"design ≠ creation"

However it does require a designer who wuld have to be capable of manipulation on the same level as a "creator" making them one and the same.

Doctor Who intro from the Tom Baker era.

However to most mathematicians it means "a to the power of two" and considering the context...

a^2 is also a lot easier for most people to type.

I think it was Pope John Paul 2 who announced that the RC's official position is that evolution is the most likely creation theory.

The Catholic church gets bashed on a lot and I'm never sure why. I guess because I was brought up in a communtiy of many denominations, so it was all pretty intergrated. Notably though, none of the creationists were Catholic. Most were Anglican.

Looks like she fell into the exact same trap that most creationists do: completely ignoring fact and choosing alternative definitions for scientific words.

Most creationsists I've met at least admit that micro-evolution takes place simply because we can observe it directly. This woman would have us turn a blind eye to all domesticated animals.

Ah thanks gorgonheap. I couldn't find the original video myself but I guess this one will do.

Enjoy your permanent brain damage and lung cancer.

Damn, I had ment to post a live video of this ages ago but got distracted and completely forgot!

Oh well, good luck with the sift.

I didn't realise this was an actual event, I thought it was just some obscure 4chan meme.

It doesn't have to be setup exactly but he obviously knew what he was going to say, there aren't many standup comedians who work entirely on improv. I think its a safe bet to say that there is usually an American in the audience which he uses as a lead-in to the routine.

I imagine that depending on the brand of battery they use different internal cells. This way uses 4 * large 1.5V cells while the other used 32 * small 1.5V cells in a 4 configuration

Who me? I'm just posting a lot of halo vids at the moment for two reasons: I have a mate who won't shut up about it (I don't even own a 360), and I was really surprised these hadn't already been sifted. I loled when I saw the spoof version of this got out the queue first.

It is the responsibility of the proposer to provide positive proof for a theory. So the real question what reason do you have to believe the planes *were* being remotely controlled. In this case I think Occam's razor applies nicely.

As far as I am aware the other video is a seperate production. Notice how there is no continuity between them.

Joe dirt: yes it was released a long time ago but nobody posted it and with Halo 3 just around the corner I thought it would be appropriate.

Wow, fraud. Such brilliant advice.