Now that I’ve had the current banking disaster explained to me (short answer: the people responsible will be receiving a huge handout from the taxpayers), I can understand why Obama has decided to quit. It makes sense. Whoever wins the election is going to be in for a world of pain and hard work, if they take the job seriously.
Oh, wait…McCain has already signaled that he won’t be taking it seriously.
It will get you a mention on a famous webcomic, that’s what.
I look good as an angel (not exactly).
Literally. Bill Mutranowski of Atheist Cartoons sent me these drawings. Now you know where I get my black sense of humor: every morning I get up to look at that face in the mirror, and a fellow has got to laugh. And they all look exactly like me!
You can check out his collection of cartoons — this one was my favorite.
That last panel cracks me up.
I confess to feeling a faint twinge of envy at all the news about the Large Hadron Collider. It’s Big Science, it’s got lots of shiny fancy gadgets, and it’s like NASCAR for nerds — they get to spin things together at high speed and smash them together. We biologists lack anything quite so dramatic.
Scientists from the Evolutionary Acceleration Research Institute (EARI) announced that the first test of the Giant Animal Smasher (GAS) will begin on December 19, 2008, the 41st anniversary of the premiere of Dr. Dolittle.
Dr. Thomas Malwin, head of the research project, said, “The first test runs will only accelerate microscopic life-forms like bacteria and viruses to high speeds, but theoretically the GAS can handle animals as large as squirrels, hence the squirrel smasher moniker.”
Biologists from around the globe hope the GAS will unlock the secrets of the so-called “Darwin particle” that could unlock the secrets to life.
Ha! Physicists only smash together tiny invisible things that require detectors to be seen. Our stuff will be much more photogenic, require splash goggles to witness, and a firehose to clean out the chambers afterwards.
Although, I’ve got to say, the message is somewhat attenuated by the fact that this is a comic strip about a talking cat having an argument with a troll.
I like it. This is a perfect analogy to creationist argument.
The theory of childhood, also known as child origin, is a damnable, loathsome and indefensible lie. How can any thinking person suppose all humans used to be babies once?
There is no development path from babies to adults, no transitional forms between these two species. Show me even one baby with the head of a grown man on his body. Can you? No? Not even a bearded toddler? No adults with unfused skullbones, outside unfortunate disorders? Not even a tiny little newborn girl suddenly sprouting a respectable bosom? You can’t find them, because they don’t exist. There isn’t a single transitional form between children and adults, and you will never find one because the theory simply is an unscientific lie.The development of children has been well-researched in our six-month study following a sample of one thousand children and adults of various ages. We have conclusively proven that while there are minor changes in features like height and body fat, and replacement of deciduous teeth with permanent teeth, incontravertibly still every creature in the study that started out as a child had only slightly more adult features at the end of the observation period than at its beginning. Children and adults are separate kinds and there will never be sufficient changes to change one into the other. We reject any evidence from longer-term studies as we believe the laws of physics have changed within the last year.
To claim people come from children is demeaning and morally degrading. We have observed how children behave. If we acted like small children we’d all be demanding and impatient, and we’d be cheating, lying, and stealing from each other all the time. If the theory of childhood were true there would be no morality, and with no morality to build one on, no society. Childhood is a wicked lie used by charlatans to justify evils such as public schools.
There is no consensus on the theory of childhood in the scientific community. We should teach the controversy. Our children will be served well to learn that the prospect of them becoming adults is merely a theoretical idea. Many children come from families that do not subscribe to the theory of childhood, and they could be disturbed if the theory were taught as fact.
(via)
At last, it’s a Palin we can all support.
