Scientific Storkism

[Conspiracy of Doves]

Ovulation versus cretinism

Two different theories exist concerning the origin of children: the
theory of sexual reproduction, and the theory of the stork. Many people
believe in the theory of sexual reproduction because they have been
taught this theory at school.

In reality, however, many of the world's leading scientists are in
favour of the theory of the stork. If the theory of sexual reproduction
is taught in schools, it must only be taught as a theory and not as the
truth. Alternative theories, such as the theory of the stork, must also
be taught.

Evidence supporting the theory of the stork includes the following:

1. It is a scientifically established fact that the stork does exist.
This can be confirmed by every ornithologist.

2. The alledged human foetal development contains several features that
the theory of sexual reproduction is unable to explain.

3. The theory of sexual reproduction implies that a child is
approximately nine months old at birth. This is an absurd claim.
Everyone knows that a newborn child is newborn.

4. According to the theory of sexual reproduction, children are a
result of sexual intercourse. There are, however, several well
documented cases where sexual intercourse has not led to the birth of a
child.

5. Statistical studies in the Netherlands have indicated a positive
correlation between the birth rate and the number of storks. Both are
decreasing.

6. The theory of the stork can be investigated by rigorous scientific
methods. The only assumption involved is that children are delivered by
the stork.

(Original version by Erkki Aalto, Dept. of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and
Stork Science, University of Helsinki --- English version by Jopi
Louko, Institute of Stork Research, University of Alberta)

[Ken Shaw]

Post by Conspiracy of Doves
Ovulation versus cretinism
Two different theories exist concerning the origin of children: the
theory of sexual reproduction, and the theory of the stork. Many people
believe in the theory of sexual reproduction because they have been
taught this theory at school.
In reality, however, many of the world's leading scientists are in
favour of the theory of the stork. If the theory of sexual reproduction
is taught in schools, it must only be taught as a theory and not as the
truth. Alternative theories, such as the theory of the stork, must also
be taught.
1. It is a scientifically established fact that the stork does exist.
This can be confirmed by every ornithologist.
2. The alledged human foetal development contains several features that
the theory of sexual reproduction is unable to explain.
3. The theory of sexual reproduction implies that a child is
approximately nine months old at birth. This is an absurd claim.
Everyone knows that a newborn child is newborn.
4. According to the theory of sexual reproduction, children are a
result of sexual intercourse. There are, however, several well
documented cases where sexual intercourse has not led to the birth of a
child.
5. Statistical studies in the Netherlands have indicated a positive
correlation between the birth rate and the number of storks. Both are
decreasing.
6. The theory of the stork can be investigated by rigorous scientific
methods. The only assumption involved is that children are delivered by
the stork.
(Original version by Erkki Aalto, Dept. of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and
Stork Science, University of Helsinki --- English version by Jopi
Louko, Institute of Stork Research, University of Alberta)

You're just part of the storkosexual conspiracy. Those who know the real
truth know that "newborns" appear in cabbage patches where members of
the vast storkosexual conspiracy delivery them to the "parents".

Ken

[Jim Guillory]

Post by Ken Shaw

Post by Conspiracy of Doves
Ovulation versus cretinism
Two different theories exist concerning the origin of children: the
theory of sexual reproduction, and the theory of the stork. Many people
believe in the theory of sexual reproduction because they have been
taught this theory at school.
In reality, however, many of the world's leading scientists are in
favour of the theory of the stork. If the theory of sexual reproduction
is taught in schools, it must only be taught as a theory and not as the
truth. Alternative theories, such as the theory of the stork, must also
be taught.
1. It is a scientifically established fact that the stork does exist.
This can be confirmed by every ornithologist.
2. The alledged human foetal development contains several features that
the theory of sexual reproduction is unable to explain.
3. The theory of sexual reproduction implies that a child is
approximately nine months old at birth. This is an absurd claim.
Everyone knows that a newborn child is newborn.
4. According to the theory of sexual reproduction, children are a
result of sexual intercourse. There are, however, several well
documented cases where sexual intercourse has not led to the birth of a
child.
5. Statistical studies in the Netherlands have indicated a positive
correlation between the birth rate and the number of storks. Both are
decreasing.
6. The theory of the stork can be investigated by rigorous scientific
methods. The only assumption involved is that children are delivered by
the stork.
(Original version by Erkki Aalto, Dept. of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and
Stork Science, University of Helsinki --- English version by Jopi
Louko, Institute of Stork Research, University of Alberta)

You're just part of the storkosexual conspiracy. Those who know the real
truth know that "newborns" appear in cabbage patches where members of
the vast storkosexual conspiracy delivery them to the "parents".

Hush! First lets get Intelligent Delivery taught in school, then we can
argue about the identity of the the Deliverer.

Regards,
Jim

[Mike Painter]

<snip>

Post by Ken Shaw
You're just part of the storkosexual conspiracy. Those who know the
real truth know that "newborns" appear in cabbage patches where
members of the vast storkosexual conspiracy delivery them to the
"parents".

Cabbage patch is the only true way.


I overheard a school nurse one day talking about a film she had just shown
on childbirth to a continuation* high school class. She noticed one of the
girls who was within a few weeks of delivery who was very upset. The nurse
talked with the girl who, until seeing the film, had believed what dear old
mom told her about childbirth.

The belly button opened up and the baby came out there.

*Continuation high school in California is your last chance at graduating.
You have been kicked out of the real school and have to follow a rather
strict set of rules to stay. For many they end up filling out workbooks and
end up with a GED rather than a real diploma.

[TomS]

"On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 16:51:50 -0500, in article

Post by Jim Guillory

Post by Ken Shaw

Post by Conspiracy of Doves
Ovulation versus cretinism
Two different theories exist concerning the origin of children: the
theory of sexual reproduction, and the theory of the stork. Many people
believe in the theory of sexual reproduction because they have been
taught this theory at school.
In reality, however, many of the world's leading scientists are in
favour of the theory of the stork. If the theory of sexual reproduction
is taught in schools, it must only be taught as a theory and not as the
truth. Alternative theories, such as the theory of the stork, must also
be taught.
1. It is a scientifically established fact that the stork does exist.
This can be confirmed by every ornithologist.
2. The alledged human foetal development contains several features that
the theory of sexual reproduction is unable to explain.
3. The theory of sexual reproduction implies that a child is
approximately nine months old at birth. This is an absurd claim.
Everyone knows that a newborn child is newborn.
4. According to the theory of sexual reproduction, children are a
result of sexual intercourse. There are, however, several well
documented cases where sexual intercourse has not led to the birth of a
child.
5. Statistical studies in the Netherlands have indicated a positive
correlation between the birth rate and the number of storks. Both are
decreasing.
6. The theory of the stork can be investigated by rigorous scientific
methods. The only assumption involved is that children are delivered by
the stork.
(Original version by Erkki Aalto, Dept. of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and
Stork Science, University of Helsinki --- English version by Jopi
Louko, Institute of Stork Research, University of Alberta)

You're just part of the storkosexual conspiracy. Those who know the real
truth know that "newborns" appear in cabbage patches where members of
the vast storkosexual conspiracy delivery them to the "parents".

Hush! First lets get Intelligent Delivery taught in school, then we can
argue about the identity of the the Deliverer.

On this web site, "a Conservative issue advocacy and information
group established to promote and defend conservative social, political
and economic principles nationally"

<http://therealitycheck.org/FeaturedWriters/jdm113004.htm>

There is an essay about "intelligent design" and evolution.
There is this interesting observation in that essay:

"If intelligent design is creation theory, it’s creation theory
through a P.C. filter. It’s like teaching that babies are delivered
either by storks or ladies, while swapping out the word “stork”
for “some bird” just to make it sound objective. “Which one is it,
birds or ladies?” kids will ask."

[Clothaire]

On 11 Apr 2005 08:05:33 -0700, "Conspiracy of Doves"

Post by Conspiracy of Doves
Ovulation versus cretinism
Two different theories exist concerning the origin of children: the
theory of sexual reproduction, and the theory of the stork. Many people
believe in the theory of sexual reproduction because they have been
taught this theory at school.
In reality, however, many of the world's leading scientists are in
favour of the theory of the stork. If the theory of sexual reproduction
is taught in schools, it must only be taught as a theory and not as the
truth. Alternative theories, such as the theory of the stork, must also
be taught.
clipo

The Secular Gestational Theory of Human Life

Fortunately God is not constrained by the limitations of
entropy or even the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In fact he has
no limitations. We know that you can't get something for nothing,
but this limitation does not pertain to God--the existence of the
universe bears witness to that fact.

The Secular Gestational Theory of Human Life, i.e, the theory
that the human body grows from a single cell is fallacious. Anyone
with a knowledge of simple statistics and biology can easily see this
fact. A human being does not grow from an egg and sperm as
scientists would have us believe. We do not come from eggs, like
animals. A human being is created in the womb by the Creator,
in His own image and with an indestructible soul (although this
soul may be subjected to long periods of torment in Hell).
Anything that complex and showing design must be created and can't
just happen. The hand of the Creator is evident.

The conclusion is obvious--The Secular Gestational Theory of
Human Life is wrong; Storkism is the correct theory.

A human body has an estimated 10 trillion cells. Scientists
hold that these cells, consisting of a myriad of specialized types
serving a multiplicity of purposes, just magically spring forth
from a single cell. They manufacture themselves at the right time,
then mystically travel to just the right place and begin performing
their allocated function on cue. This development theory is the
equivalent in probability to having life develop from non-life as
proposed by the Theory of Evolution.

If you take a look at the individual statistics, you arrive
at probabilities that beggar the imagination. First of all, a
single body cell is extremely complex; the difference between cell
types is tremendous. The idea that a single ovum could produce all
of the body cells is just not believable. The Secular Gestation
Theory of Human Life is just not tenable. To what lengths will
scientists go to deny the role of the Creator in human development?

[felix]

4. According to the theory of sexual reproduction, children are a

Post by Conspiracy of Doves

Post by Conspiracy of Doves
result of sexual intercourse. There are, however, several well
documented cases where sexual intercourse has not led to the birth of a
child.

And the opposite case is more compelling - there has been a famous case of a
birth without sexual intercourse. (I won't mention names....)

Post by Conspiracy of Doves
Ovulation versus cretinism

[Conspiracy of Doves]

Yeah. It isn't that hard. The penis doesn't have to enter the vagina,
only the semen does. I bet you could find lots of cases of girls
getting pregnent that way.

[666interface]

Post by Conspiracy of Doves
Ovulation versus cretinism
Two different theories exist concerning the origin of children: the
theory of sexual reproduction, and the theory of the stork. Many people
believe in the theory of sexual reproduction because they have been
taught this theory at school.
In reality, however, many of the world's leading scientists are in
favour of the theory of the stork. If the theory of sexual reproduction
is taught in schools, it must only be taught as a theory and not as the
truth. Alternative theories, such as the theory of the stork, must also
be taught.
1. It is a scientifically established fact that the stork does exist.
This can be confirmed by every ornithologist.
2. The alledged human foetal development contains several features that
the theory of sexual reproduction is unable to explain.
3. The theory of sexual reproduction implies that a child is
approximately nine months old at birth. This is an absurd claim.
Everyone knows that a newborn child is newborn.
4. According to the theory of sexual reproduction, children are a
result of sexual intercourse. There are, however, several well
documented cases where sexual intercourse has not led to the birth of a
child.
5. Statistical studies in the Netherlands have indicated a positive
correlation between the birth rate and the number of storks. Both are
decreasing.
6. The theory of the stork can be investigated by rigorous scientific
methods. The only assumption involved is that children are delivered by
the stork.
(Original version by Erkki Aalto, Dept. of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and
Stork Science, University of Helsinki --- English version by Jopi
Louko, Institute of Stork Research, University of Alberta)

ill stick with ovulation
ur logic is fucked

[Enkidu the Atheist]

Post by 666interface

Post by Conspiracy of Doves
Ovulation versus cretinism
Two different theories exist concerning the origin of children: the
theory of sexual reproduction, and the theory of the stork. Many
people believe in the theory of sexual reproduction because they have
been taught this theory at school.
In reality, however, many of the world's leading scientists are in
favour of the theory of the stork. If the theory of sexual
reproduction is taught in schools, it must only be taught as a theory
and not as the truth. Alternative theories, such as the theory of the
stork, must also be taught.
1. It is a scientifically established fact that the stork does exist.
This can be confirmed by every ornithologist.
2. The alledged human foetal development contains several features
that the theory of sexual reproduction is unable to explain.
3. The theory of sexual reproduction implies that a child is
approximately nine months old at birth. This is an absurd claim.
Everyone knows that a newborn child is newborn.
4. According to the theory of sexual reproduction, children are a
result of sexual intercourse. There are, however, several well
documented cases where sexual intercourse has not led to the birth of
a child.
5. Statistical studies in the Netherlands have indicated a positive
correlation between the birth rate and the number of storks. Both are
decreasing.
6. The theory of the stork can be investigated by rigorous scientific
methods. The only assumption involved is that children are delivered
by the stork.
(Original version by Erkki Aalto, Dept. of Obstetrics, Gynaecology
and Stork Science, University of Helsinki --- English version by
Jopi Louko, Institute of Stork Research, University of Alberta)

ill stick with ovulation
ur logic is fucked

That loud 'swish'! Look up! Too late.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplin and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA

Regardless of whether it was a murder sacrifice or a suicide sacrifice,
it's all very Old Testament this need for blood in order to atone for
alleged wrong-doing and I'll have nothing to do with it. You're free to
splash about and play in the blood of your sacred sacrificial lamb and
declare it fresh spring water if you want, however. It still stinks of
death to me.

-- Darklady