rlGood to see they've won an awardrl

Because we had a complaint about an earlier thread that included a link to this site, I'm adding a warning

Plenty of deep fried spam fritters in my Junior School days, circa '75. Not so much custard with puddings but a substance we affectionately nicknamed 'jungle juice'. Some p!ssy orangey flavoured liquid adornment to the rock hard sponges they used to serve up.

I don't recall any sponge puddings – but there seemed to be an endless variety of sago and semolina and rice pudding: always with a dollop of red jam in the middle that, for some unexplained reason, you were not supposed to twirl around into the rest of the pud.

Sago, semolina, spam fritters, yep, school staples they were. The spam fritters always accompanied by the remains of beans which had been through at least 5 full boil-washes.

And all of it still loads better than turkey twizzlers etc.

Any half-decent mod would've cleaned this thread up by now and put a great part on the food & drink thread

And any half decent poster would have know to post on the Food and Drink thread in the first place...

But sadly, as we know from the other thread, the only mods we have are all devil-worshipping sinners, condemned to the eternal flames of hell. With this in mind, they spit on your thread cleaning

Meh

Back on topic and the bat[is[/ihit loons are out in force again.

This time NARIC, the UK Agency responsible for providing information and opinion on examinations and courses, has found that rlChristian Fundamentalist ICCE is equivalent to 'A' Levelrl

Here's a selection from the history module“True or false

Remember, these are the people who reckon that the Loch Ness monster is proof that evolution theory is rubbish

I thought you were having a laugh until I googled it.
My jaw hit the desk.

I want to know how these people manage to switch off their logic circuits when they "think".
a) They say that the Loch Ness monster is a plesiosaur despite there being no proof that any monster exists at all, never mind a plesiosaur.
b) They say that the existence of such a plesiosaur disproves evolution theory ... quite how they conclude that an animal having not evolved disproves evolution is beyond me ... their assertion merely leads one to suspect that they either can't (or won't) reason logically or that they haven't actually understood what is meant by the term "evolution".

I'm not saying that I would have my children take the ICCE qualification, but what exactly is your problem if the course is suitably rigorous?

It's not 'brainwashing' small children. It's essentially an A level in Christian theology. You might disagree with some other things the administrators think, but that's not really relevant, is it?

Its been spotted on sonar and its been followed by a small submarine.

Apparently, according to that previous link.

Its also true that far too many Americans learn their history through watching Hollywood films without the important question "Is this fiction or not" being asked.

What do you mean "It's not 'brainwashing' small children"?

To have got that far, they must have started by brainwashing small children. There isn't a rational human being on earth that could seriously consider those questions to be bona fide unless they had been previously brainwashed.

So, if I advocated that all black or gay people were evil, would you be happy with me receiving tacit approval for an examination, aimed at furthering my prejudices, simply because I made the course suitably rigorous, that the opnly conclusions to be drawn was that I was correct?

And if you consider the questions posed, to be an indication of a "suitably rigorous course", then you really are away with the fairies.

That possibly accounts for many of them being disappointed when they discovered there would be no "Titanic II"