/state laws don't govern philosophy - (tablizer) - (19)
                 It's FRAUD if you call it science instead of philosophy. -NT - (imric) - (18)
                     then psychology is fraud -NT - (boxley) - (17)
                         This is news? -NT - (ben_tilly)
                         Soft science. - (imric)
                         That would be "Psychology is FREUD" - (imqwerky) - (14)
                             accuse me? - (boxley) - (12)
                                 No, he didn't - (Ashton)
                                 I'm still not getting the connection... - (pwhysall) - (9)
                                     Negative. - (imric) - (8)
                                         OK... - (pwhysall) - (7)
                                             OT branch - (imric) - (5)
                                                 Damn Scientologists - (pwhysall) - (4)
                                                     ROFL! -NT - (imric)
                                                     Anyone catch "Last Laugh 2005" over the weekend? - (drewk) - (2)
                                                         Yep. - (bepatient) - (1)
                                                             Ronnie, walking around, would scare me too... - (hnick)
                                             ICLRPD (new thread) - (ben_tilly)
                                 Not accusing you. - (imqwerky)
                             More like: Freud (pronounced: "fraud") - (jb4)
         Just saying "I think it's science"... - (pwhysall) - (2)
             ID ain't Physics. It's Meta-Physics. - (ChrisR) - (1)
                 \ufffdPrecisam\ufffdnte! - and before you start in that field - (Ashton)
         intelligent design: the agenda - (rcareaga) - (5)
             And around and around.. - (Ashton)
             300 years after the Enlightenment and we still get this. -NT - (warmachine)
             This crap pisses me off - (Silverlock) - (2)
                 religion is an opiate for the sociopaths? probably -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                     Not just sociopaths, everybody ;0) - (mmoffitt)
         I'm not persuaded. 47 kB .img - (Another Scott)
         God-Man\ufffd explains finally.. how it works - (Ashton) - (1)
             I like the non sequitor version better - (boxley)

Go into the light!
102 ms