Just because your magic 8-ball told you that doesn't make it true. Believe it or not, for some people, requiring an internet connection is a deal-breaker. Some people are often in situations where they don't have a reliable internet connection. But don't let reality stop you from claiming to know what other people will do.

It's a great bit, but why is it flipped horizontally?

As an atheist, I can see why they'd want to fight this - you can be sure if they had "randomly" found a crescent with a star beside it, they wouldn't be including that in the memorial. This strikes me as exactly the same sort of deception as "Intelligent design" - sure, they mean God did it, they just won't say it out loud, so no one can object. The only reason they want to include this is because of the religious significance of the cross.

That being said, it seems like such a trivially thing to fight over. There are important areas to spend your time and resources on (Intelligent design being a good example), but stuff like this, and the "Seven in Heaven" street sign, just make them look petty and vindictive. I don't think it's doing anyone any favors.

Well, in the cops' defense (sarcastically, of course), the guy DID say "Do whatever you want".

After going through all that effort, I'm surprised they didn't plant some drugs in the vehicle.

Ok, playing with Advanced start on Easy doesn't make this very impressive.

>> ^ponceleon:
Edit: you might not even need any twins, the woman walks out of the room and just walks into the second room...


No, you'd still need the twins for the end when "he" turns around, the girl couldn't get from one room to the other quickly enough.

The best definition they could have used for the supernatural, is that it's something that cannot be known. Most atheists don't believe that there's anything that's unknowable - unknown, certainly, but not unknowable. I think that fits well with the point that Hitchens was making.

Yeah, that "Heather" was horribly designed - very plastic looking face.

Wow, this does nothing to help the case of legalizing marijuana, imo. The two "interviews" are horrible - they both knowingly committed illegal acts, and then get all whiney when it actually has consequences.

There are plenty of good, logical reasons to make it legal, and in general I'm in favour of doing so, but seriously, if this is the best they can do on the "pro" side, I certainly wouldn't be convinced.

>> ^dag:
Wow, he really did seem offended. Seems weird to be sensitive to that with such a laughable title.


It seems like Nimoy thought the guy was laughing at the fact that he'd be in such a movie, not laughing at the title itself (which is what I believe he was laughing at).

It's a nice idea, but I'd like to see what happens with them on a cloudy day.

This fails on so many levels. It demonstrates a lack of understanding of the concept of "infinite", to begin with. That one cannot tell when an infinite amount of time has "passed" is simply in keeping with the definition of infinite, that is, an unmeasurable quantity. It'd be the same as me saying that I'll give you a cookie after you've counted to infinity - obviously you can't do so. But that in no way invalidates the concept of infinity.

Even accepting, however, the original premise, it further breaks down when talking about creation. If you postulate that there is no such thing as infinite time, then "God" also had to come into existence at some point. Either that, or you have to believe that "God" is infinite - and you just spent all that time proving that there's no such thing as infinite. And that just begs the question of who or what supposedly created "God"? And that just leads to an infinite regression (funny how often infinite comes up) of who/what created who/what created "God", ad nauseum.

And finally, even if one were willing to concede that there was some "awesomely powerful, awesomely intelligent" entity that created the universe, the idea that that entity corresponds with your definition of what "God" is hasn't been proven in the slightest. Considering how many varied "Gods" that man has invented over the years, the idea that you somehow have the "right" one, and everyone that doesn't believe in the same deity has the "wrong" one is simply extreme arrogance - and definitely not "proven".