They make me happy when I can't sleep

I just ate some lucky charms

/hijack on

holy ****, justkev, are you feeding a live raccoon some beer . . . my metaphorical hat is off to you sir

/hijack off

I'm too lazy to write my own definition so I just lifted one from wiki.

A New World Order (Novus Ordo Mundi) is a conspiracy theory that refers to a plan in which a powerful and secretive group, most often referred to as the Illuminati, is to be conspiring to eventually rule the world via an autonomous world government, which would replace sovereign states and other checks and balances in world power struggles. In the new world order, many significant occurrences are caused by a powerful secret group. Historical and current events are seen as steps in an on-going plot to rule the world primarily through a combination of political finance, social engineering, mind control, and fear-based propaganda.

Just remember, honesty is a process by which you consider and weigh the consequences of your choices. If you really are done, say so, if wasn't clear to him then, make it clear now.

Bad analogy: when you go hunting, you don't let the deer bleed to death when you can plug it in the head and put it out of its misery.

Don't leave him with any false hope, this is something I would ask of all women intent on dumping me.

lol, like it matters which party gets into the white house

Untamed, there are certain terms you are using which are incorrect in regards to what evolution is, and we need to clear them up before we can begin to discuss your larger arguments.

"no experience = no call to evolve into a superior species right?"

Using the word superior here is not proper, the function of evolution allows organism to become a better functioning organism in its particular ecosystem. To say that any organism is "superior" to another is inaccurate. Also, "experience" is not the driving force behind evolution as you describe it. In a sense, it is randomness paired with situations that favor particular arrangements of randomness. There is one more important point to remember in regards to evolution, it acts on populations, not individuals.

"So if we "evolved" to get more and more complex. . ."

Complexity is a byproduct and by no means necessary or required. No organism "evolves" to become more complex simply for complexity's sake. Evolution can be as "simple" as antibiotic resistance.

"But what use is a hole in the front of the eye to allow light to pass through, if there are no cells at the back of the eye to recieve light?"

I agree with this statement, if it were true. Here you are assuming that the lens was developed prior to light sensitive cells, and if you look at various "simpler" organisms (flip through an intro zoology text) you will find various organisms that possess structures (albeit rudimentary) similar to our own eye. Development of a lens to focus light onto these specialized photo-sensitive cells is not as farfetched as you make it sound.

"but if you dont have a blood clot system and you get cut, you bleed to death"

This is mostly true, although the clotting cascade that is the dominant source of repair to our circulatory system, it is by no means the only part of it. Also, there are various other organisms that do not really have any means of hemostasis, however, they still thrive. Again, a population need not "experience" blood loss to develop blood clotting. During the evolution of particular species, there are individuals with preexisting genetic variation that is "beneficial" or provides a phenotypic advantage among the various selective pressures applied to the population.

". . .FLAWED dating system known as radio active dating. . ."

It is really only flawed if the person conducting the test does not know what they are doing. What you are saying is tantamount to bashing heart surgery if you let your dog perform the operation.

It's getting late, and I have to be up early, so this should be a decent spot to end for the night.

cheers

I won't go through all of your examples, however, you're initial supposition is completely wrong. Evolution is about selective pressures on populations that favor previously acquired mutations. It's not about 'experience' per se, it's about having a phenotype that allows greater survival within a certain niche.

When talking about eyes, it's better to look at the simpler examples and then work to more complicated ones. There are small single celled critters that have light spots, with the purpose of directing the organism to light. Other organisms, still relatively simple have eye spots that are integrated into neural nets. Examples of primitive eye'like structures are abundant in nature. In that light, it is entirely conceivable to imagine a lens being 'added' to the system, in order to localize the source, or allow more coordinate movement, or something similarly useful.

I'm heading to bed, but if you want to chat more, let me know

hola, night sure what kind of night it is yet . . . but it will be entertaining

You'll find someone, although I've found that I find better matches when I'm not really looking, rather when I'm just living life and finding myself.

just kick back, get some tea, watch some cartoons, and if that doesn't work, crack open some tequila

what up, whatup?

what are you talking about?

I was inspired by my bike ride earlier today . . . it's nice to slow down a little and go cruising . . . and see what people leave in their wake as they rush to their next destination

Riding my bike far
I see the possum up close
Worse than from a car

nice ink

are you seriously playing this game?

"eat it all, or you won't get dessert!!!"

your phrasing here made me laugh, for some reason it reminded me of the dr. seuss story about the sneeches

I still think it's funny there's actually a place called pardeeville . . . I mean that would be the name of my imaginary get away spot (with a minor spelling adjustment) where all I would do is drink, dance, and run around like a madman