News and Politics Forum

Qwinn · 07-16-2008 02:40 AM

Did you copy and paste this from some TCL thread?

Um. Hate to be overwhelmingly geeky here, but the only TCL I know is a scripting language

The pictures and quotes were indeed cut and pasted, from the link elliot provided.

EDIT: Oh, wait, you meant over there. Nah. From this very thread.

That bat looks like a TT.

Ok, I'll just have to admit to an epic fail on acronym knowledge.

Qwinn

Last edited by Qwinn (07-16-2008 02:43 AM)

2.FOH. · 07-16-2008 03:17 AM

Over there, the common criticism about -many- new car designs was/is that the
car "looks like an Audi TT."

It may only resemble a TT about this --><-- much at -just- one certain angle, but it matters
not to the VWVortex braintrust that frequents The Car Lounge. It might as well be a mirror image.

Why that's such a big deal, I'll never know since any car enthusiast worth his weight in petrol
knows that function should come first & foremost. That's why the E36 BMW is the only car
anyone needs for any & all reasons.

Autocrossing? Buy an E36. Want a fun daily driver with timeless style & performance to spare?
E36. Taking the family across the country? E36 4 door. Towing a boat? An E36 will pull anything
(one with a 1.8T swap would be even better as the torque would come in handy). Plowing
a driveway? SCCA Roadracing? Want a combination rock crawler/bracket racer? E36 BMW
is the only real choice.

...or a Miata

Jesus Is My Pilot · 07-16-2008 12:01 PM

Old fogey, the e36 has been replaced by the e30.

2.FOH. · 07-16-2008 12:05 PM

Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:
Old fogey

AARP called & told me to tell you your card is in the mail & to EAD.

the e36 has been replaced by the e30.

Really? Even where towing is concerned?

AC · 07-16-2008 12:34 PM

I (now) like where this thread is headed.

But back on topic, I think that when it comes to zebras and horses, God is guilty of some blatant badge engineering. Platform sharing is fine, but come on.

Or maybe the zebra pics I've seen are Brenda Priddy spy shots of upcoming horse, um, mules?

Jesus Is My Pilot · 07-16-2008 01:48 PM

2.FOH. wrote:
Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:
Old fogey
AARP called & told me to tell you your card is in the mail & to EAD.

Poor fella, dimensia is setting in. You think AARP is calling you to talk to me... I think it's time to take you for a walk in the woods.

the e36 has been replaced by the e30.
Really? Even where towing is concerned?

Yes, though it may require an E36 motor transplant, like AC has.

Thus solving the chicken before the egg debate.

2.FOH. · 07-16-2008 02:17 PM

Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:
2.FOH. wrote:
Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:
Old fogey
AARP called & told me to tell you your card is in the mail & to EAD.
Poor fella, dimensia is setting in. You think AARP is calling you to talk to me... I think it's time to take you for a walk in the woods.

Matt, put the .22 down.....& no, I don't want any steak.

2.FOH. · 07-16-2008 02:29 PM

& BTW...

JIMP wrote:
You think AARP is calling you to talk to me...

Isn't that what you think your God does?

T · 07-16-2008 02:30 PM

Who really gives a shit? They both taste good.

Don't question. Eat.

Jesus Is My Pilot · 07-16-2008 05:23 PM

T wrote:
Who really gives a shit? They both taste good.

Don't question. Eat.

Shit tastes good?

Yucky

Buho · 07-16-2008 05:56 PM

AC wrote:
I (now) like where this thread is headed.

But back on topic, I think that when it comes to zebras and horses, God is guilty of some blatant badge engineering. Platform sharing is fine, but come on.

Or maybe the zebra pics I've seen are Brenda Priddy spy shots of upcoming horse, um, mules?

Haven't horses and zebras bred before? I think they're called a zorse. If they can breed together, then doesn't that make them, by definition, a single species? If so, then what's the problem?

Man, this thread is so off-topic!

T · 07-16-2008 06:09 PM

Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:
T wrote:
Who really gives a shit? They both taste good.

Don't question. Eat.
Shit tastes good?

Yucky

Everything tastes good with Tony Chachere's and Tabasco

Jesus Is My Pilot · 07-16-2008 08:56 PM

Buho wrote:
AC wrote:
I (now) like where this thread is headed.

But back on topic, I think that when it comes to zebras and horses, God is guilty of some blatant badge engineering. Platform sharing is fine, but come on.

Or maybe the zebra pics I've seen are Brenda Priddy spy shots of upcoming horse, um, mules?
Haven't horses and zebras bred before? I think they're called a zorse. If they can breed together, then doesn't that make them, by definition, a single species? If so, then what's the problem?

Man, this thread is so off-topic!

Why can't it be a Hebra? You have a problem with Jews?

glfredrick · 07-23-2008 10:17 AM

http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?v … a971320f54

Qwinn · 07-23-2008 11:56 AM

Haven't horses and zebras bred before? I think they're called a zorse. If they can breed together, then doesn't that make them, by definition, a single species? If so, then what's the problem?

There's an additional requirement. The offspring have to be fertile themselves. Horses and donkeys, therefore, are not considered to be a single species, because mules are, well, mules.

Note that I have no idea if "zorses" are fertile.

Qwinn

Last edited by Qwinn (07-23-2008 11:57 AM)

adoniram7 · 07-23-2008 01:24 PM

Chicken came first.

Any other questions? I mean, I got answers baby, for it ALL!

I mean, how did the chicken cross the road? EASY! It was carried
gently, and carefully, by Obama after he first parted the seas
of traffic on the LA Freeway.

Last edited by adoniram7 (07-23-2008 01:26 PM)

elliot · 07-25-2008 03:54 PM

Qwinn wrote:
Did you copy and paste this from some TCL thread?
Um. Hate to be overwhelmingly geeky here, but the only TCL I know is a scripting language

The pictures and quotes were indeed cut and pasted, from the link elliot provided.

EDIT: Oh, wait, you meant over there. Nah. From this very thread.

That bat looks like a TT.
Ok, I'll just have to admit to an epic fail on acronym knowledge.

Qwinn

That wasn't the intent of my post. I was simply intending, as I directly stated in the sentence below the link, that recent genetic research has shown that expression of gene mutation is not nearly as simple as once thought. The multiple dependencies make anticipation (or forcing) of phenotypic expression through genotypic modification much more difficult, and in some cases, probably impossible.

The mouse v. bat example was not meant to show that bats evolved from mice, but rather that scientists' attempts and forcing the expression of a particular gene (prx1) in mice that they thought was one of the critical differences in the two species, demonstrated that prx1 has a plethora of interfaces with other genes that may or may not have an impact on phenotypic expression of the prx1 presence.

Buho · 07-25-2008 04:22 PM

glfredrick wrote:
http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=6227de60bba971320f54

I'm not a biologist, but I keep up in the news. The animation at 7:45 is incorrect. The little canister with the lid turns out to have an iris door, not a hinged door as shown.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … 161044.htm

So, basically, reality just got more complicated....

By the way, the article above was referenced in post #66 of this thread because evolution was not mentioned at all. New law of science: evolutionary storytelling is inversely proportional to observational detail.

glfredrick · 07-25-2008 05:08 PM

elliot wrote:
That wasn't the intent of my post. I was simply intending, as I directly stated in the sentence below the link, that recent genetic research has shown that expression of gene mutation is not nearly as simple as once thought. The multiple dependencies make anticipation (or forcing) of phenotypic expression through genotypic modification much more difficult, and in some cases, probably impossible.

The mouse v. bat example was not meant to show that bats evolved from mice, but rather that scientists' attempts and forcing the expression of a particular gene (prx1) in mice that they thought was one of the critical differences in the two species, demonstrated that prx1 has a plethora of interfaces with other genes that may or may not have an impact on phenotypic expression of the prx1 presence.

An interesting thought in concert with the above remarks...

Identical twins share identical genes, but each will have unique fingerprints and retinal patterns... Why? Perhaps there is more at stake (actually, we KNOW there is more at stake) than a one-to-one gene to trait development issue?

axe · 07-25-2008 05:14 PM

glfredrick wrote:
Identical twins share identical genes, but each will have unique fingerprints and retinal patterns... Why? Perhaps there is more at stake (actually, we KNOW there is more at stake) than a one-to-one gene to trait development issue?

Yes, because it couldn't be anything like, oh, I dunno... a Phenotype. That's out of the question. It HAS to be God, we KNOW for sure it's God. Case closed!

glfredrick · 07-25-2008 07:46 PM

axe wrote:
glfredrick wrote:
Identical twins share identical genes, but each will have unique fingerprints and retinal patterns... Why? Perhaps there is more at stake (actually, we KNOW there is more at stake) than a one-to-one gene to trait development issue?
Yes, because it couldn't be anything like, oh, I dunno... a Phenotype. That's out of the question. It HAS to be God, we KNOW for sure it's God. Case closed!

Bring something real to the discussion once in a while, would ya?

Turbiodiesel! · 07-31-2008 07:35 PM

glfredrick wrote:
Identical twins share identical genes, but each will have unique fingerprints and retinal patterns... Why? Perhaps there is more at stake (actually, we KNOW there is more at stake) than a one-to-one gene to trait development issue?

Of course there is. But that's still not much ground to start pulling the God in the Gaps argument.

Turbiodiesel! · 07-31-2008 07:36 PM

glfredrick wrote:
axe wrote:
glfredrick wrote:
Identical twins share identical genes, but each will have unique fingerprints and retinal patterns... Why? Perhaps there is more at stake (actually, we KNOW there is more at stake) than a one-to-one gene to trait development issue?
Yes, because it couldn't be anything like, oh, I dunno... a Phenotype. That's out of the question. It HAS to be God, we KNOW for sure it's God. Case closed!
Bring something real to the discussion once in a while, would ya?

Phenotypes aren't real. OK. Righto. May I suggest that you either a) take Bio 101 or b) stick to sermons?

glfredrick · 07-31-2008 08:54 PM

Sorry, some lame, "you don't have a clue" stuff isn't going to convince me to leave this subject alone.

I've actually worked in bio-related fields, and have a fair working knowledge of what I'm talking about -- or at least the State of Wisconsin said so when I wrote the test...

Buho · 08-01-2008 03:05 PM

Phenotypes are real, but glf was referring to the entirety of axe's rebuttal, which was just sarcasm. That response was not "real", i.e., substantive. glf (and I) are interested in steak but all we have seen so far are croutons.

News and Politics Forum

#26 07-16-2008 02:40 AM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

#27 07-16-2008 03:17 AM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

#28 07-16-2008 12:01 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

#29 07-16-2008 12:05 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:

#30 07-16-2008 12:34 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

#31 07-16-2008 01:48 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

2.FOH. wrote:

Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:

#32 07-16-2008 02:17 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:

2.FOH. wrote:

Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:

#33 07-16-2008 02:29 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

JIMP wrote:

#34 07-16-2008 02:30 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

#35 07-16-2008 05:23 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

T wrote:

#36 07-16-2008 05:56 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

AC wrote:

#37 07-16-2008 06:09 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

Jesus Is My Pilot wrote:

T wrote:

#38 07-16-2008 08:56 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

Buho wrote:

AC wrote:

#39 07-23-2008 10:17 AM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

#40 07-23-2008 11:56 AM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

#41 07-23-2008 01:24 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

#42 07-25-2008 03:54 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

Qwinn wrote:

#43 07-25-2008 04:22 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

glfredrick wrote:

#44 07-25-2008 05:08 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

elliot wrote:

#45 07-25-2008 05:14 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

glfredrick wrote:

#46 07-25-2008 07:46 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

axe wrote:

glfredrick wrote:

#47 07-31-2008 07:35 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

glfredrick wrote:

#48 07-31-2008 07:36 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

glfredrick wrote:

axe wrote:

glfredrick wrote:

#49 07-31-2008 08:54 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

#50 08-01-2008 03:05 PM

Re: Which came first -- Chicken or Egg?

Board footer