AzurePhoenix

You can't deny the blinding intensity of the cute-itude At least I don't look like something I (the puppy) might of dug up in a serial killer's backyard

I knew I couldn't hide my true identity forever....

But from a biological standpoint, it was harder for them (birds) to start flying than it was for us to become delusional...er... conscious. For birds to evolve flight, they had to undergo a complete rehaul of their form; develop the proper musculature, skeletons, respiratory systems, feathers etc. etc. All humans had to due was undergo some mysterious upgrade to an already existing brain; an upgrade, I might add, that was most likely a direct result of the Divine Caress of the Noodly Appendage of the Great and Sagacious Flying Spaghetti Monster, an act probably committed while His Greatness was totally wasted on cheap Sicilian wine. (although those scientist's ignorant to the ways of the FSM claim extra protein from a changing diet was the catalyst for a bigger brain... heathens...)

Or maybe it's the pirates. Hey, if they can influence global warming, why not IQs? EDIT: wow, "RUN!!! It's the Return of the Long Forgotten Posts!!"

Ah, yes, my mistake, I keep getting taken in by the outdated-yet-often-used "Canis familiaris"

No, they've diverged long ago. They are now generally regarded as genetically distinct from wolves. Coyotes themselves are a separate species from wolves. They do all share the same genus.

Then someone had better investigate into the source of this whole 70% water misconception!!! Or should I say...LIE!!! Dear Lord, it's all a conspiracy!! DON'T DUST ME !!! You certain "dust" isn't a synonym for "a lot off small particles," and while we're at it, why can't the rest be a metaphor?

I have been following along, and most certainly have read what both of you have said. Perhaps the context of your question escaped me. You continue to point out that these suriviving reptiles are not dinosaurs, but to what ends? Do you feel that pointing out the fact that these creatures aren't dinosaurs somehow indicates that dinosaurs were specifically targeted/cursed by the Powers that Be? Yet you fail to notice that nearly all creatures larger than 25 kg at that time supposedly went extinct (many of them non-saurian); the only possible exceptions that come to mind are crocodiles, (large turtles possibly ) all while some dinosaurs did survive in the form of birds. If dinosaurs, as you claim, were specifically targeted, why pass up a whole distinct group of dinos in favor of creatures that have little to do with dinosaurs? You continue to make erratic claims without taking the time to explain your theory in detail, thereby leaving a series of possible gaps in your intent. And when someone does point out the flaws, you continue to use irrelevant points to support your case.

Because it's a frickin' crocodile, not a dinosaur. They are distinct taxonomic groups. Dinosaurs had nothing to do with the era they lived in, but were defined by a number of anatomical features that they inherited from common ancestors. As do crocs Not so much, very few survived, and evolved into many after the extinction Actually, a few got out scotfree, and are successful to this day. And yes, many prove to be quite tasty; Kentucky Fried Chicken has built an empire on this fact. Actually, yes, you'e creating absurdly false assumptions based on a complete ignorance of what you're arguing, and then display them as logic. The Lizard rebuttal? Same as the croc. I've yet to see any proof there actually was a world-wide flood at any point in time (seeing as the entire thing is 100% impossible). Atmospheric conditions themselves change constantly due to many factors. Yet, they have nothing to do with the topic at hand. You've failed to refute anything whatsoever, indeed, you've only proven that you have no knowledge of the concept you're battling. That is intellectually dishonest, because how can you deny it's authenticity without even learning what it is? That proves that you don't care what anyone says, because you made your decision based on what you'd prfer to believe, as opposed to fact.

Well then, is there anything you really need to know at all?? "I'm here, I've sinned, I love you Jesus, the book is all, I'm ignorant of reality!" EDIT: Sorry, that was rude of me

Mwahahaha!!! Wait, does this mean... nevermind... I shall choose silence over risking blasphemy!

I suppose a sweet lil' birdy is more tasteful than a pic of a knife piercing a bloody Bible

Meh, we'll love him no matter what his avatar might suggest

May the FSM grind crushed red pepper into his heretical eyesockets!!

You can bet your macaroni I am!!

Forgive me Blessed Farfalle, for in my love of soups I have demeaned my life and denied your glory, whilst wallowing in the tepid broth of heathens! From this day forth, I pledge the my eternal spirit to the sacred union of the Trenette. Celibacy, here I come!! Or rather, never come again.... geeze, being devout is gonna be hard...

As it was said earlier, a Tazer, if they had one, could have posed a risk by way of causing a detonation. Whether it's likely or not, I don't know, and it's likely the cops wouldn't have know the risk either, in which case, not tazing the suspect was the responsible thing to do. And cops (at least around here) neither carry tranqs (which are generally too slow-acting to be useful, even not work at all, or might cause adverse reactions in certain people for whatever reason, metabolism included) nor are they taught techniques to put out criminals (both because in the case of this leading to the suspects death, the cops would then be accused of being too aggressive and of utilizing potentially lethal and unproven techniques yadayadayada, as well as the fact that it's far easier to just break the jerk's arms) The only logical and responsible course of action was to kill the suspect.

Anyone who was carrying a bomb would realize they were going to die whether they detonated it or not. They might as well try to finish the job to the best of their ability and try to reach a crowded area to do as much damage as possible, or get shot trying.

The answer to that question will differ based upon every indidviuals principles, theology, and value of social order in regards to human life. Me? I vote for the individuals, and I don't even like people!!!

I agree with her. I don't want some guy who wears his independence on his sleeve. Sure, I wanna guy who will sacrifice what he wants without my even asking, even if I don't take him up on it, because I wanna do the same for him. Someone who doesn't treat me like a girlfirend, but like a best friend with benefits. Someone sweet and not overbearing, sarcastic and glum to a certain extent, but sweet with a non-corny romantic side who's excited by the little things in life, someone who speaks his mind, but gives thought to what others say, and waits to mock them till they're gone. Indeed, someone who's not afraid to mock me on occasion, as long as he can handle a few good shots himself. Someone who stands up for himself, but doesn't go looking for fights, or become offended over little nothings. I don't mind a little tasteful cussing, but vulgarities should be few and far between, or rare altogether. I don't like big butch hunk of meat; I like a someone fitted to me, a slim intellectual, though he has to be fit, because one of the things I enjoy demand being in good condition, not to mention that no one loves to snuggle with a bag of Jell-O. I'm only writing this because you asked for another girl's opinion. And don't say someone like that doesn't exist, becuase I snagged one quite a while ago, and if I do say so myself, things are looking bright for us. As for calling, I don't give a flying rat's ass if he ever picks up the phone, becuase my guy, like myself, doesn't like the telephone, but we talk nearly every night, whether face to face snuggling in a chair or in the backyard, or chatting eachother up over the internet. If I can't see or hear from him for a day or two that's fine, but he'd better makeup for it afterwards (the same applies to me!!). That's what I like in my guy. EDIT: I'd like to include that I wanna a guy who doesn't think of himself as being "above" authority or the law, but refuses to follow blindly and unquestioningly as well.

By this I meant that once the suspect was in the tube station, the police were left with no other choice than the one they followed. Anything else would have been irresponsible. Any other course of action would have to have been acted upon prior to reaching this oh-so-critical point.

not to mention the type of screw itself

The police are taught to act on their instincts, and to make difficult choices in the time it would take most anyone else to register that there's even a problem. The circumstances led them to believe that they had only two choices. Take him out, or risk the possible deaths of dozens of bystanders. Was it necessarily the right choice? Impossible to tell without actually having been there to witness exactly what occured (including every action made by the suspect, the initial reactions of the police, and the apparent possibility of a bomb or of accidently setting it off if it actually existed).

I know what you mean. My dad got a call like the one I described, but since the caller was a known paranoid drunk (harmless up till this call), and it was just about the end of their shift, they let the morning squads take care of it. By the time they got there, they found the would be killer passed out in his lawnchair. Breaking down the door woke him up, he got a couple shots off into one cop's vest, then his head was blown off by the other. My only point is that had they not carried guns to this apparently non-violent situation, both woul've been killed (the next step in the guy's plan was to kill his neighbors from either side of his house, because he was convinced they were spies(they found his journal)) I wish it could be like that here, but it's far too late to get the guns outa the people's hands. Just last night my dad's squad was called to a scene where a man was shot and killed over a lousy parking space at a Wal-Mart. Happens all the time.

Drunk, tired, and screeching into your cell phone. Oh yeah, you're also a monkey.