Comments Posted By Romeocat
Displaying 11 To 20 Of 30 Comments
Grrr... What the heck *is* it with TPad and WP trackbacks? Sorry, Rick, I tried to TB to this post at my place, and it didn't go through.
But if you send some people my way, I'm donating $5.00 per polite comment to Soldiers' Angels there, or leave one on my Carnival of Recipes post, and it's $5.00 to the Red Cross. Wanna help me out and send some people over?
-- R'cat
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 1.09.2005 @ 12:49
CatHouse Chat
ROTFLMAO! Oh, OH LORD, that is too funny! Mumon, you have that wonderful sense of humor and the sly wit for the perfect parody troll! Oh, gosh that was good...
[/sarcasm]
Gadzooks, Mumon, what the heck are you using for a skull? I think we should find out and manufacture it as head armor for the troops, because if the grenade of Truth won't get through, those morters (sp?) and IEDs wouldn't have a chance with our armed forces.
Hey, you could serve by saving a lot of lives that way...
[shaking head] Sorry, Rick, got a little... frustrated there...
Many hugzz, blog-brother!
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 22.08.2005 @ 17:15
-- R'cat
CatHouse Chat
Rick! Rick, Rick, Rick... I *loved* this! Excellent post, and it shows how gracious you are to give such a high reality quotient to Willis and Kos ;-)
Of course, you are totally on the mark concerning the cesspool that is the DU. *shudder* Are they even human? Sometimes I wonder if they aren't space aliens invading us...
Keep up the good work, blog-brother!
-- R'cat
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 6.08.2005 @ 10:00
Well, I can see that you are still not fully assimilated: you didn't post a picture.
[private to Snowball: Lady Snowball, if I may be so bold as to make a suggestion to Your Royal Highness? If Your Majesty deems it proper, it would be a wonderful display of Your Power if You would command Your minion, Rick, to upload a portrait of Your wonderful Personage!]
With deepest respects, and greetings from Your Cousin Sovreigns, Sultana Smudge and Princess Pixel, I remain Your humble servant,
R'cat
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 12.06.2005 @ 20:38
My Lord King!
Your humble servant, Lady Romeocat of the Sharp Claws and Gracious Snark, wishes to report that she has alerted your Allies of Wide Awakedom!
We will fight for our own demensne in the Land of the Coalition and be your allies to the end!
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 7.06.2005 @ 14:34
IT'S NICE TO BE WELL THOUGHT OF
I will not obey any FEC regulations that restrict my freedom of speech!
The gub'mint better start treading lightly. Too many people are getting more than irritated with the insidious tentacles of gub'mint regulation and restriction.
Don't you send those tentacles into MY life: you'll bloody well draw back a nub!
[Cat soothes her ruffled fur and sheathes her claws]
*pft!* to them!
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 5.06.2005 @ 07:59
Ah, Rick - you do manage to find something to give us encouragement regularly! I hope and pray this little girl will continue to be the joy and delight of her family for many years to come!
Best,
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 13.05.2005 @ 18:32
R'cat
CatHouse Chat
I WILL BE SUPERHAWK NO MORE FOREVER
*sniff*
Ah, Superhawk, we hardly knew ye... Well, Rick, I hope you will still forgive us if we slip up and type "SH" upon occasion.
Good for you! I've thought about doing the same, but I like my pen name too much (sentimental value), and it's not as if people can't find me out anyway.
So, welcome to the blogosphere, Rick Moran, LOL!
-- R'cat
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 12.05.2005 @ 12:32
CatHouse Chat
ATTACK OF THE KILLER POTATO HEADS
Also, SH, in addition to some of the thoughtful comments above (sorry - still getting the houses in order for the move *grf!*), I might also suggest Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behe.
And I'm not sure Nature is a peer-reviewed journal? I don't read it, but is it similar to something like the Journal of the American Medical Association? I'm assuming that we have the same definition of a peer-reviewed journal.
Secondly, my whole point was that the whole issue has been clouded by an unwillingness to admit to mistakes, frauds, and poor evidence. There is so much dogmatic ideology running rampant, that neither side is willing or able to hear what the other side is saying.
Finally (and I suppose this is where you and I go in opposite directions), I can't see how you get solar systems and people and animals and oceand and literature and air and physics and atoms etc., etc., without some sort of Original Cause, which must be intelligent (otherwise where do order and intelligence come from? Nothing plus nothing times nothing equals.... nothing) and therefore must also....
No. I'll stop there. I'm not going to dive into the endless circle and insult my friend and his courtesy in permitting me to comment here.
So. We'll have to agree to disagree, and remain friends, and perhaps help each other sharpen up our respective arguments LOL
And I would never dream of sharpening my claws in your house. That would be rude. Unless, of course, there are some moonbat trolls hanging around...? [peering into the corners....]
;)
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 10.05.2005 @ 18:16
Hey, Superhawk -
I agree that science shouldn't be used for indoctrination. However, I think you glossed over some of the difficulties "Christian idiotarians" have with today's "science" as taught in schools. Quite probably, I am assuming, you did this because it wasn't the main focus of your post.
As a "Christian idiotarian" myself (well, to a certain extent), science should be taught according to reality, which includes discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of theories. The ID movement, while certainly having problems of its own, brings challenges to the near-monolithic evolution caucus which are usually dismissed flippantly.
Now, for me, in a perfect world, everyone would believe in the Bible and be saved. As a Christian, that's pretty natural. However, I live here in reality, and a perfect world won't happen here on this earth. So what would make me absolutely ecstatic? Something like:
"The theory of Evolution goes like this... Scientists who support this theory give a) b) c) d) as evidence. Here are some strengths of this theory, and here are some weaknesses that opponants cite. The theory of Intelligent Design says this... Scintists who support this theory give a) b) c) d) as evidence. Here are the strengths of this theory, and here are weaknesses discussed by the theory's opponants. Some well-known scientists on each side are/their qualifications and published, peer-reviewed articles are.... Here are several deceptions that each side has used to promote their theory, and here are scientists who have worked hard to keep their "side" honest."
Etc., etc., etc.
I admit, I'm em a Scientist. But I have been exposed to points on both sides which make me long for a dispassionate discussion of the pros and cons of both sides, without descending into the rhetorical extremes. Is that so wrong? And, I think that most of the "mainstream" Christian idiotarians would be happy with that, too.
Anyway. I don't mean to rant at you - you have always been fair and willing to encourage civil discussion. It's just a very sore spot for many right now. I hope that I didn't step on any toes. (Shutting up, now....)
Comment Posted By Romeocat On 7.05.2005 @ 10:31
