«

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:22:04 +1000, Sharktbbtfy wrote:

> Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>> In article <>,
>> (Don Hills) wrote:
>>> In article <>, thingy <>
>>> wrote:
>>>> My greatest concern is the huge quantity of school kids who use them.
>>>> Their brains are still developing plus they seem to use them a lot,
>>>> so we are conducting one huge experiemnt on our children..........
>>> On the plus side, they usually can't afford long calls so spend most
>>> of their time with the phone in front of them txting rather than up
>>> against their heads.
>>
>> .. in their laps instead ? ... hmmm ...
>
> Darwinism as its finest! Along with dorks who put their kids on quad
> bikes!

Unfortunately if this were true, the dork gene would have been bred out
of the human race long ago (natural selection) as it is not an advantage
to be a dork progeny with the higher risk of not passing on your dorky genes,
compared to the non-dorks. This assumption must hold some water because
as you say, dorks still put kids on quad bikes. Also take them out in fast
boats without lifejackets on, let them stand up in the front seat of a
car, sit them on the petrol tank of a motorcycle, hold them under one arm
while feeding a crocodile with the other, dangle them over the balcony of
a high-rise, ad nauseum. If dorks didn't survive to breed, then Darwins
theory would apply, but as you know, not only do they survive, they
thrive, get a law degree, and go into politics.

cheers
BrianM

--
"It was only a Corvette !"
Vin Diesel, xXx

BrianM wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:22:04 +1000, Sharktbbtfy wrote:
>
>
>>Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>>
>>>In article <>,
>>> (Don Hills) wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <>, thingy <>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>My greatest concern is the huge quantity of school kids who use them.
>>>>>Their brains are still developing plus they seem to use them a lot,
>>>>>so we are conducting one huge experiemnt on our children..........
>>>>
>>>>On the plus side, they usually can't afford long calls so spend most
>>>>of their time with the phone in front of them txting rather than up
>>>>against their heads.
>>>
>>>.. in their laps instead ? ... hmmm ...
>>
>>Darwinism as its finest! Along with dorks who put their kids on quad
>>bikes!
>
>
> Unfortunately if this were true, the dork gene would have been bred out
> of the human race long ago (natural selection) as it is not an advantage
> to be a dork progeny with the higher risk of not passing on your dorky genes,
> compared to the non-dorks. This assumption must hold some water because
> as you say, dorks still put kids on quad bikes. Also take them out in fast
> boats without lifejackets on, let them stand up in the front seat of a
> car, sit them on the petrol tank of a motorcycle, hold them under one arm
> while feeding a crocodile with the other, dangle them over the balcony of
> a high-rise, ad nauseum. If dorks didn't survive to breed, then Darwins
> theory would apply, but as you know, not only do they survive, they
> thrive, get a law degree, and go into politics.
>
> cheers
> BrianM
>
> --
> "It was only a Corvette !"
> Vin Diesel, xXx

text has also made it easier for dorks to hook up and exchange their
mutant genes.

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 07:28:28 +0000, BrianM wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:22:04 +1000, Sharktbbtfy wrote:
>
>> Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>>> In article <>,
>>> (Don Hills) wrote:
>>>> In article <>, thingy <>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> My greatest concern is the huge quantity of school kids who use them.
>>>>> Their brains are still developing plus they seem to use them a lot,
>>>>> so we are conducting one huge experiemnt on our children..........
>>>> On the plus side, they usually can't afford long calls so spend most
>>>> of their time with the phone in front of them txting rather than up
>>>> against their heads.
>>>
>>> .. in their laps instead ? ... hmmm ...
>>
>> Darwinism as its finest! Along with dorks who put their kids on quad
>> bikes!
>
> Unfortunately if this were true, the dork gene would have been bred out of
> the human race long ago (natural selection) as it is not an advantage to
> be a dork progeny with the higher risk of not passing on your dorky genes,
> compared to the non-dorks. This assumption must hold some water because
> as you say, dorks still put kids on quad bikes. Also take them out in fast
> boats without lifejackets on, let them stand up in the front seat of a
> car, sit them on the petrol tank of a motorcycle, hold them under one arm
> while feeding a crocodile with the other, dangle them over the balcony of
> a high-rise, ad nauseum. If dorks didn't survive to breed, then Darwins
> theory would apply, but as you know, not only do they survive, they
> thrive, get a law degree, and go into politics.
>
> cheers
> BrianM

Heh!
OK - that's put Darwinism to rest.
But it's not looking good for "Intelligent Design" either, then.

Murray.

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:15:11 +1000, Murray Symon wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 07:28:28 +0000, BrianM wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:22:04 +1000, Sharktbbtfy wrote:
>>
>>> Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>>>> In article <>,
>>>> (Don Hills) wrote:
>>>>> In article <>, thingy <>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> My greatest concern is the huge quantity of school kids who use
>>>>>> them. Their brains are still developing plus they seem to use them
>>>>>> a lot, so we are conducting one huge experiemnt on our
>>>>>> children..........
>>>>> On the plus side, they usually can't afford long calls so spend most
>>>>> of their time with the phone in front of them txting rather than up
>>>>> against their heads.
>>>>
>>>> .. in their laps instead ? ... hmmm ...
>>>
>>> Darwinism as its finest! Along with dorks who put their kids on quad
>>> bikes!
>>
>> Unfortunately if this were true, the dork gene would have been bred out
>> of the human race long ago (natural selection) as it is not an
>> advantage to be a dork progeny with the higher risk of not passing on
>> your dorky genes, compared to the non-dorks. This assumption must hold
>> some water because as you say, dorks still put kids on quad bikes. Also
>> take them out in fast boats without lifejackets on, let them stand up
>> in the front seat of a car, sit them on the petrol tank of a
>> motorcycle, hold them under one arm while feeding a crocodile with the
>> other, dangle them over the balcony of a high-rise, ad nauseum. If
>> dorks didn't survive to breed, then Darwins theory would apply, but as
>> you know, not only do they survive, they thrive, get a law degree, and
>> go into politics.
>>
>> cheers
>> BrianM
>
> Heh!
> OK - that's put Darwinism to rest.
> But it's not looking good for "Intelligent Design" either, then.
>
> Murray.

Especially the political bit Murray

cheers
BrianM

BrianM wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:22:04 +1000, Sharktbbtfy wrote:
>

>
> Unfortunately if this were true, the dork gene would have been bred out
> of the human race long ago (natural selection) as it is not an advantage
> to be a dork progeny with the higher risk of not passing on your dorky genes,
> compared to the non-dorks. This assumption must hold some water because
> as you say, dorks still put kids on quad bikes. Also take them out in fast
> boats without lifejackets on, let them stand up in the front seat of a
> car, sit them on the petrol tank of a motorcycle, hold them under one arm
> while feeding a crocodile with the other, dangle them over the balcony of
> a high-rise, ad nauseum. If dorks didn't survive to breed, then Darwins
> theory would apply, but as you know, not only do they survive, they
> thrive, get a law degree, and go into politics.

TMML


--
Sharktbbtfy

Jerry wrote:
> And they get RSI in their thumbs from it. Some kids can text about
> 100KMH though.

Whilst _going_ 100kph.

Fran