Re: a comment on Reasonably Good by Dovina	23-Mar-05/2:45 AM
The theory of evolution is one of a number of examples in science where serendipity played a part. However that is not to say it simply fell into Darwins lap. Darwin recognised that within species there are also familial traits. To go from this to a theory of evolution involving concepts of natural selection and natural variation is somewhat of a jump. Darwin opened up a line of enquiry which required assumptions. If Darwin had not done this, the so called truth you see in the theory of evolution would not have reached you because there would have been no theory of evolution. What you are claiming is that those who only believe that God created the universe will not believe anything else and therefore will be obscured from truth if truth is the big bang theory. This is a perfectly arguable standpoint but it does not permit you to say that an open mind is better at receiving truth than one that uses a model to understand the world. By the way only the mentally retarded do not have a model of the world. That is perfectly measurable and the finding is perfectly robust.
Re: a comment on stab in the dark by not_a_philosopher	22-Mar-05/2:28 PM
How does a submission to logic and reason make you an agnostic? [50]
Re: a comment on Reasonably Good by Dovina	22-Mar-05/2:25 PM
It seems to me that you both claim truth as something which can be picked up by an open mind and deflected by a closed one. For this to happen however would require you to recognise truth when it comes to bite you on the nose. That you believe you would recognise it to me signifies you are both attributing some kind of magical property to truth that seperates it from falsehood. Don't you maybe think that to discover something you must first be looking for it and have some idea what 'it' is and hence require preconception?
Re: a comment on The Populous by durr_T_hip_E	22-Mar-05/2:13 PM
The most rewarding aspect of the assymetry of conversation borne out by the internet is not the lying and getting away with it but rather the watching of other people lying then waiting for them to be damned by their own words.
Re: Sleeping Beauty by fevriere	16-Mar-05/3:12 AM
Cute. Except that two lines seem to have inexplicably become detached from both the first and second verses of this two verse poem.
Re: a comment on JJ’s Church by Dovina	16-Mar-05/3:01 AM
The metaphor is too clumsy. If the setting is a bar make the setting a bar. Gently allude to the nature of a church, the wine, amen, comfort etc. There is no way in the world we can be expected to assume the elders are waiters. How about using a religious word like transubstantiation figuratively.
Re: a comment on How to make a suicide bomber by Caducus	14-Mar-05/6:52 AM
If Iraq were a nude woman, in what position would it lie so as not to be tits-up. Does it indeed lie in that position today?
Re: a comment on Poet, Earth mover by INTRANSIT	10-Mar-05/3:02 PM
I believe portentous is correct as it is an adjective describing that children batting at tetherball is a portent. Portentously suggests that the children are doing the portending.
Re: Subtle Reasons by crooked_smile	10-Mar-05/2:47 PM
That's pretty much it. God is strong, infallible, doesn't wear shoes, male. Nature is nurturing and female. Not exactly subtle though. It merely reflects beliefs held as our language evolved.
Re: Nonchalantly by Plaidypus	10-Mar-05/2:40 PM
Shock endings involving tragic illness, death, are not my bag, they lack subtlety. I would also suggest that the quoted bit is made less clunky to sound more like natural speech.
Re: To those that would teach poetry by INTRANSIT	10-Mar-05/2:32 PM
I'm having a bit of trouble with the metaphor here. The teacher is metaphorically holding a pistol to your head by forcing you to write. 'And then I would forge you a sword to be used against me later.' It is unclear why the effect of holding a pistol to your head would 'forge a sword' or how that sword could be used against you. The end is fine, although I missed that you wanted pushing to write first time (it seemed unexpected).
Re: Apostrophetic Loss by Dovina	10-Mar-05/2:16 PM
I think you need to stop being so angry. The anger in this poem is the worst type of anger, dull anger. All this talk of in-crowd and rules, dull, dull, dull and the least said about the ending the better. The first verse was quite well constructed I thought, the poem did lose its discipline afterwards though.
Re: a comment on Half Empty, Half Whole by Rainbow_chaser	9-Mar-05/2:44 AM
Don't be ridiculous. If you write to get rid of an emotional block (whatever overblown, melodramatic and ultimately meaningless buncombe that is) then when you have finished simply throw it in the bin. You have moved the emotional block and we all hear no more about it. I understand that you haver managed to distil emotion to its purest form, ace. If I had read this poem without you telling me this I would have thought it was just another bumbling misappropriation of the English language. Now that you have used the magic words fibre, core and pure, I understand how wrong I would have been. The reason weighing on the soul is wrong is because the soul is an abstract idea that you have made no attempt to get to grips with. You have merely said 'soul' which you believe is enough to evoke some kind of empathy for your deep suffering. It isn't. By the way 'writters' is spelt 'writers'. The word you attempted is aptly enough as close to witters as writers.
Re: a comment on Fastso by Dovina	8-Mar-05/3:01 AM
Poor people are more likely to be fat, diseased, alcoholic, smokers, drug addicts, criminals, victims of crime, depressed, schizophrenic. You call this an irrelevance and then criticise an gentleman's portrayal of poorness as a bit smelly. Let me ask you this. Is it better to sweep clean the pavement because it is smelly or to not sweep clean the smelly pavement because you believe it to be jolly?
Re: a comment on Pilgrim by richa	8-Mar-05/2:43 AM
I am not entirely happy with the third verse, but I thought the first two came off rather well.
Re: a comment on Pilgrim by richa	8-Mar-05/12:02 AM
Virgins for the puritans came from the idea that your time on earth is toil to contrast with heaven. In effect your reward in heaven is the opposite of your discipline on earth.
Re: Death is a Three Step Process by dancin_n_da_moonlite	7-Mar-05/3:52 PM
sad noess depres sion suic ide. Got ya. Probably a bit ambitious to do an acrostic in this manner and have it make sense.
Re: Death is a Three Step Process by dancin_n_da_moonlite	7-Mar-05/2:46 PM
Sudden Death Syndrome. Don't get the rest of it though.
Re: You Fell Asleep First by jessicazee	7-Mar-05/2:40 PM
Should have kept ethnic studies. This is pretty much prose as well so there was little need for all the flashy effects. Not bad.
Re: Fastso by Dovina	7-Mar-05/8:28 AM
I don't think fat people tend to be jolly. I think they tend to be poor and hence have nothing to be jolly about :(