Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
His name is Norman and he is omletipotent.
That's as quackers as the creation myth.I'm still waiting for someone to defend my assertion that the universe could just as conceivably have been created by a gigantic omnipotent duck operating in the 11th dimension. Since no-one can prove the duck does not exist, is it not reasonable that we should also keep my theory open as a real possibility?
No need to get in a flap about it!Stop it both of you. I fucking hate pun threads.
Stop it both of you. I fucking hate pun threads.
They seem to have ruffled his feathers.No need to get in a flap about it!
That theory is clearly to be regarded as being as valid as the theory of God.I'm still waiting for someone to defend my assertion that the universe could just as conceivably have been created by a gigantic omnipotent duck operating in the 11th dimension. Since no-one can prove the duck does not exist, is it not reasonable that we should also keep my theory open as a real possibility?
That theory is clearly to be regarded as being as valid as the theory of God.
Which only goes to show how ludicrous it is, doesn't it.
Either which way, I think my duck illustrates a point. Either you have to accept the possibility of an omnipotent duck as the creator of the universe (which is CLEARLY bonkers), or you rightly dismiss the duck as being ridiculous, and are then placed in the position of having to explain why you chose to reject one baseless daft idea and yet accept another equally baseless and daft one, i.e. a devine creator called God.
I agree 100% with you. Now I suppose we can say it is the free will of every one of us whether we choose to believe in something which is clearly bonkers or not. I think it is madness, but I accept somebody chooses madness. What I do not accept is the influence and control those organizations of madness take over all of us.Which only goes to show how ludicrous it is, doesn't it.
Either which way, I think my duck illustrates a point. Either you have to accept the possibility of an omnipotent duck as the creator of the universe (which is CLEARLY bonkers), or you rightly dismiss the duck as being ridiculous, and are then placed in the position of having to explain why you chose to reject one baseless daft idea and yet accept another equally baseless and daft one, i.e. a devine creator called God.
Which only goes to show how ludicrous it is, doesn't it.
Either which way, I think my duck illustrates a point. Either you have to accept the possibility of an omnipotent duck as the creator of the universe (which is CLEARLY bonkers), or you rightly dismiss the duck as being ridiculous, and are then placed in the position of having to explain why you chose to reject one baseless daft idea and yet accept another equally baseless and daft one, i.e. a devine creator called God.