Well, well, well - I guess the groundwork has been laid for the ol' "power corrupts" saw...
Leave it to the resident liberal geniuses to set the record straight and pass judgement on us all. What more proof does this board need that they are the ones who belong to the "enlightened" party? Now if they could only master the butterfly ballot.
The analogy doesn't stop there. There are also walls of buildings on the north side of the street which we can bound off of into a southerly direction back into dangerous traffic. If we are not smart enough to be careful, our existence will always be at risk.
As to wether a divine creator actively made us the most advanced species on the planet, I found this analogy amusing.
"Consider a drunken man walking down a sidewalk that runs east-west. Skirting the sidewalk?s south side is a brick wall, and on the sidewalk?s north side is a curb and a street. Will the drunk eventually veer off the curb, into the street? Probably Does this mean he has a ?northerly directional tendency?? No. He?s just as likely to veer south as north. But when he veers south the wall bounces him back to the north. He is taking a ?random walk? that just seems to have a directional tendency.
If you get enough drunks and give them enough time, one will eventually get all the way to the other side of the street (notwithstanding traffic fatalities involving other, less lucky drunks). That?s us: the lucky species that, through millions of years of random motion, happened to get to the far north. But we didn?t get there because north is an inherently valuable place to be; indeed, if it weren?t for the brick wall, there would be just as many drunks south of the sidewalk as north of it, and the randomness of all our paths would be obvious. That is: if it weren?t for the fact that no species can have less than zero complexity, the history of life wouldn?t look like a natural progression. Gould writes: ?The vaunted progress of life is really random motion away from simple beginnings, not directed impetus toward inherently advantageous complexity.?"
Doc> It appears that the Yahoo! Cray Message Board has a new resident psychologist.
You don't have to be a psychologist to know when someone is nuts:)
Doc> I would tend to concur with this diagnosis...
What did I just say?
Doc> ...although not the treatment program.
You have to admit it is 100% effective. Can you make the same claim of most traditional methods?
> No, it is a paranoia problem. <
It appears that the Yahoo! Cray Message Board has a new resident psychologist.
> Right now he is still in the ignore stage, though his recent posts shows him progressing nicely. <
I would tend to concur with this diagnosis...
> Let the guy get wilder and wilder till he becomes a physical threat to others, then we can put him down like some rabid animal. <
...although not the treatment program.
I have reached the conclusion that they really don't bite and in spite of their fearsome appearance, they really do make fine, loving novelty-pets. Mr. TCV seems to have hit upon the right approach: it is an ego stroke if you can claim one of the species as a "close friend". I suspect this is the real reason why someone would keep a pet alligator.