Rubber bands were my friend until my 6th month.

They are occasionally still my friend on Thanksgiving.

Rubber bands were my friend until my 6th month

All of my pants have hooks instead of buttons. WHY MUST THE WORLD CONSPIRE AGAINST ME SO????

Hmmm. Lemme ponder. And google.

Timelies all!

We have a box of hand-dipped Hannukkah candles. Got them at the Jewish Arts Festival. They fit my menorah much better than the standard Manishevitz candles sold in the store.(Those won't stay in the candle holders unless they are wrapped with foil.)

Jessica - here: [link]

In conclusion: why, if I have gained no weight during my first trimester, do none of my pants fit? In what universe was that intelligently designed?

Hard belly versus soft belly. Before the fall of humankind, you'd have been nekkid, and pants wouldn't have been a problem. Pants are one of the scourges of sin.

Wait 'til your regular undies don't fit you, and your maternity undies, in addition to making you feel like you're wearing grannypants, irritate the heck out of your I-can't-believe-it's-this-stretched-out abdomen. Oh, the fun!

My favorite undies were (thanks to Cash's suggestion) were Body by Victoria briefs. So soft. And wonderful.

Jessica - here

Ooh, that's kind of nifty. Up til now I've been mostly just wearing my elastic-waistbanded skirts, but it's getting to be too chilly.

This whole thing would be so much easier if I were allowed to work from home in my bathrobe...

Pants are one of the scourges of sin.

Stoopid sin. t kicks sin

Ooh, that's kind of nifty. Up til now I've been mostly just wearing my elastic-waistbanded skirts, but it's getting to be too chilly.

a suggestion for pants -- [link]

It's like a soft stretchy jersey, but nice jersey. comfortable but professional.

So an example (from the Dembski blog entry) of this unconvinced-by-mountains of data is when he says this?...

I wouldn't say mountains for that-- he's refined his argument to the point where he's harping on systems that we don't know very well. For the Ken Miller article mentioned: [link] It's a good article. Also see: [link] I have to leave work now so I haven't read Dembski's response to this and any counter-response, but he's definitely refusing to be persuaded by counter-examples where a simpler organism is shown to be part of a more complex organism. The responses to TTSS/flagellum, as Jessica and Nutty said, appeared to be "now you have TWO irreducibly complex things" and "that's not close enough to the final form of flagella!" The difficulty appears to be lack of information about the flagellum-- which doesn't prove IC/ID.

Is 'detailed Darwinian pathway,' a Discovery Institute-ism?

Yes; from a quick google it appears to be the thing they will ask for as evidence of evolution but will never receive. The other evidence for evolution-- like replicating it in the lab-- goes unmentioned.

bon bon, would Bob Bob agree with Nutty's assessment of Dembski's rhetorical skills?

Unfortunately I can't ask him b/c he's on a plane right now. I agree with what Nutty says, but I wouldn't want to speak for Bob if only because he has sympathy for Dembski, as Bob gets some shit professionally for being a theist. I think he's been convinced that Dembski has failed to adequately respond to his critics, though.