"Species" is a somewhat arbitrary term, used to help categorize but hardly an ironclad line of demarkation.
And the "theory" proves it's veracity in that it can be used to predict thing like in Sushi's article, or in even things that have long since happened that are in the fossil record.
And it really doesn't have to get down to an "either - or" debate, but were it to:
"Noah's Ark" vs. an evolutionary explanation of the fossil record -
Ok. Mea culpa in turning what was (supposedly) a joke-only (?) thread into a debate biased one, but basically peeves me to no end when I see Creationists endeavoring to do a rather dishonest and fear driven end run around a science that has been getting more and more evidence to support it, and that for no better reason than that it questions/challenges what they believe from scripture (and often under the mistaken premise that such challenges threaten their spiritual salvation, which is often why the Creationist movement use a lot of said fear motivation to drum up support for their cause). Not only that, but they also endeavor to pose their beliefs as an actual science in order to wedge it into the classroom, and finally root out evolution instruction. (No, I don't believe they'll just stop at having the both of them taught in the classroom if they have it their way. I believe I know better than that, my once being a fundamentalist myself.)
So jokes like the one that started this thread I saw but subtle digs (and unfair ones at that) trying to portray the false dilemna of science vs. God (religion). I mean, look at the thread title, fer crying out loud. <_<
Also, let's not mistake 'proof' for 'belief'. A good number of you here believe in young earth creationism (via literal interpretation of the Bible). Nobody here is challenging your right to hold that belief. But a belief in itself does not make it proof. Evolution isn't *just* based on blind faith (Ron's claim notwithstanding, and LG rightly shows why), but is based on a growing mountain of evidence. That the evidence is growing, and not shrinking, ought to tell you something. If you were in court, and the amount against the defendant is growing, and not disappating, ... you can pretty much see where the verdict is going to head, _unless_ that evidence is shown to be wrong. That's called 'preponderance of the evidence'.
Also, the theory of evolution, while not total and complete in facts presented, is such that it can be (more and more) considered to be in the 'preponderance of the evidence' category. That's why that, even tho' its called a 'theory', the preponderance of the evidence puts it solidly on the side of fact, rather than on guesswork.
Psalm 71 says "I still won't debate with the ones who don't believe 'In the beginnig God'. That would be fruitless." Yeah, and it would also be irrelevent, as evolution does nothing to determine whether or not God started things 'in the beginning' (as there are many religiously faithful Christians who believe that evolution was how 'God in the beginning' started things). Evolution only deals with the mechanics of the physical how, and only challenges the usage of biblical verses to suggest a 'young earth' theory as understood by biblical literalists. And apparently this challenge is taken by many of these literalists to be equal to 'Science vs. God'. Which inspires the often digs at science that I apparently mistook to interpret in the beginning of this thread.
Let's not be adversaries about this. There are plenty of things to discuss without getting our collective noses out of joint because there is nothing we can physically do about either "side" of the "argument"
It depends on what you want to call "crossover".
I think Piper was talking about changes in organisms in general - "evolution". I understand where she might get this from because in PFAL it was stated "you can have all the evolution you want" between the first 2 verses of Genesis.
"Species" is a somewhat arbitrary term, used to help categorize but hardly an ironclad line of demarcation.
"Species" is not an arbitrary term at all. The line between them is reproduction. Two organisms are of the same species if they can reproduce together AND have fertile offspring. Horses and Donkeys are separate species, therefore. They can breed together, but the result is a Mule and they are sterile.
And the "theory" proves it's veracity in that it can be used to predict thing like in Sushi's article, or in even things that have long since happened that are in the fossil record.
This is only partly true. But those of us who are "ordinary" citizens see it being true more than not. Theories begin when somebody gets an idea about how some things are related.
A brief example:
I notice that bees can be trained to a bowl of sugar water if I put it in a certain place at a certain time of day. Pretty soon they will be there waiting for me to come with the bowl. Then somebody says....if I move the bowl, will they find it? So they do an experiment and find, yes indeed, it doesn't take long, but they do find it.
Then somebody says....I wonder how they see it, I wonder if they see color, after all all the flowers have colors so I'll put the sugar water on some colored backgrounds and find out. And yes, bees can be trained to respond to color. So once trained to red, a bunch of bees were unleashed on various colors and they remembered the red! Nobody started out thinking up the theory that bees can see color.
BTW - bees don't see color the way we do....they see various shades of grey, and will land on a black square just as often as a red one. However they do respond to ultraviolet light....and that's something we can't see with out naked eyes....hmmmm.
Most theories get modified over time and a great many are accepted as "Truth" because there is no way to really test them in all conditions and circumstances. or, a means exists but it is impractical or unethical to do the experiment.
...sorry for rambling....but you guys know by now how this stuff grabs me
But the reason that anything is "funny" is that there is an element of perceived truth in it to the teller.
For example, racists jokes are funny to racists because they believe the stupid things that are said about people of other races.
The joke is funny to creationists because many of them believe that science is indeed "versus" God, that scientists don't believe that you need God, yada yada yada.
Therefore, IMNSHO, the responses by Garth & others are entirely appropriate.
And another thing...
Few scientists claim that any one theory is the absolute final word on anything, but that new information may necessitate a change in the theory.
Krys, You are right-- we don't need to be adversaries about it! With that in mind, I will try to be careful in what I write here--I don't mean to offend anyone with my own personal belief--nor do I want to try to "convert" them!
Oak, I agree with most of your post. The joke WAS funny to me because of the "element of perceived truth in it to the teller"--and to me, as I am a creationist believer. When you said the responses by Garth and others are appropriate, at first I totally disagreed. But then I remembered not everybody "does as I do". If I see a title of a thread that I am not going to agree with, many times I just don't even go there--I hate confrontation and hate arguing. So my first response is "What-inna-heck did they (Garth, et al) come in and read this thread for? And why-inna-heck are they posting HERE?" :blink:
But after reading Garth's post, I am trying to be fair here. Just cuz I don't like debate, doesn't mean others don't! Garth, you said,
"So jokes like the one that started this thread I saw but subtle digs (and unfair ones at that) trying to portray the false dilemna of science vs. God (religion). I mean, look at the thread title, fer crying out loud."
Okay, I get it, because when you make biting comments about fundamentalists/evangelicals, I get offended, also. It feels like you are ridiculing me and trying to convert me to your way of thinking. (even when your post isn't directed at Psalm 71 one) And I can't do it-- that would be to deny my Lord Jesus. It's my free choice to believe that way.
(your quote, "I mean, we want to keep thinking for ourselves after learning our lesson as regards to TWI, don't we?" Yes, I agree, and my thinking for myself is to accept the Bible as truth by my "Blind faith" as you call it).
"Upholding the Authority of the Bible from the Very First Verse"
When that kind of standard is set, and that no findings shall question/cross it, whatsoever, contrary or otherwise, all objectivity and honest scrutiny and analysis is lost. ... Flushed down the tubes, no matter what kind of trappings of professionalism and academics surrounds it.
I can't agree with this. THis is where I am coming from. Nor can I agree with you that creationists are dishonest with science, etc., and it's offensive to me to read it. My beliefs, my opinion, or whatever. We don't agree.
But your whole explanation, in post 29, DOES help me see where you are coming from, whether I agree with you or not, so I offer my own apologies for getting my dander up against you.
I don't like to argue, I don't do well at it, I've possibly not even made myself clear, maybe I'll just throw pies at you!
Ron's right; if you didn't see the big bang or if you didn't see a one celled amoeba evolve into something else, then you believe it because of your faith. Call it whatever you want.
quote: Evolution has been observed both directly and indirectly.
Yeah, Darwin observed evolution within a genus and that crab article is a form of evolution, but you science idolators need to prove to me that a minkey evolved into a man and that God did not create the heaven and the earth. Good luck.
Like I said I ain't no scientist...but I know that Krys is. :)
I read the article George but it still doesn't explain the leap from a wing to an arm.
My usage of "crossover speices" is not from the lectures I've heard. It is my words from my limited scientific appalachain vocabulary. :) The lectures are presented by passionate evoluntionists professors....one from Duke and the other Cornell? And they had fascinating information and presentations regarding the primodial soup.
Krys..I didn't know piffle stated that evolution could be in the first heaven and earth. Duh on me. I thought I had had an "orginal" thought with that. I guess at the time I thunk it, it had been so long from piffle that I'd forgotten. Funny thing is...when I shared that thought with Corps they responded that would not have been the case...that God doesn't think that way. Oh well!!!!
I guess if it came to an "either - or", I'd choose evolution (from one kind/species/whatever into another) in the first earth........but evolution only within species/kind/whatever in the 2nd earth. I have no prob with adaptation within the same kind. I guess time will tell!!!! Thank ee.
(I do look foward to "evolving" into my new bod. :) )
Ahhhh DAMN! ... Who told him about my golden bust of Einstein?? I mean, I had no idea that Johniam is so allergic to the incense that I burn unto good ol' Albert.
And I was about ready to mail my tax exempt form to the IRS for my science worship too.
Is there anything about evolution that necessarily precludes a god at the start? Is there anything about believing in a god that eliminates the possibility of evolution? I think that the answer is "no" to both.
Unless one believes in a 100% literal interpretation of the bible, why is evolution any less plausible than a from-thin-air creation as the process by which the world and all that is it in was created? Most of us, as PFAL grads, learned about figures of speech; can we say with any certainty that we know which parts of the bible are figurative and which are literal?
No science can deny the truth of the REAL creation...
On the first day, God created the dog and said:
"Sit all day by the door of your house and bark at anyone who comes in or walks past. For this, I will give you a life span of twenty years."
The dog said: "That's a long time to be barking. How about only ten years and I'll give you back the other ten?"
So God agreed.
On the second day, God created the monkey and said: "Entertain people, do tricks, and make them laugh. For this, I'll give you a twenty-year life span."
The monkey said: "Monkey tricks for twenty years? That's a pretty long time to perform. How about I give you back ten like the dog did?"
And God agreed.
On the third day, God created the cow and said: "You must go into the field with the farmer all day long and suffer under the sun, have calves, and give milk to support the farmer's family. For this, I will give you a life span of sixty years."
The cow said: "That's kind of a tough life you want me to live for sixty years. How about twenty and I'll give back the other forty?"
And God agreed again.
On the fourth day, God created man and said: "Eat, sleep, play, marry and enjoy your life. For this, I'll give you twenty years."
But man said: "Only twenty years? Could you possibly give me my twenty, the forty the cow gave back, the ten the monkey gave back, and the ten the dog gave back; that makes eighty, okay?"
"Okay," said God, "You asked for it."
So that is why the first twenty years we eat, sleep, play and enjoy ourselves. For the next forty years we slave in the sun to support our family. For the next ten years, we do monkey tricks to entertain the grandchildren. And for the last ten years, we sit on the front porch and bark at everyone.
Hey this molasses makes good cookies they are hard as a rock great for shooting at low flying pigs. clack ...clack... clack...There that should take care of that pesky pig. Hey look if it isn't a little piggy school room. CLANG...CLANG...CLANG, Hi kids my name is Mr. Feathers and I'll be your substitute teacher for the day. Well look it's recess time you guys go out and hide in the forest and when I'm done counting I'll come looking for ya....... Now run along......... Suckers!!
Why look someone removed all the glue off of this floor these desks slide too easy someone could get hurt. GLUG... GLUG...GLUG.....there a gallon of gorilla glue should do the trick those desks aren't going anywhere now. Now to spruce up the paint job lets see some purple, a little red and some nice black now I'll just spray it into this big fan and make a beautiful nice tie dye look for the walls. Now some nice plants to accent the look. first this truckload of dirt SPLAT..... and then a pound of kudzu seeds. a gallon of miracle grow. there all done.
Lets check out the books here "The mud is your friend" .....Boooor......ing "How to slop your way to the top"......So last year. "Food Fights for Dummy's" "The big bad wolf and the three little pig HO'S"..... :blink: :blink: hmmm I'll save that one fer later. Well these have to go, what kind of school is that pig running here? Here's a good book..... "Kids give all your money to the nice birds and your mom and dads too from their wallets." lets see....... here is another one "Whining, kicking and crying to get your way." and this one "Why can't Mr. fork and Ms. electric outlet be friends?" Hey all this work is making me hungry let's see what Psalmie has on the lunch menu.....Slop n corn :blink: No way I'll just fix this menu here MMMMM Pizza a little crust, some sauce a little birdseed...... there. Now I'll just change these heat settings on the computers and into the CD drive it goes. Type run program and it will be all ready when the kids get back. Well my work is done here.
OOOPS I almost forgot to water the new plants let me just pull this hose through the basement window and turn it on . There all the plants can get a nice drink............
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
5
4
11
5
Popular Days
Aug 22
21
Aug 23
13
Aug 21
12
Aug 24
4
Top Posters In This Topic
Psalm 71 one 5 posts
LG 4 posts
GarthP2000 11 posts
WhiteDove 5 posts
Popular Days
Aug 22 2006
21 posts
Aug 23 2006
13 posts
Aug 21 2006
12 posts
Aug 24 2006
4 posts
George Aar
Piper,
It depends on what you want to call "crossover".
"Species" is a somewhat arbitrary term, used to help categorize but hardly an ironclad line of demarkation.
And the "theory" proves it's veracity in that it can be used to predict thing like in Sushi's article, or in even things that have long since happened that are in the fossil record.
And it really doesn't have to get down to an "either - or" debate, but were it to:
"Noah's Ark" vs. an evolutionary explanation of the fossil record -
not a difficult choice for me...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Hey Pig I new I smelt trouble and here you are again, now look what you done.....
Hey if you can't take a joke then there is always pie (in the face of course) :blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Folks,
Ok. Mea culpa in turning what was (supposedly) a joke-only (?) thread into a debate biased one, but basically peeves me to no end when I see Creationists endeavoring to do a rather dishonest and fear driven end run around a science that has been getting more and more evidence to support it, and that for no better reason than that it questions/challenges what they believe from scripture (and often under the mistaken premise that such challenges threaten their spiritual salvation, which is often why the Creationist movement use a lot of said fear motivation to drum up support for their cause). Not only that, but they also endeavor to pose their beliefs as an actual science in order to wedge it into the classroom, and finally root out evolution instruction. (No, I don't believe they'll just stop at having the both of them taught in the classroom if they have it their way. I believe I know better than that, my once being a fundamentalist myself.)
So jokes like the one that started this thread I saw but subtle digs (and unfair ones at that) trying to portray the false dilemna of science vs. God (religion). I mean, look at the thread title, fer crying out loud. <_<
Also, let's not mistake 'proof' for 'belief'. A good number of you here believe in young earth creationism (via literal interpretation of the Bible). Nobody here is challenging your right to hold that belief. But a belief in itself does not make it proof. Evolution isn't *just* based on blind faith (Ron's claim notwithstanding, and LG rightly shows why), but is based on a growing mountain of evidence. That the evidence is growing, and not shrinking, ought to tell you something. If you were in court, and the amount against the defendant is growing, and not disappating, ... you can pretty much see where the verdict is going to head, _unless_ that evidence is shown to be wrong. That's called 'preponderance of the evidence'.
Also, the theory of evolution, while not total and complete in facts presented, is such that it can be (more and more) considered to be in the 'preponderance of the evidence' category. That's why that, even tho' its called a 'theory', the preponderance of the evidence puts it solidly on the side of fact, rather than on guesswork.
Psalm 71 says "I still won't debate with the ones who don't believe 'In the beginnig God'. That would be fruitless." Yeah, and it would also be irrelevent, as evolution does nothing to determine whether or not God started things 'in the beginning' (as there are many religiously faithful Christians who believe that evolution was how 'God in the beginning' started things). Evolution only deals with the mechanics of the physical how, and only challenges the usage of biblical verses to suggest a 'young earth' theory as understood by biblical literalists. And apparently this challenge is taken by many of these literalists to be equal to 'Science vs. God'. Which inspires the often digs at science that I apparently mistook to interpret in the beginning of this thread.
Hope that makes where I'm coming from more clear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
Let's not be adversaries about this. There are plenty of things to discuss without getting our collective noses out of joint because there is nothing we can physically do about either "side" of the "argument"
I think Piper was talking about changes in organisms in general - "evolution". I understand where she might get this from because in PFAL it was stated "you can have all the evolution you want" between the first 2 verses of Genesis."Species" is not an arbitrary term at all. The line between them is reproduction. Two organisms are of the same species if they can reproduce together AND have fertile offspring. Horses and Donkeys are separate species, therefore. They can breed together, but the result is a Mule and they are sterile.
This is only partly true. But those of us who are "ordinary" citizens see it being true more than not. Theories begin when somebody gets an idea about how some things are related.
A brief example:
I notice that bees can be trained to a bowl of sugar water if I put it in a certain place at a certain time of day. Pretty soon they will be there waiting for me to come with the bowl. Then somebody says....if I move the bowl, will they find it? So they do an experiment and find, yes indeed, it doesn't take long, but they do find it.
Then somebody says....I wonder how they see it, I wonder if they see color, after all all the flowers have colors so I'll put the sugar water on some colored backgrounds and find out. And yes, bees can be trained to respond to color. So once trained to red, a bunch of bees were unleashed on various colors and they remembered the red! Nobody started out thinking up the theory that bees can see color.
BTW - bees don't see color the way we do....they see various shades of grey, and will land on a black square just as often as a red one. However they do respond to ultraviolet light....and that's something we can't see with out naked eyes....hmmmm.
Most theories get modified over time and a great many are accepted as "Truth" because there is no way to really test them in all conditions and circumstances. or, a means exists but it is impractical or unethical to do the experiment.
...sorry for rambling....but you guys know by now how this stuff grabs me
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Okay, it's just a joke, I get it
But the reason that anything is "funny" is that there is an element of perceived truth in it to the teller.
For example, racists jokes are funny to racists because they believe the stupid things that are said about people of other races.
The joke is funny to creationists because many of them believe that science is indeed "versus" God, that scientists don't believe that you need God, yada yada yada.
Therefore, IMNSHO, the responses by Garth & others are entirely appropriate.
And another thing...
Few scientists claim that any one theory is the absolute final word on anything, but that new information may necessitate a change in the theory.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psalm 71 one
Krys, You are right-- we don't need to be adversaries about it! With that in mind, I will try to be careful in what I write here--I don't mean to offend anyone with my own personal belief--nor do I want to try to "convert" them!
Oak, I agree with most of your post. The joke WAS funny to me because of the "element of perceived truth in it to the teller"--and to me, as I am a creationist believer. When you said the responses by Garth and others are appropriate, at first I totally disagreed. But then I remembered not everybody "does as I do". If I see a title of a thread that I am not going to agree with, many times I just don't even go there--I hate confrontation and hate arguing. So my first response is "What-inna-heck did they (Garth, et al) come in and read this thread for? And why-inna-heck are they posting HERE?" :blink:
But after reading Garth's post, I am trying to be fair here. Just cuz I don't like debate, doesn't mean others don't! Garth, you said,
"So jokes like the one that started this thread I saw but subtle digs (and unfair ones at that) trying to portray the false dilemna of science vs. God (religion). I mean, look at the thread title, fer crying out loud."
Okay, I get it, because when you make biting comments about fundamentalists/evangelicals, I get offended, also. It feels like you are ridiculing me and trying to convert me to your way of thinking. (even when your post isn't directed at Psalm 71 one) And I can't do it-- that would be to deny my Lord Jesus. It's my free choice to believe that way.
(your quote, "I mean, we want to keep thinking for ourselves after learning our lesson as regards to TWI, don't we?" Yes, I agree, and my thinking for myself is to accept the Bible as truth by my "Blind faith" as you call it).
I can't agree with this. THis is where I am coming from. Nor can I agree with you that creationists are dishonest with science, etc., and it's offensive to me to read it. My beliefs, my opinion, or whatever. We don't agree.
But your whole explanation, in post 29, DOES help me see where you are coming from, whether I agree with you or not, so I offer my own apologies for getting my dander up against you.
I don't like to argue, I don't do well at it, I've possibly not even made myself clear, maybe I'll just throw pies at you!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sushi
My point in posting the article was, perhaps Ron didn't have all the facts at his disposal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Ha Ha Psalmie- this is from a pig that for 63 pages argued to convince us that she was really the thread killer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Psalmie doesn't argue, .... she 'discusses'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Ron's right; if you didn't see the big bang or if you didn't see a one celled amoeba evolve into something else, then you believe it because of your faith. Call it whatever you want.
quote: Evolution has been observed both directly and indirectly.
Yeah, Darwin observed evolution within a genus and that crab article is a form of evolution, but you science idolators need to prove to me that a minkey evolved into a man and that God did not create the heaven and the earth. Good luck.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
I Love Bagpipes
Thanks George and thanks Krys for clarifying.
Like I said I ain't no scientist...but I know that Krys is. :)
I read the article George but it still doesn't explain the leap from a wing to an arm.
My usage of "crossover speices" is not from the lectures I've heard. It is my words from my limited scientific appalachain vocabulary. :) The lectures are presented by passionate evoluntionists professors....one from Duke and the other Cornell? And they had fascinating information and presentations regarding the primodial soup.
Krys..I didn't know piffle stated that evolution could be in the first heaven and earth. Duh on me. I thought I had had an "orginal" thought with that. I guess at the time I thunk it, it had been so long from piffle that I'd forgotten.
Funny thing is...when I shared that thought with Corps they responded that would not have been the case...that God doesn't think that way. Oh well!!!!
I guess if it came to an "either - or", I'd choose evolution (from one kind/species/whatever into another) in the first earth........but evolution only within species/kind/whatever in the 2nd earth. I have no prob with adaptation within the same kind. I guess time will tell!!!! Thank ee.
(I do look foward to "evolving" into my new bod. :) )
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Ahhhh DAMN! ... Who told him about my golden bust of Einstein??
I mean, I had no idea that Johniam is so allergic to the incense that I burn unto good ol' Albert.
And I was about ready to mail my tax exempt form to the IRS for my science worship too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Is there anything about evolution that necessarily precludes a god at the start? Is there anything about believing in a god that eliminates the possibility of evolution? I think that the answer is "no" to both.
Unless one believes in a 100% literal interpretation of the bible, why is evolution any less plausible than a from-thin-air creation as the process by which the world and all that is it in was created? Most of us, as PFAL grads, learned about figures of speech; can we say with any certainty that we know which parts of the bible are figurative and which are literal?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psalm 71 one
SHUT UP! FEATHERS!!! SPLOOOT! (That was a one gallon container of molases fer the Birdbrain!)
SPLAT! Keylime pie hat fer Garth--I'll show ya "discuss"! Haha!
ahhhhh I feel better, back to my regularly scheduled programming. . . . bleep . . . bleeeep bleeep bleep bleep . . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
I guess we can now move this thread past the soap opera section to the FOOD FIGHT SECTION..........
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
And "Bluto", the 'science idolator' calmly proclaims, ...
FOOD FIGHT!!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
I only taught science, I am not a scientist....but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn last night.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
No science can deny the truth of the REAL creation...
On the first day, God created the dog and said:
"Sit all day by the door of your house and bark at anyone who comes in or walks past. For this, I will give you a life span of twenty years."
The dog said: "That's a long time to be barking. How about only ten years and I'll give you back the other ten?"
So God agreed.
On the second day, God created the monkey and said: "Entertain people, do tricks, and make them laugh. For this, I'll give you a twenty-year life span."
The monkey said: "Monkey tricks for twenty years? That's a pretty long time to perform. How about I give you back ten like the dog did?"
And God agreed.
On the third day, God created the cow and said: "You must go into the field with the farmer all day long and suffer under the sun, have calves, and give milk to support the farmer's family. For this, I will give you a life span of sixty years."
The cow said: "That's kind of a tough life you want me to live for sixty years. How about twenty and I'll give back the other forty?"
And God agreed again.
On the fourth day, God created man and said: "Eat, sleep, play, marry and enjoy your life. For this, I'll give you twenty years."
But man said: "Only twenty years? Could you possibly give me my twenty, the forty the cow gave back, the ten the monkey gave back, and the ten the dog gave back; that makes eighty, okay?"
"Okay," said God, "You asked for it."
So that is why the first twenty years we eat, sleep, play and enjoy ourselves. For the next forty years we slave in the sun to support our family. For the next ten years, we do monkey tricks to entertain the grandchildren. And for the last ten years, we sit on the front porch and bark at everyone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
... and all the scientists in the back pew rejoiceth, and sayeth,
"Amen!!"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Ah buhlieve brutha Ron, ah buhlieve!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Hey this molasses makes good cookies they are hard as a rock great for shooting at low flying pigs. clack ...clack... clack...There that should take care of that pesky pig. Hey look if it isn't a little piggy school room. CLANG...CLANG...CLANG, Hi kids my name is Mr. Feathers and I'll be your substitute teacher for the day. Well look it's recess time you guys go out and hide in the forest and when I'm done counting I'll come looking for ya....... Now run along......... Suckers!!
Why look someone removed all the glue off of this floor these desks slide too easy someone could get hurt. GLUG... GLUG...GLUG.....there a gallon of gorilla glue should do the trick those desks aren't going anywhere now. Now to spruce up the paint job lets see some purple, a little red and some nice black now I'll just spray it into this big fan and make a beautiful nice tie dye look for the walls. Now some nice plants to accent the look. first this truckload of dirt SPLAT..... and then a pound of kudzu seeds. a gallon of miracle grow. there all done.
Lets check out the books here "The mud is your friend" .....Boooor......ing "How to slop your way to the top"......So last year. "Food Fights for Dummy's"
"The big bad wolf and the three little pig HO'S"..... :blink: :blink: 
hmmm I'll save that one fer later. Well these have to go, what kind of school is that pig running here? Here's a good book..... "Kids give all your money to the nice birds and your mom and dads too from their wallets." lets see....... here is another one "Whining, kicking and crying to get your way." and this one "Why can't Mr. fork and Ms. electric outlet be friends?" Hey all this work is making me hungry let's see what Psalmie has on the lunch menu.....Slop n corn :blink: No way I'll just fix this menu here MMMMM Pizza a little crust, some sauce a little birdseed...... there. Now I'll just change these heat settings on the computers and into the CD drive it goes. Type run program and it will be all ready when the kids get back. Well my work is done here.
OOOPS I almost forgot to water the new plants let me just pull this hose through the basement window and turn it on . There all the plants can get a nice drink............
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
..... Yes boys and girls, this is what happens to folks who go without coffee for a whole day.
Waiter! Waiter! Could you please bring over a LARGE cup of coffee over here for Mr. Dove, please? He is in *dire* need of some NOW!
mmmmmmmm, ..... Now, isn't that a lot better?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
It might have been the bottle of Captain Morgan's Parrot Bay Rum......
But the coffee works for that too thanks.......
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.