Fyre's Domain
AP Psychology
Literature
Magic Online
Empire Earth
Firearms Half-Life
Friends' Submissions
Fyre
Mage Knight
NetHack
Newsgroups
My Philosophy
Pictures
Site Statistics
TORPG
Fun Stuff
90 Foot Tall Adam
Why Be A Fish?
WarCraft III
Archives Page
Wiki Web
Contact Info
  Here follows is the text of a newsgroup discussion thread on talk.origins ... it began with Ed Conrad and a "short poem disproving evolution," and here's the responses
he got back (it's quite funny):


Lump of coal,
Piece of rock,
Truth be told,
It's all a crock.

Burma Shave

---
JCS


"David Sienkiewicz" wrote in message news:...
> "Ed Conrad" wrote in message
> news:3cda6019.51995511@news.shenhgts.net...
> >
> > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>
> No, Ed, WE don't know better at all.
>
> What WE ALL (including you) know is that there's massive evidence for the
> evolution of man.
>
> What WE ALL (including you) know is that you've been pointed to that
> evidence many times.
>
> What WE ALL (including you) know is that you've lied over and over again
> when you claimed that evidence has never been presented to you or that your
> demands for evidence were answered with silence.
>
> What WE ALL (including you) know is that you're lying again.

David, Ed's ego rules over his intellect. He feels he's right even if
the rest of the world proves him wrong. I feel if he admited defeat
it'd take down his personality like a pack of cards.

For this reason you are wasting your time, no matter what approach you
try. I've even tried emailing Ed to get to understand what his
theories are regarding the coal and hubble 'evidence'. No reply. He's
set on broadcast.

Stew Dean
Ed Conrad wrote:
>
> Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>
> Ed Conrad
> > http://www.edconrad.com

Actually, *this* is the shortest poem on the evolution of man:

It's been resolved
That Man evolved.
> Ed Conrad wrote:
> > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>
> Actually, *this* is the shortest poem on the evolution of man:
>
> It's been resolved
> That Man evolved.


Or, how about this:


Wevolved.


Nathan
Dear Ed, poem: very succinct. I liked it fine! Gen2rev: 'taint been
resolved! God bless, Jo Jean

I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
topics and am a retired RN.

http://community.webtv.net/JOJOYD/BigDiscusser
Jesus loves you.
John Chap 1 v 3
Colossians Chap 1 v 16, 17--defeats evolution with ADAPTATION by Jesus
who is IN His creation (not evolution) plus scientifically untouchable
classic morality, equals the DIVINE SYNTHESIS.
In talk.origins I read this message from "Brian O'Neill"
:

>"(BigDiscusser)" wrote in message
>news:12905-3CDB14F4-89@storefull-2311.public.lawson.webtv.net...
>
>> I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
>> topics and am a retired RN.
>
>You're a stupid cunt.

I hope you don't claim intelligence, or at least not civility.


Susan Silberstein
Mike Dunford wrote in message news:...
> "Brian O'Neill" wrote in
> news:oEEC8.34826$G%3.12846894@typhoon.columbus.rr.com:
>
> > "(BigDiscusser)" wrote in message
> > news:12905-3CDB14F4-89@storefull-2311.public.lawson.webtv.net...
> >
> >> I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide
> >> variety of topics and am a retired RN.
> >
> > You're a stupid cunt.
>
> I'm honestly curious. What, exactly, did you expect to accomplish
> with that post? I'm assuming that there must be something, since I
> haven't seen anyone use 'cunt' that gratuitously since one of my
> friends tried to impress the rest of us by proving that he knew the
> word -- and that was in fourth grade.
>
> Please, enlighten me as to your intent. I've really tried to figure
> it out, but I've eliminated all of the possibilities I can think of.
> I don't think you are trying to display your volcabulary, since most
> of us have known what 'stupid' and 'cunt' mean for years. I'm also
> pretty sure that wasn't intended to be a display of debating
> technique, unless you were going for the 'how not to' approach. And
> there are far simpler ways to convince people that you are a flaming
> asshole. So I'm fresh out of ideas.

No, Mr. O'Neill is fresh out of ideas and curiously intent on
demonstrating that sad fact.

---------------
J. Pieret
---------------

Isn't man a creature to be ashamed of in pretty much all his aspects?
Is he really fit for anything but to be stood up on the street corner
as a convenience for dogs?

-- Mark Twain --
Dear Susan S., these are the best and fastest brains on the range!!!!!!
Thanks to those that showed a little civlity--as I tried to honestly do
for Ed. God bless, Jo Jean

I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
topics and am a retired RN.

http://community.webtv.net/JOJOYD/BigDiscusser
Jesus loves you.
John Chap 1 v 3
Colossians Chap 1 v 16, 17--defeats evolution with ADAPTATION by Jesus
who is IN His creation (not evolution) plus scientifically untouchable
classic morality, equals the DIVINE SYNTHESIS.
"(BigDiscusser)" wrote in message
news:18945-3CDBE21B-10@storefull-2315.public.lawson.webtv.net...

> "Christianity, insanity." And you guys
> wonder why us Christians contend with Darwinian evolution?????

No, we don't wonder. That little couplet explains it quiet adequately.

(Provided, of course, that one reads "Christian" to mean "creationist".
There are Christians who are not creationists; they may even be in the
majority. And considering that creationists prefer to worship a book rather
than studying God's work, one could argue that they are not Christians at
all.)



"Bill Pate" wrote in message
news:abgu490aul@drn.newsguy.com...
> In article <18945-3CDBE21B-10@storefull-2315.public.lawson.webtv.net>,
> JOJOYD@webtv.net says...
> >
> >"Christianity, insanity." And you guys
> >wonder why us Christians contend with Darwinian evolution????? God
> >bless, Jo Jean
>
> I propose a little test of the hypothesis that Christianity
> is insanity with two questions for you, Jo. Do you believe
> that the universe solely exists so that its most important
> inhabitants, humans, have a place to live, in which to obtain
> shelter and food and create some more important inhabitants?
> Do you believe that by saying the words "I believe that Jesus
> was killed (as required by God) to absolve my sin (given by
> this same God)" that you will live forever?
>
> Answering yes to the above doesn't mean insanity, but in my
> opinion you're on your way.
>
> Sorry for this post that doesn't really belong in talk.origins.
>

It is Quite appropriate for TO, as a
one of the most serious counter-arguments about origins comes from Fundos.
You have however DEFINED the Fundamentalist motto as insane.
I see a problem with doing this. I used to accept statements like that as
Axiomatic.
Sanity has nothing to do with it.

RJ Pease

"On Fri, 10 May 2002 15:01:09 +0000 (UTC), in article
<18945-3CDBE21B-10@storefull-2315.public.lawson.webtv.net>, JOJOYD@webtv.net
stated..."
>
>"Christianity, insanity." And you guys
>wonder why us Christians contend with Darwinian evolution????? God
>bless, Jo Jean

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth,
the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the
motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative
positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the
cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals,
shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as
being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a
disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a
Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture,
talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to
prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up
vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is
not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that
people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers
held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose
salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and
rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a
field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his
foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe
those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead,
think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they
themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?
Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold
trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in
one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by
those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For
then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue
statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof
and even recite from memory many passages which they think support
their position, although _they understand neither what they say
nor the things about which they make assertion_. [1 Timothy 1.7]

Augustine, On the literal meaning of Genesis, 1.19.39

Tom S.

I officially will have David be my spokesperson when I've been drinking.
Thank you for your eloquence.

> > Dear Susan S., these are the best and fastest brains on the range!!!!!!

> Well, no, Jo Jean. That's not true.
>
> The reply to you was a bit over the top and quite inappropriate. On
> the other hand, I have criticized YOU for using a name like
> "BigDiscusser" when you don't really DISCUSS anything. While that
> sort of thing doesn't frustrate me, I can see why it would frustrate
> others.

> > Thanks to those that showed a little civlity--as I tried to honestly do
> > for Ed. God bless, Jo Jean

> The time for civility with Ed has long since passed. Ed is not a
> civil person. But that's a personal judgement we all make
> individually.

> > I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
> > topics and am a retired RN.

> Why won't you actually DISCUSS any of them, Jo Jean?
I do forgtive Brian O--happy he's quit smoking.
To David S----I called myself Big Discusser, because in real life off
the web--that's ME ( even my adopted grand daughter Suzi said it
suited me to a tee when she was helping me to get going on the new Webtv
I had just gotten). I came straight to TO to continue my long time
disagreement with Darwin. I have no computer "experteese" to argue with
you "down and dirty fighters" and besides I am too smart, and also
too old and tired, and have too many other things to do--sooo sorry,
that's why I don't discuss. OK? God bless, Jo Jean I'd like to add,
(and probably shouldn't ) most of the requests are too juvenile, and
would lead nowhere. I do the best I can to get my points across.
Lovingly to All, including Ed.

I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
topics and am a retired RN.

http://community.webtv.net/JOJOYD/BigDiscusser
Jesus loves you.
John Chap 1 v 3
Colossians Chap 1 v 16, 17--defeats evolution with ADAPTATION by Jesus
who is IN His creation (not evolution) plus scientifically untouchable
classic morality, equals the DIVINE SYNTHESIS.
In talk.origins I read this message from "Brian O'Neill"
:

>"Mike Dunford" wrote in message
>news:Xns9209D02B8C052mikedunford@66.75.162.198...
>
>> >> I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide
>> >> variety of topics and am a retired RN.
>
>> > You're a stupid cunt.
>
>> I'm honestly curious. What, exactly, did you expect to accomplish
>> with that post?
>
>I had a little bit too much to drink last night. So, I apologize for the
>rudeness, but the sentiment stands. That lady calls herself "big discusser"
>and staunchly avoids all discourse, happy in her world of ignorance. I
>don't much care her age, rank and serial number; she's a moron and has been
>one since she got here, and I, being a staunch supporter of equal rights,
>will treat her as such.
>
>Fuck her and all stupid people like her.
>
>Now, care to ask what *she* plans to accomplish with her litany of "rah,
>rah" posts that offer nothing but simple stupidity? I find someone who
>dares call herself a "big discusser" who has such strong ideas on a subject,
>yet refuses to actually discuss anything, just spout out pithy cheerleading
>nonsense far more offensive than a four letter word. YMMV.
>
>As I said, it was an unfortunate choice of words. She's a moron. Better?

No. Being drunk is no excuse; all that does is release your
inhibitions and allow your true feelings to surface. Besides,
what you write when sober isn't much better. So you don't like
what she posts. Big deal. Grow up and learn to live with it.


Susan Silberstein
Brian O'Neill wrote:
>
> "(BigDiscusser)" wrote in message
> news:12905-3CDB14F4-89@storefull-2311.public.lawson.webtv.net...
>
> > I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
> > topics and am a retired RN.
>
> You're a stupid cunt.

That was uncalled for.

"gen2rev" wrote in message
news:3CDAB610.8E2AFA31@crosswinds.net...
> Ed Conrad wrote:
> >
> > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> >
> > Ed Conrad
> > > http://www.edconrad.com
>
> Actually, *this* is the shortest poem on the evolution of man:
>
> It's been resolved
> That Man evolved.

And further to
It's time he knew

edconrad@shenhgts.net (Ed Conrad) wrote...
>
> Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>

Why not a haiku?

Man's evolution
Explains how we came to be
But not why, really.
Richard Clayton wrote...
> Spartakus wrote:
> > edconrad@shenhgts.net (Ed Conrad) wrote...
> > >
> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> >
> > Why not a haiku?
> >
> > Man's evolution
> > Explains how we came to be
> > But not why, really.
>
> That's senryu, not haiku. It lacks a seasonal reference.

Cool! Thanks for the enlightenment. Now that I think of it, isn't
the 3rd line supposed to be a contrasting image, like "Birds sing
mournfully " or something like that?

Evolution says
We change as do the seasons
A bird sings off-key.
In article <3cda6019.51995511@news.shenhgts.net>,
edconrad@shenhgts.net (Ed Conrad) wrote:

> Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>
> Ed Conrad

*
An even shorter poem:

Christianity,
Insanity.

earle
*
Brian O'Neill wrote:

> "Earle Jones" wrote in message
> news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
>
> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> > >
> > > Ed Conrad
>
> > An even shorter poem:
> >
> > Christianity,
> > Insanity.
>
> Ed?
> Meds.
>
> That's only six letters. What do I win?
>
Ed - odd

Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.
--
John Wilkins
Occasionally entertaining others
On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:08:41 +0000 (UTC), wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John
Wilkins) wrote:

>Brian O'Neill wrote:
>
>> "Earle Jones" wrote in message
>> news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
>>
>> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
>> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>> > >
>> > > Ed Conrad
>>
>> > An even shorter poem:
>> >
>> > Christianity,
>> > Insanity.
>>
>> Ed?
>> Meds.
>>
>> That's only six letters. What do I win?
>>
>Ed - odd
>
>Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.
>--

Not so fast!

Ed - o.d.

>John Wilkins



---------------
J. Pieret
---------------

Sometimes I wish I were smart enough to know
when I've happened to say something smart
so that I can get it down on paper
and notarize it as proof for posterity.

--Isaac Asimov --
Richard Clayton wrote:

> catshark@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:08:41 +0000 (UTC), wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John
>>Wilkins) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Brian O'Neill wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Earle Jones" wrote in message
>>>>news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
>>>>>>But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ed Conrad
>>>>>>
>>>>>An even shorter poem:
>>>>>
>>>>> Christianity,
>>>>> Insanity.
>>>>>
>>>>Ed?
>>>>Meds.
>>>>
>>>>That's only six letters. What do I win?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Ed - odd
>>>
>>>Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.
>>>--
>>>
>>Not so fast!
>>
>>Ed - o.d.
>>
>
> Mr. Conrad could beat you all with his autobiography:
>
> I, ED
>
> --
> Richard Clayton (forty2@earthlink.net)
> "Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be
> one, He must approve the homage of Reason rather than that of
> blindfolded Fear." -- Thomas Jefferson
>
>

Title:

An Epic Ode Being a Synopsis of All the Worthy Material Posted to USENET
by the Man Who is Older than Coal















The End

I think I win
wrote:

> On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:08:41 +0000 (UTC), wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John
> Wilkins) wrote:
>
> >Brian O'Neill wrote:
> >
> >> "Earle Jones" wrote in message
> >> news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
> >>
> >> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> >> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> >> > >
> >> > > Ed Conrad
> >>
> >> > An even shorter poem:
> >> >
> >> > Christianity,
> >> > Insanity.
> >>
> >> Ed?
> >> Meds.
> >>
> >> That's only six letters. What do I win?
> >>
> >Ed - odd
> >
> >Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.
> >--
>
> Not so fast!
>
> Ed - o.d.
>
Uh uh. It's

I.D.
O.D.

--
John Wilkins
Occasionally entertaining others


John Wilkins wrote:

> wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:08:41 +0000 (UTC), wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John
>>Wilkins) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Brian O'Neill wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Earle Jones" wrote in message
>>>>news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
>>>>>>But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ed Conrad
>>>>>>
>>>>>An even shorter poem:
>>>>>
>>>>> Christianity,
>>>>> Insanity.
>>>>>
>>>>Ed?
>>>>Meds.
>>>>
>>>>That's only six letters. What do I win?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Ed - odd
>>>
>>>Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.
>>>--
>>>
>>Not so fast!
>>
>>Ed - o.d.
>>
>>
> Uh uh. It's
>
> I.D.
> O.D.
>
Might say you've been:

Ed'd.


Eddie, are you kidding?

(Ed - you're an idiot.)

--
Ward M. Clark
Author, Lecturer, Traveler & Bum
www.frombearcreek.com
www.pathwai.org

On Thu, 9 May 2002, Ed Conrad wrote:
>
>
>Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
>But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus

Burma-Shave!

Simeon
Problem solved: man evolved.

Roy
wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John Wilkins) wrote in message news:<1fbyvmx.1twvqli1jkwv0hN%wilkins@wehi.edu.au>...
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:08:41 +0000 (UTC), wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John
> > Wilkins) wrote:
> >
> > >Brian O'Neill wrote:
> > >
> > >> "Earle Jones" wrote in message
> > >> news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
> > >>
> > >> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > >> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Ed Conrad
>
> > >> > An even shorter poem:
> > >> >
> > >> > Christianity,
> > >> > Insanity.
> > >>
> > >> Ed?
> > >> Meds.
> > >>
> > >> That's only six letters. What do I win?
> > >>
> > >Ed - odd
> > >
> > >Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.
> > >--
> >
> > Not so fast!
> >
> > Ed - o.d.
> >
> Uh uh. It's
>
> I.D.
> O.D.

DOH!

"John Wilkins" wrote in message
news:1fbyvmx.1twvqli1jkwv0hN%wilkins@wehi.edu.au...
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:08:41 +0000 (UTC), wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John
> > Wilkins) wrote:
> >
> > >Brian O'Neill wrote:
> > >
> > >> "Earle Jones" wrote in message
> > >> news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
> > >>
> > >> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > >> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Ed Conrad
> > >>
> > >> > An even shorter poem:
> > >> >
> > >> > Christianity,
> > >> > Insanity.
> > >>
> > >> Ed?
> > >> Meds.
> > >>
> > >> That's only six letters. What do I win?
> > >>
> > >Ed - odd
> > >
> > >Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.
> > >--
> >
> > Not so fast!
> >
> > Ed - o.d.
> >
> Uh uh. It's
>
> I.D.
> O.D.
>
> --
> John Wilkins
> Occasionally entertaining others

I ?
O !

By RJP

wrote in message
news:3cdb2318.9810798@news-server.optonline.net...
> On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:08:41 +0000 (UTC), wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John
> Wilkins) wrote:
>
> >Brian O'Neill wrote:
> >
> >> "Earle Jones" wrote in message
> >> news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
> >>
> >> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> >> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> >> > >
> >> > > Ed Conrad
> >>
> >> > An even shorter poem:
> >> >
> >> > Christianity,
> >> > Insanity.
> >>
> >> Ed?
> >> Meds.
> >>
> >> That's only six letters. What do I win?
> >>
> >Ed - odd
> >
> >Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.
> >--
>
> Not so fast!
>
> Ed - o.d.

Ediot?

>
> >John Wilkins
>
>
>
> ---------------
> J. Pieret
> ---------------
>
> Sometimes I wish I were smart enough to know
> when I've happened to say something smart
> so that I can get it down on paper
> and notarize it as proof for posterity.
>
> --Isaac Asimov --
>

--
Ward M. Clark
Author, Lecturer, Traveler & Bum
www.frombearcreek.com
www.pathwai.org

catshark@yahoo.com wrote:

> On Fri, 10 May 2002 01:08:41 +0000 (UTC), wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John
> Wilkins) wrote:
>
> >Brian O'Neill wrote:
> >
> >> "Earle Jones" wrote in message
> >> news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
> >>
> >> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> >> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> >> > >
> >> > > Ed Conrad
> >>
> >> > An even shorter poem:
> >> >
> >> > Christianity,
> >> > Insanity.
> >>
> >> Ed?
> >> Meds.
> >>
> >> That's only six letters. What do I win?
> >>
> >Ed - odd
> >
> >Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.
> >--
>
> Not so fast!
>
> Ed - o.d.

Mr. Conrad could beat you all with his autobiography:

I, ED

--
Richard Clayton (forty2@earthlink.net)
"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be
one, He must approve the homage of Reason rather than that of
blindfolded Fear." -- Thomas Jefferson
In talk.origins I read this message from wilkins@wehi.edu.au
(John Wilkins):

>Brian O'Neill wrote:
>
>> "Earle Jones" wrote in message
>> news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...
>>
>> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
>> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>> > >
>> > > Ed Conrad
>>
>> > An even shorter poem:
>> >
>> > Christianity,
>> > Insanity.
>>
>> Ed?
>> Meds.
>>
>> That's only six letters. What do I win?
>>
>Ed - odd
>
>Five letters, I'll take my prize in a sixpack thanks.

Ed
ID

Or, even shorter,

Ed
"Earle Jones" wrote in message
news:earle.jones-646A41.16541809052002@netnews.attbi.com...

> > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> >
> > Ed Conrad

> An even shorter poem:
>
> Christianity,
> Insanity.

Ed?
Meds.

That's only six letters. What do I win?

--
TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Two years, one month, 22 hours, 33 minutes and 52 seconds.
30437 cigarettes not smoked, saving $3,804.70.
Life saved: 15 weeks, 16 hours, 25 minutes.
See my Sig File FAQ: http://pages.prodigy.net/briank.o/SigFAQ.htm
Richard Clayton wrote in message news:<3CDAEE9E.2E13D5C2@earthlink.net>...
> Spartakus wrote:
>
> > edconrad@shenhgts.net (Ed Conrad) wrote...
> > >
> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> >
> > Why not a haiku?
> >
> > Man's evolution
> > Explains how we came to be
> > But not why, really.
>
> That's senryu, not haiku. It lacks a seasonal reference.

Ok then, how about:

Ed should fall right down
one of his goddamn coal mines
and not spring back out

-Floyd
Spartakus wrote:

> edconrad@shenhgts.net (Ed Conrad) wrote...
> >
> > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>
> Why not a haiku?
>
> Man's evolution
> Explains how we came to be
> But not why, really.

That's senryu, not haiku. It lacks a seasonal reference.
--
Richard Clayton (forty2@earthlink.net)
All that time hanging out with Japanese students pays off!
edconrad@shenhgts.net (Ed Conrad) wrote in message news:<3cda6019.51995511@news.shenhgts.net>...
> Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
>
> Ed Conrad
> > http://www.edconrad.com


How about this

Evolution
of man

happened.




Andy
"(BigDiscusser)" wrote:
>
> Dear Ed, poem: very succinct. I liked it fine! Gen2rev: 'taint been
> resolved! God bless, Jo Jean

Care to discuss it?


> I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
> topics and am a retired RN.
>
> http://community.webtv.net/JOJOYD/BigDiscusser
> Jesus loves you.
> John Chap 1 v 3
> Colossians Chap 1 v 16, 17--defeats evolution with ADAPTATION by Jesus
> who is IN His creation (not evolution) plus scientifically untouchable
> classic morality, equals the DIVINE SYNTHESIS.
"Susan S" wrote in message
news:pa6odugnqoq9lg82dbmq4gnibdtq80eags@4ax.com...

> No. Being drunk is no excuse; all that does is release your
> inhibitions and allow your true feelings to surface.

My true feelings: I am sorry I used that word. Honestly. And I said as
much.

My true feelings are also that the person I was responding to is a waste of
space, though I could have said that without the dramatics, and I just did.

My final true feelings are that you're a self-righteous, overly pious jerk
who can't accept an apology. Now, feel free to ignore me. In fact, I
demand you ignore me. I don't want some unforgiving, sanctimonious twit to
read my posts. Plonk me immediately, as I don't give you permission to read
my posts.
"Brian O'Neill" wrote in
news:tVPC8.35432$G%3.13366702@typhoon.columbus.rr.com:

> "Mike Dunford" wrote in message
> news:Xns9209D02B8C052mikedunford@66.75.162.198...
>
>> >> I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a
>> >> wide variety of topics and am a retired RN.
>
>> > You're a stupid cunt.
>
>> I'm honestly curious. What, exactly, did you expect to
>> accomplish with that post?
>
> I had a little bit too much to drink last night. So, I
> apologize for the rudeness, but the sentiment stands. That lady
> calls herself "big discusser" and staunchly avoids all
> discourse, happy in her world of ignorance. I don't much care
> her age, rank and serial number; she's a moron and has been one
> since she got here, and I, being a staunch supporter of equal
> rights, will treat her as such.
>
> Fuck her and all stupid people like her.
[snip]

You know, there's an easier and much more stress-free way of dealing
with people who really manage to annoy you. Here, I'll demonstrate
for you:


<*PLONK*>

HAND
--Mike
"Brian O'Neill" wrote in message news:...
>
> I officially will have David be my spokesperson when I've been drinking.
> Thank you for your eloquence.

We all have moments of indiscretion and we often say or write things
that we later wish we hadn't written or said.

I think it says a lot about you that you accepted it was a bit more
than was necessary and you publicly apologized. Jo Jean will show
true christian character if she acknowledged and accepts the apology.
We'll see about that.

> > > Dear Susan S., these are the best and fastest brains on the range!!!!!!
>
> > Well, no, Jo Jean. That's not true.
> >
> > The reply to you was a bit over the top and quite inappropriate. On
> > the other hand, I have criticized YOU for using a name like
> > "BigDiscusser" when you don't really DISCUSS anything. While that
> > sort of thing doesn't frustrate me, I can see why it would frustrate
> > others.
>
> > > Thanks to those that showed a little civlity--as I tried to honestly do
> > > for Ed. God bless, Jo Jean
>
> > The time for civility with Ed has long since passed. Ed is not a
> > civil person. But that's a personal judgement we all make
> > individually.
>
> > > I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
> > > topics and am a retired RN.
>
> > Why won't you actually DISCUSS any of them, Jo Jean?
JOJOYD@webtv.net ((BigDiscusser)) wrote in message news:<18942-3CDBD6C6-21@storefull-2315.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
>
> Dear Susan S., these are the best and fastest brains on the range!!!!!!

Well, no, Jo Jean. That's not true.

The reply to you was a bit over the top and quite inappropriate. On
the other hand, I have criticized YOU for using a name like
"BigDiscusser" when you don't really DISCUSS anything. While that
sort of thing doesn't frustrate me, I can see why it would frustrate
others.

> Thanks to those that showed a little civlity--as I tried to honestly do
> for Ed. God bless, Jo Jean

The time for civility with Ed has long since passed. Ed is not a
civil person. But that's a personal judgement we all make
individually.

> I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
> topics and am a retired RN.

Why won't you actually DISCUSS any of them, Jo Jean?


>
> http://community.webtv.net/JOJOYD/BigDiscusser
> Jesus loves you.
> John Chap 1 v 3
> Colossians Chap 1 v 16, 17--defeats evolution with ADAPTATION by Jesus
> who is IN His creation (not evolution) plus scientifically untouchable
> classic morality, equals the DIVINE SYNTHESIS.
In article , "Bob says...
>
>
>"Bill Pate" wrote in message
>news:abgu490aul@drn.newsguy.com...
>> In article <18945-3CDBE21B-10@storefull-2315.public.lawson.webtv.net>,
>> JOJOYD@webtv.net says...
>> >
>> >"Christianity, insanity." And you guys
>> >wonder why us Christians contend with Darwinian evolution????? God
>> >bless, Jo Jean
>>
>> I propose a little test of the hypothesis that Christianity
>> is insanity with two questions for you, Jo. Do you believe
>> that the universe solely exists so that its most important
>> inhabitants, humans, have a place to live, in which to obtain
>> shelter and food and create some more important inhabitants?
>> Do you believe that by saying the words "I believe that Jesus
>> was killed (as required by God) to absolve my sin (given by
>> this same God)" that you will live forever?
>>
>> Answering yes to the above doesn't mean insanity, but in my
>> opinion you're on your way.
>>
>> Sorry for this post that doesn't really belong in talk.origins.
>>
>
>It is Quite appropriate for TO, as a
>one of the most serious counter-arguments about origins comes from Fundos.
>You have however DEFINED the Fundamentalist motto as insane.
> I see a problem with doing this. I used to accept statements like that as
>Axiomatic.
>Sanity has nothing to do with it.

Yes, I recognize the problem with calling somebody
insane because of their beliefs, that is why I used
the vague term "on your way" which I used for a
little humor as lame as it might have been.

Probably anybody accepting axiomatically beliefs as
exemplified by my two questions above would no
doubt *not* recognize that I was ridiculing those
beliefs by asking them in what I considered their
most extreme or ridiculous form.

Bill P

>
>RJ Pease
>
>
In article <18945-3CDBE21B-10@storefull-2315.public.lawson.webtv.net>,
JOJOYD@webtv.net says...
>
>"Christianity, insanity." And you guys
>wonder why us Christians contend with Darwinian evolution????? God
>bless, Jo Jean

I propose a little test of the hypothesis that Christianity
is insanity with two questions for you, Jo. Do you believe
that the universe solely exists so that its most important
inhabitants, humans, have a place to live, in which to obtain
shelter and food and create some more important inhabitants?
Do you believe that by saying the words "I believe that Jesus
was killed (as required by God) to absolve my sin (given by
this same God)" that you will live forever?

Answering yes to the above doesn't mean insanity, but in my
opinion you're on your way.

Sorry for this post that doesn't really belong in talk.origins.

Bill P


>
>I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
>topics and am a retired RN.
>
>http://community.webtv.net/JOJOYD/BigDiscusser
>Jesus loves you.
>John Chap 1 v 3
>Colossians Chap 1 v 16, 17--defeats evolution with ADAPTATION by Jesus
>who is IN His creation (not evolution) plus scientifically untouchable
>classic morality, equals the DIVINE SYNTHESIS.
>
"Christianity, insanity." And you guys
wonder why us Christians contend with Darwinian evolution????? God
bless, Jo Jean

I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
topics and am a retired RN.

http://community.webtv.net/JOJOYD/BigDiscusser
Jesus loves you.
John Chap 1 v 3
Colossians Chap 1 v 16, 17--defeats evolution with ADAPTATION by Jesus
who is IN His creation (not evolution) plus scientifically untouchable
classic morality, equals the DIVINE SYNTHESIS.
"Mike Dunford" wrote in message
news:Xns9209D02B8C052mikedunford@66.75.162.198...

> >> I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide
> >> variety of topics and am a retired RN.

> > You're a stupid cunt.

> I'm honestly curious. What, exactly, did you expect to accomplish
> with that post?

I had a little bit too much to drink last night. So, I apologize for the
rudeness, but the sentiment stands. That lady calls herself "big discusser"
and staunchly avoids all discourse, happy in her world of ignorance. I
don't much care her age, rank and serial number; she's a moron and has been
one since she got here, and I, being a staunch supporter of equal rights,
will treat her as such.

Fuck her and all stupid people like her.

Now, care to ask what *she* plans to accomplish with her litany of "rah,
rah" posts that offer nothing but simple stupidity? I find someone who
dares call herself a "big discusser" who has such strong ideas on a subject,
yet refuses to actually discuss anything, just spout out pithy cheerleading
nonsense far more offensive than a four letter word. YMMV.

As I said, it was an unfortunate choice of words. She's a moron. Better?

--
TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Two years, one month, one day, 11 hours, 25 minutes and 37 seconds.
30459 cigarettes not smoked, saving $3,807.38.
Life saved: 15 weeks, 18 hours, 15 minutes.
See my Sig File FAQ: http://pages.prodigy.net/briank.o/SigFAQ.htm
"Brian O'Neill" wrote in
news:oEEC8.34826$G%3.12846894@typhoon.columbus.rr.com:

> "(BigDiscusser)" wrote in message
> news:12905-3CDB14F4-89@storefull-2311.public.lawson.webtv.net...
>
>> I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide
>> variety of topics and am a retired RN.
>
> You're a stupid cunt.

I'm honestly curious. What, exactly, did you expect to accomplish
with that post? I'm assuming that there must be something, since I
haven't seen anyone use 'cunt' that gratuitously since one of my
friends tried to impress the rest of us by proving that he knew the
word -- and that was in fourth grade.

Please, enlighten me as to your intent. I've really tried to figure
it out, but I've eliminated all of the possibilities I can think of.
I don't think you are trying to display your volcabulary, since most
of us have known what 'stupid' and 'cunt' mean for years. I'm also
pretty sure that wasn't intended to be a display of debating
technique, unless you were going for the 'how not to' approach. And
there are far simpler ways to convince people that you are a flaming
asshole. So I'm fresh out of ideas.

--Mike Dunford
"(BigDiscusser)" wrote in message
news:12905-3CDB14F4-89@storefull-2311.public.lawson.webtv.net...

> I am an 80 year old Christian lady. I am interested in a wide variety of
> topics and am a retired RN.

You're a stupid cunt.
On Thu, 09 May 2002 15:53:18 -0700, Nathan wrote:

>> Ed Conrad wrote:
>> > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus! But WE know better: It's
>> > hokus-pokus
>>
>> Actually, *this* is the shortest poem on the evolution of man:
>>
>> It's been resolved
>> That Man evolved.
>
>
> Or, how about this:
>
>
> Wevolved.
>
>
> Nathan

Evolved? Resolved!
gen2rev wrote in message news:<3CDAB610.8E2AFA31@crosswinds.net>...
> Ed Conrad wrote:
> >
> > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> >
> > Ed Conrad
> > > http://www.edconrad.com
>
> Actually, *this* is the shortest poem on the evolution of man:
>
> It's been resolved
> That Man evolved.

I'll beat you by a syllable:


'Twas nature made man, not plan.


Nathan
"stew dean" wrote in message
news:2b68957a.0205100242.4f6c1f3c@posting.google.com...
> "David Sienkiewicz" wrote in message
news:...
> > "Ed Conrad" wrote in message
> > news:3cda6019.51995511@news.shenhgts.net...
> > >
> > > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus
> >
> > No, Ed, WE don't know better at all.
> >
> > What WE ALL (including you) know is that there's massive evidence for
the
> > evolution of man.
> >
> > What WE ALL (including you) know is that you've been pointed to that
> > evidence many times.
> >
> > What WE ALL (including you) know is that you've lied over and over again
> > when you claimed that evidence has never been presented to you or that
your
> > demands for evidence were answered with silence.
> >
> > What WE ALL (including you) know is that you're lying again.
>
> David, Ed's ego rules over his intellect. He feels he's right even if
> the rest of the world proves him wrong. I feel if he admited defeat
> it'd take down his personality like a pack of cards.
>
> For this reason you are wasting your time, no matter what approach you
> try. I've even tried emailing Ed to get to understand what his
> theories are regarding the coal and hubble 'evidence'. No reply. He's
> set on broadcast.
>
> Stew Dean

Don't try to start this again, Skippy.

Run along now.


>

Oh, boy, a poetry slam!

In article ,
"David Sienkiewicz" writes:
> "Ed Conrad" wrote in message
> news:3cda6019.51995511@news.shenhgts.net...
> >
> > Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> > But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus


No evolution is the fundies' tenet.
And there's less hot air in the U.S. Senate.

Or:

So you never evolved? Well, be of good cheer.
You might grow opposable thumbs next year.

--
Royce Buehler buehler@space.mit.edu
"Comme un fou se croit Dieu, nous nous croyons mortels"
-- Pierre Delalande
"Ed Conrad" wrote in message
news:3cda6019.51995511@news.shenhgts.net...
>
> Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
> But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus

No, Ed, WE don't know better at all.

What WE ALL (including you) know is that there's massive evidence for the
evolution of man.

What WE ALL (including you) know is that you've been pointed to that
evidence many times.

What WE ALL (including you) know is that you've lied over and over again
when you claimed that evidence has never been presented to you or that your
demands for evidence were answered with silence.

What WE ALL (including you) know is that you're lying again.


>
> Ed Conrad
> > http://www.edconrad.com
>


Evolution of man, the pseudos' focus!
But WE know better: It's hokus-pokus

Ed Conrad
> http://www.edconrad.com



Fyre's Domain 2002