Picture Request, again...

Fieron Marzullo · Jun 15th, 2007, 05:11:49 PM

Do you have any idea how close I am to WA? I'm right on top.

**Crystal** · Jun 15th, 2007, 05:35:53 PM

Originally Posted by Hartus Kenobi

Hey, that does look good. What's in it?

It's crab. No wasabi though because I didn't have any.

Just thinking about it makes me want to make some more now. Mmm.

Originally Posted by Morgan Evanar

Hey the next time you guys have a get together let me know! I just need few weeks advance notice and I'll head over. Just feed me and I'll bring the beer

Were you talking to me? If so.. Sure thing. You want sushi?

Hartus Kenobi · Jun 15th, 2007, 05:40:11 PM

I'm pretty sure it's not that there is no biologist that believes that certain strange and unusual species COULD exist. It is that it would be morally, socially, and academically irresponsible to speculate as much and then force that within the realm of acceptable "science." I'm sure many a biologist would give their life to find Big Foot and prove his/her existence - there is no shortage of motivation to accomplish this - but until they can prove it, you all should thank your lucky stars that science and the respectable scientists of the world haven't been reduced to such pathetic charlatanism.

Now, of course there are many - hundreds, if not thousands or millions - of species that we are not aware of. Esteemed biologists are more aware of this than any of us, and are well-practiced in extrapolation and speculation, but unless it's observable/testable, it's not science.

Hartus Kenobi · Jun 15th, 2007, 05:42:49 PM

Originally Posted by Crystal

Originally Posted by Hartus Kenobi

Hey, that does look good. What's in it?

It's crab. No wasabi though because I didn't have any.

Just thinking about it makes me want to make some more now. Mmm.

The crab is cooked though, right? It looks like kimbab. Loooove kimbab. The main difference is that sushi is supposed to have raw ingredients, whereas kimbab has cooked ingredients.

Jaime Tomahawk · Jun 15th, 2007, 06:00:16 PM

Dunno if I would quite put the fact of Aussie big cats in the same bucket as Big Foot - altho it's possible I guess. A very reliable witness not long ago managed to video something quite big in Loch Ness - so legendary creatures are pretty certain to exist, maybe not quite as the legends say they are, but they do have some fact behind them. The real truth of say Nessie may be just a bloody big fish and no more

, you all should thank your lucky stars that science and the respectable scientists of the world haven't been reduced to such pathetic charlatanism.

There is a difference between reasonable doubting and sheer bloody mindlessnes and adherence to dogma. Real science is about being open and being able to accept your wrong - even recklessly asking for people to prove you wrong, like Albert Einstein did. The science that makes dogma a religion is very much more like Richard Dawkins, who is a true arrogant idiot, who will not accept for a moment that there is a chance their religion is wrong and that there is more than their narrow view holds.

Even in more regognizable religions, the ability to think, find facts and above all, be open and be willing to have your faith tested and proven false is highly important. Standing on blind faith ad being adverse to fact is not what religion is all about.

Not accepting that there is some sort of big cat in Australia firmly fits into version two and is not science. It is a dogma, a 'religion' article of faith to such so called scientists. Respectible scientists are open to all possibilities and are willing to test and more importantly theorize and propose tests to prove or disprove. The theroy in this case is that a big cat exists. The proof so far is reliable witnessess. The evidence against is that there is no known bioloigcal way a cat can get that big and that it is near impossible to catch one if it exists.

But there is too much witness reports, video evidence now to longer just allow the accepted science in the case of cats to stand.

Science has always had this problem where if the facts dont fit with the dogma, then the facts are wrong. This is not sicence - dogma has NO place in science and it is well the majority of scentists woke up to this fact. The fact is there is a big cat and biology has it wrong. Deal with it science guys, your dogma is wrong.