|
|
| Author |
Message |
willcome
|
|
How Did the Earth Get Born
| 
Nov 3 23:05 UTC 2003 |
And so the ancient Indian tribe sat itself down around the totem pole, which
in the future would be split in two with scafolding up the middle, where they
began to tell each other stories, the first of which ended with, "And so,
all
things are in some way born."
And as a cloud moved just right, Iqwai wondered how did the moon get born,
and he promptly asked that: "How did the moon get born, Storyteller?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
"The moon? Why, yes, I suppose that is a thing and was therefore born too.
Well, you see, the moon, which is still young,-- hence its small size -- was
born a long time ago, by two planets. You see, the planetary bodies too have
lives, though at a pace much slower -- though no less vigorous and colourful
-- than ours. And, so, yes, the moon: It was indeed born.
"But born of what? Well, like your mothers and fathers, humans, borned you,
who are humans, and a deer was born by a mother and father who were both
deers, so too was the moon born by its own species.
"Yes, indeed, the moon was born as a result of the mating of two planets.
The
earth said to the Saturn, 'Hey, why don't you lift up your skirts?' and
Saturn
obliged. And they had sex. The penis was this totem pole, right here," he
said, clapping the pole's side and then, after a pause, wiping his hand on
the ground.
That night, Iqway pretended to fall asleep in his family's teepee, but,
instead, when the first wolf howled, left for his cave, which to this day
bares the inscription of his name, and masturbated. He was earth.
|
| 26 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 1 of 26:
|
Nov 3 23:54 UTC 2003 |
I see where you get your onanist inspiration. It doesn't make it
any less onanism, though.
|
willcome
|
|
response 2 of 26:
|
Nov 4 00:07 UTC 2003 |
Where do I get my onanist inspiration?
|
russ
|
|
response 3 of 26:
|
Nov 4 01:54 UTC 2003 |
forget
|
vegetto
|
|
response 4 of 26:
|
Nov 5 03:44 UTC 2003 |
Two words for you all-.........BIG BANG!!!!
|
rcurl
|
|
response 5 of 26:
|
Nov 5 06:22 UTC 2003 |
The BIG BANG happened far far earlier than the "birth" of the earth. There
was only hydrogen, helium, lithium, and traces of a few other elements
following the BIG BANG. You don't get ROCKS out of that mix very easily.
|
remmers
|
|
response 6 of 26:
|
Nov 5 14:11 UTC 2003 |
When I was in elementary school, a popular theory on the origin of
the solar system was that the sun and another star passed close enough
together that the gravitional attraction pulled off some bits of the
sun, that then went into orbit around the sun and eventually cooled.
Dunno what the status of this theory is today.
|
bru
|
|
response 7 of 26:
|
Nov 5 15:51 UTC 2003 |
1st came the Big Bang.
2nd came the sun.
3rd came the planets, including earth.
4th came microscopic organisms.
5th came an earth-wide glaciation
then 550 million years ago, the earth began to thaw and there was a sudden
upsergence of life. Single celled animals gave way to the multicellular life
in the Cambrian Period, followed by the Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian,
Carboniferous, Permian, Mesozoic, Cretaceous, Neozoic which is where we
finally see mankind emerge.
Mankind evolved to the point where he looked around him and said:
I wonder where stars come fomr?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 8 of 26:
|
Nov 5 17:46 UTC 2003 |
You missed the stage that, after the Big Bang, early stars formed from
hydrogen and helium (primarily) and "cooked" through fusion the heavier
elements, eventually spraying them into space in supernova explosions,
from the pieces of which condensed solid matter, which gathered together by
gravity and formed new suns that repeated the cycle. This goes in between
your "1st" and "2nd".
|
rcurl
|
|
response 9 of 26:
|
Nov 5 17:48 UTC 2003 |
By the way - eveyone might enjoy
http://wires.news.com.au/special/mm/030811-hubble.htm
|
tod
|
|
response 10 of 26:
|
Nov 5 18:43 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 11 of 26:
|
Nov 5 19:04 UTC 2003 |
Because it is comes from a theory that agrees with measurements of the
abundances of the chemical elements in the universe and the properties of
isotopes measured in the laboratory. Also, there are no observations
contradicting the theory. Therefore it seems to be a pretty believable
hypothesis, though undoubtedly subject to detailed revisions with further
observations. In these senses, it is just as well substantiated as the
Big Bang theory itself.
|
tod
|
|
response 12 of 26:
|
Nov 5 19:22 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 13 of 26:
|
Nov 5 19:28 UTC 2003 |
Bru forgot about Adam and Eve.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 14 of 26:
|
Nov 5 19:33 UTC 2003 |
Adam and sTeve
|
willcome
|
|
response 15 of 26:
|
Nov 5 20:30 UTC 2003 |
You guys're supposed to be critiquing my excellent story.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 16 of 26:
|
Nov 5 20:36 UTC 2003 |
Re #12: why not?
|
tod
|
|
response 17 of 26:
|
Nov 5 21:06 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
gull
|
|
response 18 of 26:
|
Nov 5 21:16 UTC 2003 |
Nah, Rane knows because he was there.
|
remmers
|
|
response 19 of 26:
|
Nov 5 23:00 UTC 2003 |
Re #15: We can't control you, so what makes you think you can
control us? :)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 20 of 26:
|
Nov 6 02:06 UTC 2003 |
Re #18: it was beautiful....
|
bru
|
|
response 21 of 26:
|
Nov 6 04:34 UTC 2003 |
critiquing a story? Where did you ask us to do that?
|
willcome
|
|
response 22 of 26:
|
Nov 6 04:40 UTC 2003 |
It was implied by me posting it here, fatty.
|
bru
|
|
response 23 of 26:
|
Nov 6 17:53 UTC 2003 |
Aha! The name calling starts. Now we know who you reallya re.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 24 of 26:
|
Nov 6 19:15 UTC 2003 |
*reallya re*
take a shower, stink-o.
|