WordWolf

"How will I recognize him?" "Tall, slim, and dark." "So is my aunt. Anything distinctive about him?" "You get as much pleasure out of killing as I do, so why don't you admit it?" "I admit killing you would be a pleasure."

Don't forget the "kindler, gentler" twi of today hasn't owned up to it either, and any of that which it doesn't do now is more the result of a lack of children on grounds to treat like crapola than a desire to, you know, treat them like children. Not to take away from the brutalities inflicted on resident children, the indoctrination foisted on other kids is not to be dismissed either. I mean, when you have a high school featuring a guest speaker who is a Holocaust Survivor, and a handful of students feel the need to ridicule her until she breaks down into tears at the podium, and all of them just HAPPEN to be from the same religious group, then obviously something is wrong there....

Always the best, Paw. May you always crush your enemies and hear the lamenation of their women!

Ok, let's suppose someone (not me) has administrative access for their XP, but some of the main menus under Start (Settings, etc) aren't coming up. How would this person restore them? If you can point me to the answer, whether you know it yourself, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

I believe another, less dramatic quote, might be called for here.

If the big fellow's Mongo, the sheriff's black, and the speaker's the Waco kid, then this is "BLAZING SADDLES." If not, I have no idea.

Whoops-that is correct, sir! To be specific, he also said Leonard was good with experiences (and vpw derided experience often) but not with The Word. And H1ggins supposedly gave him his Bullinger stuff: "he writes like you teach."

Priceless line from ST:TNG. Forget the episode, though. *wild swing* "Yesterday's Enterprise"?

Correct. "The Odd Couple." One episode had Oscar scheduled to be in a movie, where he had one line, and that was it. (It was repeated a lot in the episode.) A series of twists, and he was fired, and Felix was going to do the line- but he improvised wildly and was also fired. The marriage ceremony was when Oscar's ex-wife, Blanche, was going to get remarried at the Wee Kirk of Yonkers. Felix objected, and they tried again in a few days. And Burger's Fat Farm was where the other lines came up. That's all Burger's lines from the episode. He always seemed to mention food when he spoke. Go, wasway!

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7005596044 Brazil Cat-Puppies Theory Debunked November 21, 2006 10:49 p.m. EST Megan Shannon - All Headline News Staff Writer Sao Paulo, Brazil (AHN) - A Brazilian woman was disappointed when her claim that her cat gave birth to puppies was debunked by a blood test. Cassia Aparecida de Souza, 18, said her cat, Mimi birthed three puppies and three kittens. While the claim seems far-fetched, it actually received a lot of attention by the media and the community. A local paper even asked geneticist Adil Pacheco to do a chromosome test to see whether the girl was right. When the results came back negative, he explained that sometimes mammals will nurse the young of another species, which is probably what gave Souza the impression that the cat birthed the puppies. Pacheco, director of the Institute of Biological Sciences of the University of Passo Fundo said, "People who aren't experts often imagine things. All the facts contradict her."

Well, I linked Jim Carrey, the other day. And I'm not sure Jennifer Aniston was in much we can remember. So, I shall link to Morgan Freeman Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves Sean Connery

Correct! Conan's first lines in the movie, some 20 minutes in. They really played to Ah-nuld's strengths. Go, George!

Eh, lots of groups meet in homes (houses, apts, whatevers.) The low overhead (zero rental fee) makes it a choice for small groups and low budgets. I even knew one group where a guy rented an apt for church, which is smaller than using a whole building, of course...

Indecent Proposal Demi Moore St Elmo's Fire (Now, you've GOT to be able to link from there, 1/2 "the Brat Pack" are in that one....;) )

"Tell us about your career, slugger." "Ladies and gentlemen, we are gathered here again today, to have another crack at uniting this man and this woman..." "What kind of doctor are you?" "I am an orthodontist." "A peach of a morning!" "Boy, he really went bananas!" "You are in a pickle!"

Ok, I'm moving this along.... "Hey, old man, where did you get all this stuff?" "The dead. Our gods are pleased with you. They will watch the battle." "Are they going to help?" "No." "Well, then tell them to stay out of the way." "What is best in life?" "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women."

I'm amazed this isn't sounding vaguely familiar. I've got NOTHING.

Then I'll go with who I was thinking. John Leguizamo Romeo + Juliet Leonardo di Caprio

Antonio Banderas Once Upon a Time in Mexico Johnny Depp

Hiway29 got it. It's "Measure of a Man." I liked the episode, but was disappointed in 2 things: A) Picard did not prepare his case well. He did not anticipate Riker's case, and Riker made a fair, but refutable one. "He's not alive because he can be switched off?" Well, 10 seconds, you can switch any human unconscious if you know how, or (as Raf pointed out when I said that) in 1 second, a vulcan can throw the switch. "He's not alive because of his physical makeup?" There's no "that's formism" defense? Are Starfleet members' rights limited to their resemblance to humanoids? B) Data had been accepted at Starfleet Academy as a student. At the time, he HAD to have been fully accepted as alive and a fully-participating member of the United Federation of Planets. Data had since spent YEARS serving in Starfleet as an officer. Can Starfleet retroactively dismiss the entire service record of ANY officer and declare them a non-entity whenever they want? Is there no 'CLU equivalent in the future? This is the kind of case they LIVE for!!! :) Seems to me that would have been the most DANGEROUS precedent to set, and there had to be TONS of caselaw showing that the rights of any citizen, any officer, can't be revoked. I mean, their Seventh Guarantee is against self-incrimination (the US' Fifth Amendment), but they can't guarantee non-slavery? While you're a slave (lacking control over your own body and whether or not it's disassembled), however, you're protected against incriminating yourself at trial-doesn't that make you feel better? No? Well, me neither.

I understand venting, but was the profanity really necessary? I think you could have had more impact without the cursing. After all, cursing never made lcm any more effective a speaker...

I'm waiting to hear 2 different results of the tests. A) The chromosome count. B) A genetic test confirming the cat is the actual mother of the puppies. See, a mother cat had kittens. She was found with puppies and kittens. Jumping to the conclusion that she birthed the puppies is silly-when there are more likely possibilities that have happened before. One link I read said that there's been plenty of times that's happened- and I've read stories down the years where one animal of one species raised an animal of another species.

Strawman 1. A) Supposedly, I claimed Creationism was "cold science." I claimed my reply had NOTHING TO DO WITH CREATIONISM, any more than my liking Rock and Roll had nothing to do with my reply. Your treatment of my post's content was careless, which doesn't impress me with your ability to view evidence (which may be better than this, of course...) B) All Creationists believe in a 6000-year-old earth. There's several positions held by Creationists. ONE of those is that one, and I myself have argued AGAINST it. Since you knew even vpw never claimed a 6000 year old earth, you HAD to know there was at least ONE other position-but you slapped that label on me without hesitation. As a Creationist who's never based his beliefs on whatever crackpot you've managed to find, I reject your suggestion that most Creationists base their beliefs on him or his work. I CAN ask around, if it amuses me, and see if anyone's heard of him or his. Also note that I've no problem believing any scientific theory, so long as the evidence actually SUPPORTS IT. Saying "Creationists are wrong because some of them are crackpots with silly ideas" is not "supporting" evolution any more than it's refuting anyone except certain crackpots. And I'm supposed to take your word that the thing is actually the logical conclusion supported bythe evidence, of course. Please spare ME the line that you're fairly representing what I actually TYPED ABOVE. You've already passed judgement long before I ever posted. Don't blame me if your own scientific background THEN was that shallow, and don't decide mine is equally shallow, since you know little about it. A cat was found with kittens and puppies, and the ONLY conclusion is that she gave birthto both? That's more than "premature", that's silly. Well, Gregor Mendel was hardly a scientific hack, and if you want to dismiss a man considered important enough to be a "household name" among scientists, that's your choice. BTW, no science is "irrefutable"-but there are degrees of validation in REAL science. If you held otherwise, that's hardly my fault, but that's not "good science", that's "religion." And vpw plus Hovind = ALL CREATIONISTS?Sloppy reasoning, Garth. You can certainly do better than that. Crackpots do not set the standard for rational people. I don't have any numbers-but it sounds like you've been keeping count... No I don't. I don't follow all the news. Maybe you're on some "anti-Creationist" mailing list that keeps you informed on that one better than me. So, you DID post that link with the specific goal of slapping Creationists. I'll adjust my expectations of further posts accordingly. Let me know if that ever changes.

I'm a Creationist. And my comments were based ENTIRELY on genetics and cold science. Someone made a claim that seems to violate taxonomic categorization as we know it, and BLATANTLY so (like someone just jumping off a sidewalk and flying into the sky.) What does that have to do with Creationism? If anything, it might WEAKEN the case for evolution, if something could violatenot only species, but genus and so on. I'd say that's a matter of opinion-I've seen evidence that the basis of evolutionary thought has already been disproven on a biochemical level. But you're entitled to your own opinion on things. I'm curious, though. Was this entire thread meant as an attempt to give Creationists here "the finger"? If so, saying "your mother" would have been faster, and more topical. Just because your exposure to Mendel's Law was confined to twi does not mean it's either obscure or unscientific. It's basic genetics, and any properly-educated Darwinist would have had the same reaction I had. Just because something was said in pfal is neither a guarantee it is right OR wrong.

*wild swing* Friends???? No, no, 2 spinoffs, one worked- it's CHEERS!