 | | Re: More religion (sort of) (was Re: More Clinton )
|
|
(...) I don't know... I think it's pretty safe to say we don't need to wait until we open the box to determine the state of the fishies existence...just listen for the sound of a satisified cat. :) (26 years ago, 25-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More religion (sort of) (was Re: More Clinton )
|
|
(...) None and all.. I don't think the nerve gas used in S's box is very specific :) And when we open it, there'll be a collapse of waveforms to none or all. [4] Jasper (...) [4] No, I don't know what I'm talking about [6] [5] Yes, you can have (...) (26 years ago, 25-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More religion (sort of) (was Re: More Clinton )
|
|
Jasper Janssen writes: [[Sniped some stuff]] (...) [[snipped the rest]] Why don't we put all the fish in the Schrödinger-box[1] and wait till tomorow to see which fish has survived? Mark [1] This is the box in which you put a cat and some poison and (...) (26 years ago, 25-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Okay, that's the last straw (was Re: Translating catalogues)
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <36A9D214.F685A741@v...er.net>... (...) Much, except for that "intelligently" part, given their current course of action (when view from Lugneter's perspective). ;-) Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist Looking (...) (26 years ago, 24-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Okay, that's the last straw (was Re: Translating catalogues)
|
|
(...) OK, here you go then: "That's their right, and if you don't like it, give them whatever feedback you think might help in the hopes that they'll listen. You're certainly within you rights to make whatever non slanderous statements you wish to (...) (26 years ago, 23-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More religion (sort of) (was Re: More Clinton )
|
|
Jesse Long wrote: <good fish explanation> (...) Well, there are two kinds. That one, which makes me chuckle, and another one which substitutes TRUTH as the word in the middle on the larger fish. THAT one makes me steam. The first is clever. The (...) (26 years ago, 23-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: More religion (sort of) (was Re: More Clinton )
|
|
(...) Thanks. (...) Oh yeah, right, I think I remember seeing that once or twice now. (...) We here in the Netherlands almost never have bumper-stickers, so I guess we missed out :) (...) Any bets on when we will see a darwin fish being eaten by a (...) (26 years ago, 23-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No way for a LEGO newbie to get up to speed? Unfair!
|
|
(...) Firephobe! :) Jasper (26 years ago, 22-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More religion (sort of) (was Re: More Clinton )
|
|
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <36a8aa9f.144815446@...et.com>... (...) I'll start this from the beginning, in case you don't know the whole story. Christians use a fish symbol to represent Christianity. It looks kind of like this: <>< if your (...) (26 years ago, 22-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No way for a LEGO newbie to get up to speed? Unfair!
|
|
(...) If you let the tree dry out really well first, you don't need very many candles... Steve (26 years ago, 22-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No way for a LEGO newbie to get up to speed? Unfair!
|
|
(...) Ewww! Artificial trees? Whaddaya wanna bet that's the same kind of people that use _electric_ ccandles in their tree? :-/ Jasper, who's always celebrated Winter soltice with _real_ candles in the tree... (26 years ago, 22-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More religion (sort of) (was Re: More Clinton )
|
|
(...) What _is_ a Darwin fish? or a God fish, for that matter? Jasper (26 years ago, 22-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No way for a LEGO newbie to get up to speed? Unfair!
|
|
from lugnet.general (...) Well... some of us do, anyway. :-) We celebrate the winter solstice instead, and we use all artificial trees. (26 years ago, 22-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More religion (sort of) (was Re: More Clinton )
|
|
Christopher L. Weeks wrote in message <36A7985D.6AF9AF4@cc...ri.edu>... (...) Spotted recently on a car: a "Darwin" fish getting eaten by a larger "God" fish. The saga continues. Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist Looking for answers? Read the (...) (26 years ago, 22-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | More religion (sort of) (was Re: More Clinton )
|
|
(...) I'm not sure that it's possible to write this and assure that it won't be taken the wrong way, and maybe since I'm responding to something a month old, I should just let it go, but as you've already guessed, I'm not going to. (I'm going to (...) (26 years ago, 21-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.foreign.policy (was: lugnet.religion.flame)
|
|
(...) I happen to know that some people in the US would agree. and later wrote again: (...) Wrong. I think it is up to us. I think this because as a society we have taken on the burden of opposing tyranny world-wide. I support this stance, but (...) (26 years ago, 21-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Okay, that's the last straw (was Re: Translating catalogues)
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <36A68964.87B295D4@v...er.net>... (...) I figured your philosophy would require you to say something like "that's their right and if you don't like it, suck it up and go somewhere else." Jesse ___...___ Jesse The (...) (26 years ago, 21-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | SF Story (was Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this)
|
|
(...) check my back issues of Science Fiction Age for the author and title. The action took place on a lunar colony, IIRC. I forget who won the case, though. Chad (26 years ago, 8-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Profanity (was Re: Trains)
|
|
I'd hardly call that a profanity... nor 'hell', but that tends to get picked on a lot on American TV shows too. But we're rapidly heading off-topic here - the problem is that Lego trains resemble no kind of (mother-flippin') train that is currently (...) (26 years ago, 8-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
