oVo wrote:

john9blue wrote:aafitz's latest posts contributed jack shit to this thread

as usual

You doubled that input and I just tripled it.
I thought his 15 minutes was all used up

this is my second meaningless post ITT so far today and i still haven't wasted half of the internet that fitz did

aafitz's latest posts contributed jack shit to this thread

as usual

notyou2 wrote:God gave elephants tusks so we could kill them and then carve their tusks. It is His will. Remove the ivory ban!!!!!

this thread is proof that you don't know jack shit about opposing points of view.

wow, upworthy is ranked higher than reddit.

brb, killing myself.

"can you clarify whether you're always lying or always telling the truth?"

something tells me this won't work, guys

I thought we were asking him if he was always straight.

i thought "straight" meant "honest" here, although given the topic of this thread i may be completely wrong

Symmetry wrote:

Anarkistsdream wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:Can you please clarify whether you're always trolling or always being straight?

+1

+ 2

"can you clarify whether you're always lying or always telling the truth?"

something tells me this won't work, guys

MeDeFe wrote:No, he thought of the neck thing after it was determined that he'd lost the bet.

oh i see

well all i can say is that those are some lame ass gods that can't even cleanly remove a guy's head

I kinda forgot about this thread and didn't think I'd have to spell it out. Besides, I sort of did say how the person in question managed to save himself.

"I know who it is, and I know how he managed to save his neck ."

It really boils down to "ok, you can have the head, but you're not allowed ...

they are just symptoms of a broken system. their actions shouldn't surprise you.

DoomYoshi wrote: We are more alike than I at first realized.

i honestly think that almost everyone in this forum would have quite similar views if we were all equally perceptive, educated, and open-minded.

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
I'd rather be raped than slaughtered, so whatever's your preference, I guess.

-TG

yeah, my point was that anyone who takes issue with the word "raped" should also take issue with those others.

I remember 'learning' in grade school (from a teacher who totally had zero influence on anyone btw) about how the United Kingdom would be a group of islands by the year 2000

edit: another thing that same teacher taught us one day, was about a product that would be coca cola mixed with milk, so ...

well excuse US for being the most important and influential country in the world. sorry that your country doesn't matter as much, but there can only be one #1.

Not sure. I can bet that if you then asked him whether the removal of oxygen had any effect on the climate, he'd say no.

(Also, cutting down trees wouldn't decrease the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere.)

it wouldn't reduce it over time? why not?

i mean, i don't think that this guy would ...

Metsfanmax wrote: Actually, this guy does:

if you asked this guy whether there would be less oxygen in the atmosphere after we cut down 1000 trees, you think he'd deny it?

chang50 wrote: Which isn't what I said,my words were NO effect,which is impossible...

there is nobody in earth who thinks that humans have ZERO effect on the climate.

I think it's possible to separate those ideas.

It is possible to acknowledge that man-made global warming is occurring, while still rejecting the idea that change is inherently harmful.

At least, it's possible for me.

i guess you're right, but it seems ridiculous to think that AGW would NOT ...

if you think abortion is murder, but you think someone that got raped should be allowed to murder, then you've got serious fucking problems

overthrow the government, sure... institute complete automation... sounds good... destroy the male sex... no prob- wait, WHAT??

i've heard this one before i think, but just to clarify, there are two jars with one marble each, right?

speaking of which, what do you guys think about this article? some of my FB friends were raging pretty hard about it:

http://badgerherald.com/oped/2013/11/04 ... not-exist/

Just like Mets, I am a feminist.

i don't think you're quite like mets ITT. he just posts stupid images that make baseless claims.

You only have a sample size of one, that's a premature assessment.

Oh, wait...

http://www.sparksummit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Feminismradicalnotion-1.jpeg ...

saxitoxin wrote:Just like Mets, I am a feminist.

i don't think you're quite like mets ITT. he just posts stupid images that make baseless claims.

i, too, can cherry pick quotes. they put forward biased information without drawing a conclusion, because they know the conclusion they want US to draw (these magazines have the same mentality as rapists) is false. you would need a random selection of quotes to accomplish that, not pre-selected ...

oVo wrote: Fact is there are better ways to describe a lopsided victory.

like "slaughtered"? "crushed"?

those don't sound nearly as bad as getting "raped"

thank you for sharing your fact