The moon is made of green cheese!
This bit about the cool people dying young is nonsense. Certainly there are myriads of uncool people who die young.
As for people who are(were) just as cool (or even cooler) at an old age: Paul McCartney, Stephane Grappelli, Maggie Smith, Vladimir Horowitz, Clint Eastwood, Samuel Jackson, Leonard Cohen, Michelangelo, Orson Welles, John Wayne, Sean Connery, Ella Fitzgerald, etc etc.
Perhaps an individual sasquatch pops up occasionally via time travel.
Along Frink’s line of reasoning, I also consider the various religious gods to be highly unlikely, for the very reason that their descriptions are comprehensible to us. Any being that could create our universe must be so many intellectual/evolutionary rungs above us, that we couldn’t possibly understand essentially anything substantive about it.
Further, I see no reason for god to try explaining anything to us. If we found some sort of primitive protozoic life on Europa, would we try explaining anything to it? Its life is all about eating, pooping, and splitting. We might feed it, but in so doing we wouldn’t be revealing anything of substance to it about us. Similarly, our life of physics, math, art, etc. would likely be so primitive compared to whatever thoughts/processes god utilizes, that I see no point in him “communicating” at all with us. I think we are just patting ourselves on the back if we think that god wants a relationship with us.
it seems to me that you do not understand that your “opponents” are not opposed to the idea of God,
It seems to me that they are opposed to the idea of a God who desires relationship with us, if even exists at all.
I’m not sure what you mean by “opposed to the idea”. I’m opposed to privatizing social security, and I’m opposed to mandating prayer in schools. By contrast, I don’t believe in God, but that doesn’t mean that I am “opposed” to there being a God. If there is, great! What I oppose is passing laws based on the assumption that there is a God, especially some alleged particular God.
As far as whether he desires a relationship with us, that would be awesome. But it seems to me that if he does exist, he isn’t making that desire clear at all. It seems more like a claim made by some people.
People believe many things that aren’t proven, even in science. For example, much of computer science is based on the belief that P is not equal to NP, even though that hasn’t been proven. All of math and science includes certain assumptions that must be made in order to make progress. So saying that it is being overly-critical to require “proof in a lab” to believe in God (or ghosts) is a red herring. People don’t require that level of proof to believe things.
However, testimony about ghosts is un-compelling – not because it isn’t “proven in a lab”, but because there is no clear tangible evidence to corroborate that testimony. Also, testimony about ghosts is wildly inconsistent.
In my opinion, testimony about god is also uncompelling for the same reasons. It makes zero sense to me that a god who wishes to be revered would leave no clear and tangible evidence of his existence. It also makes no sense that there would be over 4000 religions in the world, and god expects us to believe the testimony from one of them while discounting the testimony from the other 3999 – especially when most people in the world are guaranteed to not have even been exposed to that one or its adherents’ testimony.
Further, using the concept of “faith” to circumvent the above reasoning is something that I find disturbing. Being asked to believe something so important, specifically in the absence of evidence or logical support, is far more easily explained by it being a historical mechanism for people to control other people. And for that, there is plenty of corroborating evidence.
It’s an age-old tactic – when the scandals are closing in, bomb someone to keep your base waving the flag and screaming your support. U - S - A ! U - S - A ! Mission accomplished.
Unfortunately, the current political climate (white house, senate, congress - and soon the supreme court) is to deregulate everything, especially the internet, so that mega-billionaires can become as rich as possible. That is not compatible with requiring companies to waste their time with annoyances like protecting consumers’ personal data.
My point was that it sounds like a mechanism for squashing all dissenting debate. The very act of discussing a change to a law could be labeled “promoting” illegal activity, and all involved with running the forum where the discussion took place could be criminally charged. That sounds rather patently un-American to me. A dangerous precedent.
So, under the proposed bill, would our arguing the merits of decriminalizing certain illegal drugs constitute “promoting” criminal acts, and thus make this site guilty of a crime?
On the entire previous page of posts (page #691 in my screen), there was not a single post about politics.
I still don’t understand why the Probe isn’t examining trump’s tax returns.
TV’s Frink said:
In general, I don’t like negative campaign ads. But when you have a nazi running against you, you have to.
Or a child molester…
Or a serial sexual assaulter…
Or a witch…
If in “witch” you mean like “wiccan”, I’ll take the wiccan any day.
TV’s Frink said:
TV’s Frink said:
Many are trolls in love with their Troll-in-Chief.
I have no idea what Mrebo’s problem is though.
I think it’s hilarious that such simple and good advice needs to be presented to him like he’s 5 years old and he’s still unable to follow it. And at the end of the day, this doesn’t change anything. I don’t know what’s wrong with you humorless knuckleheads.
It would be funny if it were a tv show. It’s not, and it’s not.
Unfortunately Trump either doesn’t understand or doesn’t care about the consequences of anything he does, and it seems neither do you.
What do you think are the consequences of congratulating?
Putin is running a dictatorial regime with sham elections propped up by massive national and international propaganda. What are the consequences of the U.S. president congratulating him on his successful running of a sham election?.. it feeds his propaganda machine and strengthens his legitimacy. Worse, Trump makes the effort to congratulate Putin, but can’t make the effort to do anything in response to a nerve gas attack by this same regime on our closest ally (England). Trump’s supporters haven’t come to grips with what a danger this dalliance he has with Putin is to the free world.
I wonder if some people are confusing Papa Murphy’s with Papa John’s.
My wife and I have learned that it takes us about 20 minutes to get out of work clothes, make a salad, pour some wine, set up a movie, and kick back. If I pick up a Papa Murphy’s on the way home, it’s fresh out of the oven right about when we’re ready to eat, and tastes homemade. If I pick up from Round Table (across the street from Murph’s), we’re talking 45 minutes of congealing before we ever sit down for a bite.
Murphy’s also keeps costs down (and thus prices) by having small takeout stores - no ovens, no waiters, no tables, no drinks or liquor license, all they do is make dough and assemble the pizza you want. The hard part about making a pizza is kneeding the dough and slicing the ingredients, not the cooking - that part’s easy.
Because I like the pizza better when it’s hot right out of the oven. That is harder to get unless I eat it at the restaurant. Typical travel time of a half hour before I get a cooked pizza home and served, it’s already cooled off and partially congealed. With Papa Murphy’s it’s like I’m eating it at the restaurant when it’s still fresh out of the oven. I can also cook it to exactly the done-ness I prefer.
I think they may be too old, plus any pregancy is dangerous.
I don’t see how anyone could compare a frozen pizza to Papa Murphy’s. The best frozen pizza I’ve had is California Pizza Kitchen, but it’s still a frozen pizza. Papa Murphy’s is fresh; you watch them prepare the dough and assemble it right in front of you with fresh vegetables. If you cook it within the hour it’s quite good, especially with the garlic sauce.
Admittedly, a very good restaurant pizza should be better, especially if they have a proper brick oven. But most pizza places mentioned in this thread don’t have that.
It also might depend on the type of crust. For take-and-bake, I generally stick with thick crust because you want it more doughy/bread-like, which a regular oven can produce nicely. Thin crust is more touchy with respect to the type of oven.
Currently my favorite is Papa Murphy’s “pan” pizza – chicken and artichokes with creamy garlic sauce. I’ve tried a lot of pizza all over the world, and honestly this is pretty sublime.
However, when in Italy, pizza is an entirely different and ethereal thing. Especially if I can get it with FRESH anchovies (which don’t seem to exist in the U.S.) and prosciutto.
Interestingly, one of the very best pizzas I’ve ever had was in 2008 at the top of Victoria Peak in Hong Kong. Very authentic Italian thin crust style.
I read “Brief History of Time” and even managed to understand about half of it. One of the great minds in human history. I was so glad he was able to realize his dream of going into space.
Has our president said anything in his memory? I’m fearful that he’ll do an imitation of him.
WTH == WTF only less.
As a liberal, I would agree that there is some truth to the idea that if Warren were a Republican, that left-leaning politicians would tear into her more about the Native American thing. She would probably be branded with one of the label-du-jours, “cultural appropriation” or some such.
It’s why being a leftie, I try not to fall into lockstep with every bandwagon the left’s politicians are currently saying. When you’ve been around as long as I have, you start to notice that the left and right flip-flop on some of the issues. For example, years ago it was the left promoting tariffs and the right who were opposed to them. I wish the two sides, and the voters, would do a better job of prioritizing their fights.
My grandmother for years said we were like 1/32 native american… something about her having a grandmother named “Hawk” or some such. Well, my sister just took a test and it turns out we have absolutely zero native american DNA. Apparently this is a common story.
As per the recent “current events” topic discussion, I hereby proclaim that I will only defend my title under the proviso that Frink agrees to sing the National Anthem beforehand.