Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 83

Thread: there's no place like home

  1. #41
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]Bottom Line: That is my subjective truth ... taken straight from the Book of Genesis

    That is what I choose to teach my children ... my subjective truth

    Millions of taxpayers believe the same, right or wrong

    Now do you have any DEFINITIVE PROOF to the contrary?

    If so, please produce it now ... I wanna see it ... I wanna see your DEFINITIVE PRROF, oh wise men of science

    And if not, don't be using taxpayer schools to tell my children their religion is a fraud

    Fair enough?
    [/b][/quote]

    No it is not fair enough. 5ever has explained the rationalle far better than I can. 5ever is also, if I remember correctly, an atheist with a strong Catholic background and a very religious family. Just thought you should know so you can use that as a way to discredit him.

  2. #42
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@Nov 5 2004, 04:43 PM
    [b] You can't even come close to proving what's in the Bible and I think the evidence we've uncovered suggests that [b]evolution is far, far more probable[/b][/b][/quote]
    [url=http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/]http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/[/url]

    You'll thank me for this someday ;)

  3. #43
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Nov 5 2004, 05:20 PM
    [b] 5ever is also, if I remember correctly, an atheist with a strong Catholic background and a very religious family. Just thought you should know so you can use that as a way to discredit him. [/b][/quote]
    Look, I don't wanna teach his children creation ... yours either ... I just ask you folks to pay others the same courtesy

    What's so unfair about that?

    If I extend you that courtesy, why not extend me the same ... if only for the sake of being polite

  4. #44
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Green Jets & Ham+Nov 5 2004, 05:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (Green Jets & Ham &#064; Nov 5 2004, 05:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-jets5ever[/i]@Nov 5 2004, 04:43 PM
    [b] You can&#39;t even come close to proving what&#39;s in the Bible and I think the evidence we&#39;ve uncovered suggests that [b]evolution is far, far more probable[/b][/b][/quote]
    [url=http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/]http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/[/url]

    You&#39;ll thank me for this someday ;) [/b][/quote]
    BTW, I invite all those who are under the impression that evolution is the accepted view of the origin of mankind within the scientific community to visit the above link

    Contrary to popular opinion, it is not only the uneducated who accepts creation as a plausible explanation for the origin of man

    There is an entire field of science ... scientists all ... who find creation far more plausible than evolution

    Now you wouldn&#39;t know that cause the intelligencia completely rejects the possibility that a THRIST HOLY GOD created the heavens and the earth and all that is in it, including if not especially mankind

    Our public schools have long since rejected the idea in favor of evolution ... as has the intelligencia ... as has the popular culture ... as has the mainstream media ... as has all of the usual suspects of the left

    So in kind an entire field of SCIENCE has been virtually ignored by the elites ... intentionally leaving the masses with the impression that ONLY EVOLUTION is based on GOOD SCIENCE, while creation is ONLY a matter of faith

    But is evolution really SOUND SCIENCE?????

    Although the elites in acedemia would have you believe that it is .... IS IT REALLY?????

    Is it possible that the entire hypothesis is built on faulty science?

    And lastly, did you know that nearly half the population in this nation accepts the literal interpertation of Genesis ... nearly 50% of Americans accept the accounts of Genesis as the explanation for the origin of man ... and this in spite of the fact that this entire generation has been raised in a popular culture that is heavily skewed in favor of evolution as the more plausible explanation ... so much so that it&#39;s a miracle anyone still accepts the literal account of Genesis, much less half the population ... but in a poll sited by MSNBC {ironically, LAST NIGHT&#33;&#33;}, nearly half the population of the United States still accepts the account of Genesis {the literal account} to explain the origin of man

    Yet still the intelligencia remains steadfast in their devotion to the theory of evolution ... having you believe it is the ONLY accepted POV of science ... but is that true?

    [quote][b][b][SIZE=3]What do Creation Scientists Believe?[/SIZE][/b]

    Scientists who call themselves "creation scientists" are professionals, typically with advanced degrees from major universities, who are generally involved in the same types of work as the average scientist.

    The difference is that creation scientists have a "world-view", or "model" for their science which is based on the belief that an intelligent designer ("God") exists who created our universe and the natural things in it.

    The creation events were one-time events and are not taking place today. A large subset of creation scientists could be called "Biblical creationists", who take the first eleven chapters of the Bible to be real history, including the creation of all things in six 24-hour days, the existence of Adam and Eve as the first man and woman, the unnatural introduction of "death" into the perfect creation because of the disobedience of Adam and Eve, and the occurence of a world-wide flood (Noah&#39;s flood) which destroyed most life and greatly affected the processes operating on the earth.

    Most creation scientists believe that the earth is "young" (on the order of ten thousand years), but this is a secondary issue. Biblical creationists believe that the Bible and true science are in full harmony with each other - there is no need to "check your brain at the door" when entering a church.

    [b]A major goal of creation science is to point out the weakness of evolutionary theory, because basically there are only two alternatives for how we got here, and if naturalistic processes are incapable of the task, then special creation must be the correct answer.[/b]

    On the positive side, creation scientists are developing alternative models and theories in many areas to help our understanding of how the universe works.

    [b]It should be noted that much of day to day scientific activity is not heavily influenced by either evolutionary or creation assumptions, but much scientific energy has been wasted over the last century in the search for evolutionary evidences and experimental proofs, which have been unsuccessful so far and will continue to be.[/b]

    How much further might we be in some areas of scientific understanding if a model of special creation had been the working hypothesis?[/b][/quote]

    Is it possible that evolution has been wrong all along?

    Is it possible that we actually had the answer, scientific or otherwise, to begin with?

    Is it possible that the BIG LIE has never been creation, but is in fact evolution?

    Is it posssible that creation, and not evolution, is in fact the more plausible of the two?

    [url=http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/]http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/[/url]

  5. #45
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Posts
    3,682
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Green Jets & Ham[/i]@Nov 6 2004, 12:06 PM
    [b] Is it possible that evolution has been wrong all along?

    Is it possible that we actually had the answer, scientific or otherwise, to begin with?

    Is it possible that the BIG LIE has never been creation, but is in fact evolution?

    Is it posssible that creation, and not evolution, is in fact the more plausible of the two?

    [url=http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/]http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/[/url] [/b][/quote]
    No, no, no, and no.

    I checked out that website. Is it TRULY a reliable source? I don&#39;t see one iota of scientific process developed from creation scientists, only that &#39;&#39;the evolution theory is flawed, so we must be right&#39;&#39;. Look, if you want to knock science, go ahead. But to assume that some minor problems with it makes your side the truth, in ANY ARGUMENT, without proving YOUR SIDE well, is ridiculous.

    I don&#39;t want your children being told their religion is a fraud, nor do I want teachers expressing their beliefs in schools. All I want is for everything science has accomplished to be taught to our children. If you have really taught them well enough, they can make their OWN interpretations and decisions.

  6. #46
    [quote][b]Is it possible that evolution has been wrong all along?[/b][/quote]

    Yes. Anything is possible. That is why we have science. To look at everything possible and make judgements based on the evidence found. You can site the general scientific ignorance of America as your "Proof" creationism is right, and site a cadre of "religious scientists" who are shunned by the vast majority of science, but that does not make your faith fact GJ&H.

    [quote][b]Is it possible that we actually had the answer, scientific or otherwise, to begin with?[/b][/quote]

    No, "Religion Science", based purely on "Faith", without documentable, quantifyable or experimentable proof (or even legitimate evidence, if not outright proof) does not equal Proof. It equals religion. But this thread shows you do not agree with the principles of science at all. In your world view, religion trumps all. Faith trumps anything else. And believing that is your right in America, of course, as it is mine to point out the flaws in that line of thinking.

    [quote][b]Is it possible that the BIG LIE has never been creation, but is in fact evolution?[/b][/quote]

    No, the Big Lie has always been, and always will be, a belief in something based on nothing more than "faith" that it exists. If my "Faith" tells me the World was created in 5 minutes by a Mystical Talking Panda, can you PROVE that it wasn&#39;t GJ&H. You demand "negatory proof" (itself a joke and a direct contradiction of scientific principles) to contradict your own "faith", before you will even consider another option.

    Well, I demand the same. [u]Prove to me[/u] the world wasn&#39;t created in 5 minutes, 5000 years ago, by a Giant Panda named LooLoo, who simply wanted some humans to play with, so LooLoo invented religion as the best way for humans to kill each other off in funny and enjoyable (to LooLoo) ways. PROVE it is NOT true, if you can.

    If you cannot PROVE my theory wrong, perhaps we should teach Panda-ism in School, eh? Perhaps Christian creationism is the big lie, and Panda-ism the truth. After all, you cannot prove it wrong.

    [quote][b]Is it posssible that creation, and not evolution, is in fact the more plausible of the two?[/b][/quote]

    No, but trying to convince a devout religious person of anything that contradicts their all-powerful "faith" is an exercise in futillity......A fact I should have known when I first read this thread.

    Your demands for negatory proof are your downfall in my view GJ&H, and shows you for what you are, someone who chooses faith over everything else. Any logical person should realize that a negative cannot be proved.

    For example GJ&H, please prove that I am NOT God. Prove that I an NOT the reincarnation of Weeb, come back to haunt the Jets Forums. Prove that the universe is actually NOT just a tiny atom in a giant world of atom-sized universes. Good luck. Hell, prove I am not a little intelligent kitten, typing out my posts on my owners computer while he isn&#39;t home. By your own thesis, if you cannot PROVE it wrong, it must be truth. Meow.

    And my previous question about the bible WAS legitimate, and your failure to answer that question very telling. If Genesis is FACT, the word of God, then how can you possibly ignore the rest of the bible, including the passages any sane human would find immoral today?

    I can only assume you will stone your wife if she strays from you, or has impure thoughts, and that you will stone your children (if you have any) should they disrespect you in any way. How can you NOT follow the word of God in all cases equally??

  7. #47
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Jetsfan80[/i]@Nov 6 2004, 11:23 AM
    [b] No, no, no, and no.

    I checked out that website. Is it TRULY a reliable source? I don&#39;t see one iota of scientific process developed from creation scientists, only that &#39;&#39;the evolution theory is flawed, so we must be right&#39;&#39;. Look, if you want to knock science, go ahead. But to assume that some minor problems with it makes your side the truth, in ANY ARGUMENT, without proving YOUR SIDE well, is ridiculous.

    I don&#39;t want your children being told their religion is a fraud, nor do I want teachers expressing their beliefs in schools. All I want is for everything science has accomplished to be taught to our children. If you have really taught them well enough, they can make their OWN interpretations and decisions. [/b][/quote]
    Yes, but why should one theory be given favor in taxpayer schools ahead of the other ... especially when half the taxpayers subscribe to the opposite theory, and when you admit that the former is obviously flawed?

    This is why I applaud the good folks of Kansas ... it&#39;s about time someone stood up to the evolutionists ... they are in no position to discount half the populations accepted account of the origin of man, and I don&#39;t care how many elites come out of the woodwork to insist that they are

    Like I said .... I won&#39;t teach your children creation, and you don&#39;t teach mine evolution ... it&#39;s called common courtesy ... but one side is far too smug for such an outdated concept, especially when it means extending a courtesy towards those religious yahoos who stand in the way of their brilliance and expertise

  8. #48
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Darkstar Rising[/i]@Nov 6 2004, 11:36 AM
    [b] You can site the general scientific ignorance of America as your "Proof" creationism is right, and site a cadre of "religious scientists" who are shunned by the vast majority of science [/b][/quote]
    AHHHH HA&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

    Now we are getting some truth here ... and it&#39;s about time&#33;&#33;

    What happened to "science and religion can co-exist" ... which was what you had said at the start?

    Why ... why are "religious scientists" shunned by the scientific community?

    Does ones subscribing to a faith in GOD exclude one from being a REAL SCIENTIST?

    Thus, is atheism a pre-requisite to science?

    Is there a sign on the door ... RELIGIOUS FOLKS NEED NOT APPLY? <_<

    Please explain WHY the scientific community rejects a scientist who subscribes to some form of religion ... or in your words, "shuns"?

  9. #49
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bman[/i]@Nov 5 2004, 03:14 PM
    [b] 08 is new day.. [/b][/quote]
    It&#39;s good to see you&#39;ve gotten over the election - it didn&#39;t even take a week&#33;

  10. #50
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by sackdance+Nov 6 2004, 12:02 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (sackdance @ Nov 6 2004, 12:02 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-bman[/i]@Nov 5 2004, 03:14 PM
    [b] 08 is new day.. [/b][/quote]
    It&#39;s good to see you&#39;ve gotten over the election - it didn&#39;t even take a week&#33; [/b][/quote]
    Funnier yet..they even know they are going to, once again, get their asses kicked in the mid-term election of &#39;06 and have conceeded&#33;&#33;

  11. #51
    All League
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Richmond VA
    Posts
    681
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Darkstar Rising[/i]@Nov 6 2004, 11:36 AM
    [b] Well, I demand the same. [u]Prove to me[/u] the world wasn&#39;t created in 5 minutes, 5000 years ago, by a Giant Panda named LooLoo, who simply wanted some humans to play with, so LooLoo invented religion as the best way for humans to kill each other off in funny and enjoyable (to LooLoo) ways. PROVE it is NOT true, if you can.

    If you cannot PROVE my theory wrong, perhaps we should teach Panda-ism in School, eh? Perhaps Christian creationism is the big lie, and Panda-ism the truth. After all, you cannot prove it wrong. [/b][/quote]
    Brilliant &#33;&#33;

    Panda-ism&#33; :lol:

  12. #52
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Darkstar Rising[/i]@Nov 6 2004, 11:36 AM
    [b] You can site the general scientific ignorance of America as your "Proof" creationism is right, and site a cadre of "religious scientists" who are shunned by the vast majority of science [/b][/quote]
    Below is a list of some GIANTS OF SCIENCE who accepted Creation

    Just a few unenlightened boobs ... all of whom are obviously "shunned" by the scientific community

    [SIZE=4][color=red]Albert Einstein

    Louis Pasteur

    Sir Issac Newton[/color][/SIZE]

    [b]Charles Lindbergh[/b]

    [b]Michael Faraday[/b] {physicist, formulated laws magnetic induction, did groundwork for making dynamos, electric motors, and transformers}

    [b]William Thompson[/b] {Thermodynamics and the Kelvin tempature scale}

    [b]Johannes Kepler[/b] {Laws of plantery motion}

    [b]James Clerk Maxwell[/b] {electromagnitic theory}

    [b]Samuel Morse[/b] {invented the telegraph}

    [b]Blaise Pascal[/b] {invented the early calculator, helped discover the theory of probability}

    Werner Von Braun
    Sir Henry Rawlinson
    George Stokes
    Matthew Maury
    Carl Linnaeus
    James Joule
    Robert Boyle
    Joseph Lister
    John Ambrose Fleming
    Henri Fabre
    John Ray
    Nicolaus Steno
    William Petty
    George Cuvier
    Louis Agassiz
    Gregory Mendel
    Bernhard Reimann
    Joseph Henry Gilbert
    Thomas Anderson
    William Mitchell Ramsey
    John Coach Adams
    Johan Baptist Cysat
    John Woodward
    Humphrey Davy
    George Biddle Airy
    James Bradley
    Leonardo De Vinci
    John Dalton
    Rene Descartes
    Jean Baptist Biot
    Richard Kirwan

    JUST TO NAME A FEW

    IDIOTS ALL ... SHUNNED BY THE REAL MEN OF SCIENCE

    Should I name 50 more ... who are obviously not real men of science ... shunned by the scientific community? <_<

  13. #53
    [quote][b]Thus, is atheism a pre-requisite to science?

    Is there a sign on the door ... RELIGIOUS FOLKS NEED NOT APPLY?
    [/b][/quote]

    Not at all, but an open mind is. Someone appraoching any scientific "question" with a pre-built absolute "knowledge" that the bible is the truth, the word of God, and unquestionable (your porition in this thread) simply doesn&#39;t have an open mind.

    A scientist who came forward with the pre-built absolute "knowledge" that there was no God would also be too closed minded to be a good scientist.

    You are great at this GJ&H, you really are. Your view requires no proof, no research and no backing it up in any way (Faith is good like that). Throughout this whole thread, all you&#39;ve done is say "I&#39;m right, because my faith says so, but I don&#39;t have to tell you why or prove it in any form, but the education of society&#39;s children should follow my will or nothing". You havn&#39;t givin a single shred of science to back your view, or to debunk the evolution view.

    Oh, and you are still dodging the hard questions. The ones about the REST of the word of God, the REST of the bible. You know you cannot win that argument, so you simply avoid it.

  14. #54
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Darkstar Rising[/i]@Nov 6 2004, 01:18 PM
    [b] [quote][b]Thus, is atheism a pre-requisite to science?

    Is there a sign on the door ... RELIGIOUS FOLKS NEED NOT APPLY?
    [/b][/quote]

    Not at all, but an open mind is. Someone appraoching any scientific "question" with a pre-built absolute "knowledge" that the bible is the truth, the word of God, and unquestionable (your porition in this thread) simply doesn&#39;t have an open mind.

    A scientist who came forward with the pre-built absolute "knowledge" that there was no God would also be too closed minded to be a good scientist.

    You are great at this GJ&H, you really are. Your view requires no proof, no research and no backing it up in any way (Faith is good like that). [b]Throughout this whole thread, all you&#39;ve done is say "I&#39;m right, because my faith says so, but I don&#39;t have to tell you why or prove it in any form, but the education of society&#39;s children should follow my will or nothing".[/b] You havn&#39;t givin a single shred of science to back your view, or to debunk the evolution view.

    Oh, and you are still dodging the hard questions. The ones about the REST of the word of God, the REST of the bible. You know you cannot win that argument, so you simply avoid it. [/b][/quote]
    That is a bold faced lie ... nowhere in this thread did I suggest MY VIEW of the origin of man should be taught to the youth of America ... I SAID JUST THE OPPOSITE

    YOU, on the other hand, are the ideologue who insists that YOUR VIEW must be taught ... even to those children whose parents REJECT your hypothesis and wish to teach their children otherwise

    It is not me who seeks to impose my view on others ... IT IS YOU

    Throughout this entire thread I have stated very clearly that I WOULD NOT favor using taxpayer schools to teach creation ... I have yet to hear you extend the same courtesy to those who reject evolution, as I suspect I never will

    So let&#39;s be clear about who seeks to impose his views ... IT IS NOT I ... IT IS YOU

    I have also said nowhere that my view is the unquestionable truth and nor have I said I can prove it to be so ... it is MY TRUTH, but I cannot prove it ... [b]that&#39;s why I would not have the audacity to insist that those who disagree allow me to impose my beliefs on their children[/b] ... yet neither is your view the unquestionable truth, yet you have no problem with imposing your view of evolution on those who disagree, and even using taxpayer dollars to do so

    So again, let&#39;s be clear ... there is one rigged ideologue in this discussion, but it is not me

    Lastly, my view on the rest of the Bible is my business ... it has no bearing on this discussion ... the topic is teaching evolution in taxpayer schools, and that does not require me to bear my soul as to every belief I may or may not have ... I am sticking to the topic and not allowing you to wiggle off the hook and turn this into a discussion of theology, cause it appears you would like to change the topic ... NICE TRY, but I&#39;m not buying it ... we&#39;re gonna stick to the topic which is teaching evolution in taxpayer schools, YA or NAY

    I&#39;ve laid out my argument against ... I&#39;ve sited another field of science which disagrees ... I&#39;ve sited some Giants of science who accepted creation, in spite of the fact that they are shunned by the real men of science such as yourself ... I have sited the fact that so many offer proof to dispute the theory of evolution, or at least bring it into question ... and I have sited the common courtesy one should extend to another, even if the other happens to be a creation yahoo like oh say, Albert Einstein or Louis Pasteur

    I am not building a case to teach creation, but to NOT TEACH evolution to children whose parents hold another POV ... and visa versa ... DO NOT teach creation to the child of one who holds a different POV ... end of story

  15. #55
    Bitter
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    9,741
    wrong thread&#33;&#33;

  16. #56
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    connecticut
    Posts
    3,728
    a cynical view from america&#39;s heartland???? who would have thought... :lol:

  17. #57
    Here&#39;s another interesting link, one that discusses why any scientist who rejects evolution and accepts creation {and you might wanna see the list of scientists I provided above whom that also entails} are rejected as real men of science by the [b]real men of science[/b] such as my friend darkstar.

    [url=http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v5i10f.htm]http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v5i10f.htm[/url]

    And below is the homepage ... interesting site even if they are not real men of science :rolleyes:

    [url=http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/index.htm]http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/index.htm[/url]

  18. #58
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,699
    oh, brother what an argument&#33; i got kicked out of a lot of CCD classes as a child for trying to asceretain proof of [i]anything[/i]. initially (k thru 4?) it was purely innocent, and still i would be chastized and punished.

    nobody teaches evolution as fact. but dozens of parents and priests tried to teach me that creation was fact, without offering proof. drove me 180 degrees in the opposite direction.

    church and state should be separate. if you want your children to learn creation, etc., send them to a christian school, or to your church&#39;s CCD program. public schools should be teaching science as theory in this matter, and could offer a coursework in religion that studies [i]all[/i] religion. that would come in habdy in today&#39;s shrinking world, wouldn&#39;t you say?

  19. #59
    Young child enters his science class in elementary school

    The teacher asks the class ... does anyone how mankind was born?

    The child raises his hand and the teachers responds ... Okay Johnny, how did we get here?

    The child responds ... GOD put us here

    Teacher ... No Johnny, that is not how it happened

    Johnny ... Uh, yes sir, that is how it happened cause my mommy and daddy told me so

    Teacher ... I&#39;m sure your mommy and daddy mean well, but they are misinformed

    Johnny ... Well, my mommy said ....

    Teacher ... Johnny, your mommy is mistaken, now if you take a seat I will explain how we got here {proceeds to begin his explanation of evolution}

    Johnny ... Sir, that just isn&#39;t possible

    Teacher ... Why isn&#39;t it possible?

    Johnny ... Cause someone had to put us here

    Teacher ... NO JOHNNY, YOU ARE WRONG, NOW WILL YOU PLEASE TAKE A SEAT AND LISTEN&#33;&#33;

    Johnny ... Okay :huh:

    [b]NEXT DAY[/b]

    Teacher enters the class and finds an apple on his desk ... teacher seems grateful

    [b]FOLLOWING DAY[/b]

    Teacher enters the class and finds an apple on his desk ... teacher seems grateful

    [b]FOLLOWING DAY[/b]

    Teacher enters the class and finds an apple on his desk ... now his curiosity is peaked

    Teacher ... I would like to thank the student who placed this apple on my desk, so who is the generous soul?

    NO RESPONSE

    Teacher ... Will the child who put this apple on my desk please raise your hand

    NO REPSONSE

    Teacher ... Look, I am not going to punish you, I wish to thank you. So will the child who placed this apple on my desk please raise your hand

    NO RESPONSE

    Teacher ... HELLO, THE APPLE DIDN&#39;T JUST GET HERE BY ITSELF, SOMEBODY HAD TO PUT IT THERE&#33;&#33;&#33;

    [b]Johnny ... That&#39;s what I was trying to tell you the other day&#33;&#33;[/b] :D

  20. #60
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,699
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Green Jets & Ham[/i]@Nov 6 2004, 04:55 PM
    [b] Teacher ... HELLO, THE APPLE DIDN&#39;T JUST GET HERE BY ITSELF, SOMEBODY HAD TO PUT IT THERE&#33;&#33;&#33;

    [b]Johnny ... That&#39;s what I was trying to tell you the other day&#33;&#33;[/b] :D [/b][/quote]
    your example is cute... it would be on topic if you were talking about the very first apple ever.

    come on,. ham, give us [i]some[/i] credit. we do think about this stuff before we post. well, most of us ;)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us