The funny thing about science is:
(M)-adman
for review;
(2) if the reading on your detector is correct, then you have forgot to plug
it in;
(3) if several things can go wrong then they will do so all at the same
time;
(4) if nothing can go wrong with your experiment, something still will;
(5) left unto itself, your experiment will go from bad to worse; on the
other hand, if you pay attention to the experiment
then it will take three times longer to complete than you thought it would;
(6) Nature is both subtle and malicious (Murphy stole this one from Albert
Einstein);
(7) a straight line will never fit your data, and using a wiggly line will
result in the rejection by referees of the publication of work;
(8) if you make a great discovery today, you will find a major error in your
methods tomorrow (experienced experimentalists call this effect "here today,
gone tomorrow");
(9) in contrast to a radio, banging your apparatus when you are at peak
frustration will not fix it but permanently break it (for this reason, it is
important for experimentalists to remain calm at all times);
(10) when your experiment is just about to succeed, you will run out of
grant money.
--
A cup of coffee and some truth with:
·.¸Adman¸.·
^^^^^^^^^^^
snex
why do you suppose your computer works well enough to continue posting
this stupid shit to the world?
Mark VandeWettering
[ Idiocy snipped ]
Since you don't know anything about science or humor, perhaps you should
have just refrained from posting.
Mark
r norman
wrote:
When you copy verbatim from a source, it is usually considered proper
to cite that source
http://www.jupiterscientific.org/sciinfo/jokes/miscellaneousjokes.html
Otherwise it is called plagiarism and is considered unethical and
cheating. It will get you failed in a course and banned from
scientific publication in a submitted paper. Here on talk.origins, it
merely confirms what everyone already knows about your character,
honesty, and integrity.
Chris Krolczyk
> why do you suppose your computer works well enough to continue posting
> this stupid shit to the world?
Because people who post stupid shit like that don't think that
science produces technology. It's all fairies, pixie dust and
prosperity gospel televangelists to them, you see.
-Chris Krolczyk
John Stockwell
You are fed, clothed, and kept from freezing in the dark by
technology that is the outgrowth of the science you mock (but
don't understand).
-John
heekster
wrote:
>(1) if something can go wrong, it will do so just before your grant is up
Hey, look what I found. See science joke 2.
http://www.jupiterscientific.org/sciinfo/jokes/miscellaneousjokes.html
So, we see that not only are you an imbecile, but that you also
willfully plagiarize, right down to the parenthetical commentaries.
(M)-adman
Face it. You kooks do not have a sense of HUMOR
r norman
wrote:
We would if you ever produced something clever.
We in fact have a highly developed but rather specialized sense of
humor. What we do not have is much tolerance for complete and utter
stupidity. Ignorance we can deal with through education. Deliberate
unwillingness to learn or a complete and puzzling inability to
understand simple declarative sentences and logical development of
ideas is what bothers us. Not that I have any particular poster here
in mind, of course.
(M)-adman
yeah. You had a point?
(M)-adman
The jokes came from a very popular web site
Maybe you just lack humor
Mark Evans
> r norman wrote:
We just refrain from laughing at you because we are polite. As my
Grandma Evans used to say "T'aint nice to laugh at folks like that
poor boy."
Mark Evans
Boikat
> heekster wrote:
I guess that you are too stupid, or dishonest by nature, to understand
that plagerism is wrong?
Boikat
Boikat
> r norman wrote:
> > wrote:
>
> >> r norman wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:12:30 -0500, "\(M\)-adman" <g...@hotmail.ed>
Irrelevent. It is still plagerism.
>
> Maybe you just lack humor-
You have no sense of right or wrong.
Boikat
Boikat
> r norman wrote:
1) I would not matter one bit if the plagerized material was
ROTFLMFAO, plagerism is still wrong.
2) You do not know the difference between right and wrong, apparently.
3) Your only defence is to claim that you are too stupid to know the
difference between right aqnd wrong.
Boikat
Rusty Sites
The jokes just go right over your head. You should at least feel your
head being lifted by the Bernoulli effect.
(M)-adman
That was funny.
spintronic
Double standard.
Go tell Ye old one.
Hes plagiarizing the whole net, with his "cut & paste" one liners.
Boikat
What? You mean the ones where he challenges your pet pip-squeak,
adman, to support his claims? Hell, those are from me, and he has my
permision to post them all he wants. So does anyone else that would
like to rub assmonkey's nose in his own fecal matter.
But since you bring it up, would you care to supoport assmonkeys
claims? Any of them? How about just one:
Name one war that was faught because science discredited some
religious view or doctrine. When, where, and who, and who fired the
first shot? And no, I do not mean "culture wars" like anti-
abortionists fire-bombing a clinic. I mean in the context that adman
presented it, a *war*.
Good luck, but I'm not going to bother to even hold my breath for an
instant.
Or, do you mean Ye Olde One is cutting and pasting his *own* words,
repeatedly. News flash: That's not plagerism.
Boikat
r norman
<boi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
You would sound more impressive if you worked out how to spell
'plagiarism'. Ye Olde One's cut and paste with the constant
misspelling of Paul Newman's name didn't help the impression he made,
either.
Boikat
So what? "Spelling flames" are meaningless evasions, unless used to
flame someone who flamed someone for making a spelling error.
The main point is that the assmonkey made claims, and did not support
them.
Boikat
John Vreeland
> r norman wrote:
Meh. Most of those were dumb.
"If your test equipment is reading zero, then something's
disconnected" was always my watchword, though. It was a good thing to
consider when you were checking a power line for safe handling.
Bob Casanova
appeared in talk.origins, posted by snex <xe...@comcast.net>:
>On Oct 10, 5:12 pm, "\(M\)-adman" <g...@hotmail.ed> wrote:
<snip plagiarized list>
>why do you suppose your computer works well enough to continue posting
>this stupid shit to the world?
Someone else set it up for him?
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
James Beck
top ten signs of fundamentalist christians
10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by
other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of
yours.
9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people
evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical
claim that we were created from dirt.
8 - You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a
Triune God.
7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed
to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah
slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the
elimination
of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and
trees!
6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about
gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the
Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got
killed,
came back to life and then ascended into the sky.
5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in
the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you
find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen
sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.
4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet with the
exception of those who share your beliefs -- though excluding those in
all rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering.
And yet consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."
3 - While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have
failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor
speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove"
Christianity.
2 - You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered
prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you
think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
1 - You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do
about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call
yourself a Christian.
johnetho...@yahoo.com
> r norman wrote:
Yes we do. We laugh at your stupidity and dishonesty all the time.
johnetho...@yahoo.com
I've never seen any evidence that he understands anything at all, so
this is to be expected.