MisterTrilby's Comments
That's... beautiful.
*wipes away a tear*
*wipes away a tear*
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Awww! He looks like a real-life Clanger!
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
"Destroyed" is a little sensationalist. Actual collisions between individual stars will be very few in number. The two galaxies will merge to form a new one, but neither will be "destroyed". As for gods, I don't think that the laws of physics will be suspended for our little galaxy, when galactic mergers are happening all over the universe. Hopefully, we'll have evolved beyond the need for gods by then anyway.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
There is no science in ID whatsoever. It's just another word for creationism, based on logical fallacy. It makes claims that are not testable and not provable and more importantly not disprovable. By contrast, Darwinist scientists would abandon evolution if evidence against it were to crop up - fragments of a homo erectus fossil in the belly of a tyrannosaurus rex would do it - but no evidence of this kind has been found so far.
What amazes me is that the ID people seem so proud of having these superstitious beliefs. And the modern culture of "freedom of religion" tolerance means the rest of us are expected to respect their right to have this belief, as if religion were exempt from criticism. A father prevents his child from attending school, and he goes to prison. If he were to cite religion as the reason, we'd be expected to understand and respect his wishes. Likewise, if someone were to say "I believe that there is a giant chocolate teapot orbiting Jupiter", I would not be reasonably expected to respect this belief. Someone says "I believe the world was created 6000 years ago by an invisible, psychic being" should I be expected to respect that? No. I'ts barmy.
What amazes me is that the ID people seem so proud of having these superstitious beliefs. And the modern culture of "freedom of religion" tolerance means the rest of us are expected to respect their right to have this belief, as if religion were exempt from criticism. A father prevents his child from attending school, and he goes to prison. If he were to cite religion as the reason, we'd be expected to understand and respect his wishes. Likewise, if someone were to say "I believe that there is a giant chocolate teapot orbiting Jupiter", I would not be reasonably expected to respect this belief. Someone says "I believe the world was created 6000 years ago by an invisible, psychic being" should I be expected to respect that? No. I'ts barmy.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
They have similar urinals installed in London already. I think they're a great idea, not least for the homeless who otherwise have no choice but to urinate on the street, as most public toilets in London charge for admission.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
This is great. When will people realise that just because science doesn't have all the answers, it doesn't mean that creationism is true?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
KEKEKEKEKEKEKE
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
You miserable people. This is lovely. Who doesn't love Elmo? And his friend Mr De Niro!
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Wow, these are brilliant. I've just bought one!
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
*awaits a flash version*
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
That's so cool. I want one.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Yay for Lyle's Golden Syrup. I could bathe in it, I really could.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Jay, don't patronise me: I live in London. I use the Tube regularly, unfortunately. I don't think I need to say any more.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Well, I guess if you're stupid enough to get into such a crowded train, you deserve everything you get.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Er, S. Bahl: "Communist attack on the environment"? Please, tell us you're joking.