GLOBAL WARMING
The opera
(Al Gore)
I loved the stock broker opera.
Picture by: dunno source Caption by: Hueydoc via Poster Builder
-
-
Copy & paste this:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous Dear Volcano | If I just do this… Next »
GLOBAL WARMING
» 391 comments
Leave a Reply
-
Recent Comments
Marilyn Foster on Vandals Cashing In Steampunkette on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… Steampunkette on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… imnotreallyhere on What About the Underdog? imnotreallyhere on Today on Maury imnotreallyhere on Today on Maury imnotreallyhere on Day One By Jimmy Kimmel 'Nuther Guest on I Don’t See It…… RS on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… T'laryth Phalyn on I Don’t See It…… 
Cheezburger Company BlogPrint on Demand
More I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?
I Can Has Cheezburger? - Lolcats n Funny Pictures
Animal Capshunz: He Will Have Revenge
Lolcats - Lolcats n' Funny Cat Pictures
Walk awai, luk kewl, luk kewl
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies
Just b kewl
Animal Capshunz - All of the Internet's Animals. Captioned
Hurry, This One Won't Last Long
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
Dill Pickles the Dwarf Kitten
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
Oh, Look, A Chimp. AH, LOOK AT THE CHIMP.
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode.
You Don't Say!
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
That Parrot is Hammered
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
Never Chew Again!
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
Teabaggin'
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz
F*CK HEALTHY
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
Al Harrington of the Denver Nuggets Totally Looks Like Donatello from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
Panda Bling
If Style Could Kill - OMG Style!
Ring of the Day: Killer Whale, Dude
Lovely Listing - Strange Findings in Real Estate Listings
Winchester Mystery House
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-94wNw88f65Rhk.gif?labels=MTVN%20Digital%20Tribes\")
Still prefer the Rabbit of Sevvile.
Quick. Turn him off. His voice really grates on my tendrils.
Since Al has been mega-emissioning, he seems to have really gone to seed. The culprit must be carbon. Or Big Macs.
Isn’t he just sequestering carbon — perhaps in the form of tasty, tasty McRibs?
I’ll go with “WIN” for $1,000, Alex.
Mmm…tasty tasty carbon.
Carbonized meat? Mmmmmmmmm.
He seems to be burping light bulbs. I hope those the right kind.
He’s summoning a fire spirit.
haha! Surely it’s not safe to burp eco-bulbs, they’re like poisonous! lol
also PLEASE CHECK OUT MY BLOG
Die you fvcking spam troll!!!
*kills OCD with her M14*
Hey Diss, I need you bring the truck around.
*beep beep beep*
I’m backing it up to you right now.
He’s everywhere, HOW! I say we send cgray and Paul to his blog…..
Hey guys, completely off subject but:
.
Obama called my basketball team, University of KY Wildcats (hell yes), and told them thank you for raising 1.5 million for Haiti relief. He even told John Wall, our star player, that he’d like to have a scrimmage sometime
Basically full of win.
Huh!? I thought basketball was a non-contact sport, so just how do you have a scrum?
I don’t think I’ve ever played a game of basketball that was non-contact…
That was a joke; I do those. Even if it wasn’t at which point in a game of basketball do you get 4 subs each side off the bench, form them into groups of 8, and get those groups to try and push the other team off the ball?
I thought that is how Basketball was played. Maybe that is why I get thrown out of every game so quickly
Give blood, play rugby! –which is why I’ve never played, but I love the slogans.
Nobody else has said it, Wow, but that is cool. Very full of win. Even if you don’t like the president (or in my case the Prime Minister), getting a call from him personally (or, as in your case, your team) would be very cool.
What I think is amazing too is that it was the players who thought of “Hoops for Haiti” and they came to Coach Cal asking what they could do. They were the ones answering the phones when people called in.
VERY cool.
It is super cool!! And how amazing that these kids raised THAT much money!!
It’s the Big Blue Nation, period. We are an amazing and vast body of epically awesome people. But I AM a bit biased.
It’s nice because sometimes it seems as if all you hear about young people is bad stuff. The media seldom covers the good stuff they do. E.g., someone vandalizing a school was front page; one of our Troop’s Eagle projects to repaint the exterior landscaping trim, zilch.
That’s great for your basketball players.
Aw, good for your players! (As an aside….sorry you got stuck with Cal. Guy’s a douche.)
That’s awesome. Majorly. No matter what side you’re on, if you get a call from the President thanking you for your relief efforts, that’s pretty f’ing cool.
Is it just me or does he look like he’s belching up that ball of light?
no no no! Hes clearly summoning a spirit bomb!
Is it OVER 9000?!
What 9000!?!?!?
Urbandictionary.com can make you look smart on the interwebs.
That can’t possibly be right!
it’s the spirit of global warming! run! run for your lives! he’ll kill us all!
Oh rats, I commented before reading ALL the other comments… Sorry CW, I thought the same thing.
All I could think was “EPIC BURP”.
Yay – a funny one!!
And appropriate, since Gore has been making such a song and dance about climate change.
I agree. Yesterday was a crap fest.
However, since this LOL is a hot-button subject, I predict level 7 flaming here. Meaning at least 700 comments.
Well without futher ado, lets pour the gasoline, light the match, and ignite the flame war over the social & political effects of climate change and how Al Gore invented the interwebs to spread the propaganda…
al gore iz a lier. i cant belive u loosers lissen 2 him. their is 4feet of sno at my haus so obv it aint gitting hotter. u idiot!
(omg, that hurt… but if it doesn’t start an appropriate flame war i don’t know what will)
I don’t agree with you shorty…… I mean you didn’t include location of said house. You could be in the Polar Regions where it could still be hotter, yet snow is capable, or you could be in Alaska, New England, or Canada where you NEED tons of warming to prevent snow (I mean 30 degrees F is T-Shirt weather in Maine.) So just b/c you have snow doesn’t mean global warming doesn’t exist……. Besides it’s Belgian Change, not Ukraniane Stewardess’ Warming…….
I disagree, ILPB, it’s very obvious that if you turn shorty upside down, she’s clearly a facist socialist from….oh, dear, she’s not wearing underwear……
Well the gubberment didn’t issue her any… and this is one time I’ll tank the gubberment **smacks Shorty’s arse** plus her arse is commie red….
Only since you smacked it! Do it again
I like to watch.
*hands paddle to Nucky* No Ma’am it’s your turn… **turns on video camera labelled Women of PK Gone Wild**
umm, i’m gonna need 10% of all profits from this… in perpetuity. i’ll have diss, my lawyer in these matters, draw up the contract.
I believe this is a charity video we’re making for the men of PK. Non-profit.
fine then… i’ll make ivan pay in other ways. mwa ha ha
Okay, now that that’s settled, bend over, we’re losing the light and I want my turn!
*holds up skimpy panties* Shorty, you left these in my cave. Can I keep ‘em?
*warms up to spank Shorty* Oh, should I take my shirt off for this, Mr. Director?
No no no you’re Nurses outfit works fine for this scene.
But I thought we were doing the “Helllloooooo Nurse” thing tomorrow. *grumble grumble, puts nurse’s outfit back on* Fine, but this white pleather is really hot and can someone zip me up, please?
**runs over to help** oops my hand slipped, crazy front zippering costumes…..
should i put on my french maid outfit for a bit of consistency in the scene?
No you’re the patient……. who’s only wearing thigh highs and stilletos.
*head asplodes from image of Shorty in thigh highs and stilettos*
*shouldn’t tell ivan that she’s actually worn that “outfit” before*
[secondary head assplosion]
I don’t think he’ll care either!
No, no you shouldn’t. *entire body asplodes*
Typical conservative – labeling the opponent communist and doing anything it takes to confirm it
\joke
You’re just jealour b/c you wanted to smack it…
You can play too, Wino.
No he can’t….. he didn’t help pay for the lights and cameras…………. plus he ate the last sprinkled donut, and for that I will never forgive him.
Ah, but I have access to more sprinkled donuts…..remember, we Canucks have Timmy’s!!!! (It’s really our secret weapon.)
“It’s really our secret weapon”
Well, you need some kind of secret weapon because your armed forces are just pitiful!
But, but, I don’t like donuts… *wipes sprinkle from beard*.
Hey! You better watch out, I’ll send our elite commando squad after you!
“elite commando squad”
Six Mounties not wearing undies?
How, we’ve talked about this before. Mounties are
HOT! But, no, I can’t tell you about the elite squad ’cause they’re are other secret weapon.
Of course they’re HOT! Heck, if Canada ever invaded I would totally surrender without much of a fight to the hot Mounties.
HOW you do realize they sleep with their horses, and not women, RIGHT?
i am too… a g-string just doesn’t cover much!
You’re wearing it the wrong way as well…
)
He is super serial…
About climate change, or Manbearpig?
Half man, half bear, half pig. Manbearpig is a serious threat to us all.
Both are to serial to let your guard down
Global warming is a fraud. Those so-called scientists just say what they are paid to say.
And cancer is just a lie to enslave us and keep us afraid. Lance Armstrong is in cahoots with the scientists!
Science is a lie you mean.
Have any of you actually SEEN an atom?
No, but based on evidence I know it’s there.
Have you actually “seen” your brain? Oh wait, bad example.
I have scene you’re brian
Doubtful. My Brian is a scientist, not a thepsian.
Not your Brian, you’re Brian. Sqwirk has a scene, and you’re Brian. *mutters something about reading comprehension*
HEH. I did the best I could; I had troubl making out the apostrophe and the “e” over the sound of the WHARRGARBL
*facepalm* trouble. I need coffee. Preferably intravenously.
.
Has Brian lost one of his sandals?
If ISO is Brian I’m going to be Jesus.
*gets up on a cross*
Who’s channeling Thor? We need a hammer here!
After all the spanking, I imagine that shortright is feeling pretty thor…
I believe that would be Brak. He doesn’t like it when you play with his hammer without asking, so be careful.
Well, that’s why I was calling for him!
Excellent. Carry on then.
Somebody need a hammer? Verily doth I have that thing indeed! And you don’t necessarily have to ask, just make sure your hands are warm.
Yea, The Mighty Thor has decided to stalk nucky and follow her around so that he may never miss a shot of the Magnificent Canadian Rockies on those drive-bys.
I have answered mabs’s call. Who dost thou wishest me to smack? Or is this just for fun? Asgardians love fun.
Assguardians?
I say thee, NAY!
That’s those guys from Olympus.
Know what I sayeth?
*does a drive by boobie flash just for Brak, giggles and runs away* Always happy to oblige, Oh Mighty Thor. Say, how was that name earned? :twisted?
In the days of old in Asgard, there was born to the Allfather Odin, Ruler of Asgard and Midgard, a Mighty son, he who was to become God of Thunder and Bringer of Lightning. As he was handed the naked, crying babe, his only son, he tenderly grasped the infant in his all powerful hands, looked down at his progeny and spake these immortal words…”Wow! Look at thith! Any goddeth that gets thmacked with thith hammer ith gonna end up Mighty Thor!!” Thus it was spoken and thus it became true.
And, um…now you know something about Odin. Keep it under your helmets, ok? He’s sensitive about it. And violent. Big axe. Runs in the family.
Oh, and nucky………truly Asgardian. Join me for some mead?
I’d love some mead, Brak. Can I touch your hammer, too? I promise to be gentle.
My hammer is at your tender service. Touch it as you will, oh voluptuous mortal. May I climb the Rockies as well?
Your mead, dear. Go easy…powerful stuff.
Climb at your peril, Thor, many have tried to scale these peaks…..
I would be a most ungodlike Thunder God did I fail to accept this challenge. Indeed shall I attempt these magnificent heights! *crackles a little lightning around his head for effect* FOR THE GLORY OF ASGAAAAARRRDDDDD (and my own great pleasure)
*MMMPPPFFFFF*
——–III (a happy hammer)
*is scaled by Thor* Oh, Thor, that is a might hammer *giggles coquettishly*
And may I say, madame, that many a heroic song will be sung in the mead halls of Asgard of the feats of this day!!
Come with me…to Asgard we will go! Thou hast proven thyself worthy to walk it’s golden streets and mighty towers!! Thou shalt be the Official Booty Wench of Asgard! And Odin has GOT to see this!
*goes back in for another peek…er…peak!*
I’m all yours, Thor love. Just as long as I get to play with your hammer anytime I want……
O Mighty Nucky, thou needest not even ask. My hammer is ever at thy beck and call. More mead dear, or shall we just continue the climb?
Well, I am a little thirsty from playing with your hammer. How about a little mead and a little climb?
As they say in Asgard…
Thou art ON!
*cracks open another quaff*
For you, Mighty Nucky.
Ahhhh…thunder in the Rockies*
If you’re going to be Jesus, can you turn this water into beer for me? I don’t like wine.
I only play Jesus on PK. But, Bitter Wino, being a deity and all, could probably do something about that water of yours.
Jesus preferred to walk on water, rather than magic Wino tricks promoting the Jewish wine industry – for which he was well paid in *hics*.
I’ve seen my brain on drugs.
**eats scrambled eggs** You know you need to add some bacon to these brains.
Bacon, always a good choice on fried brains! Praise pork!
What’s left of it? (The drugs that is.)
Is… is that an actual *joke*?!
NO! That is NOT allowed in here.
Have you ever seen the webs that hold the inter-webs together?????
ZOMG the intranet is fakke
Only b/c Al Gore invented it. He likes to fabricate things… Wooh- wooh!!!
libral conspirasy!@@!342
Al Gore, King of the Cheeseburger, has dubbed this conspiracy false, and blames Man-Bear Pig…
Have you ever SEEN the air? No, but you know it’s there because you haven’t suffocated…
*facepalm*
“because you haven’t suffocated”
Yes, but in Sqwirk’s case we’re always hoping.
Maybe we could introduce some nonexistent cyanide atoms into its nonexistent air supply?
Worst band EVAH!
*hides Air Supply CD* Yeah! Man they SUCK!
*narrows eyes*
I see what you did thar.
Actually I see it on Cold Mornings.
Oh and in a pressure zone you can see it escaping…. hear it too if there’s a small leak in the pressure zone.
Ah, but what you’re seeing on cold mornings is water vapor — not oxygen. *thud* Oh, dear, ILPB was trying to breath the water vapor.
I aguatic…… like Agua Man….. someone just put Tequilla in my Water Vapor..
Plus Water Vaport, NO2, Smog, CO, CO2, Sulfur (pending how close you are to a power plant, volcanoe, car, etc), Freon, O2, are all part of Air… so when I see part of Air, I can see Air….. Just like if a can see the tops of your lady humps, I can see your breasts (maybe not all, but part)… and my how lovely they are **continues starring**
*whacks ILPB with rolled up newspaper* Stop putting stars on my lady parts. Geez.
Hammer at your service!
You guys know the regulars better than I do, so please tell me that Sqwirk is kidding. Obviously, the follow up about science is a joke, and I’m hoping that the original is also a joke. It’s so hard to tell these days…
Sqwirk is all sorts of crazy, so who knows if he’s joking..
Truly, no one knows if Sqwirk is joking. Sqwirk doesn’t know if Sqwirk is joking.
*sings*
I want to know, have you ever seen the raaaaaiiin?
*sings*
I can see clearly now, the rain has come.
*joins in*
I can see alllll obstacles in my way!
Uhm, isn’t it supposed to go, “I can see clearly now the rain is gone.”?
No, it’s “I can see clearly now, Loraine has gone…”
(credit to who ever it was I stole this from)
That was me, DU!
I’ll take payment in the form of cookies.
No, no, no, this is an entirely different song altogether. I’m not shocked that some of the young’uns don’t know Creedance, but YOU, Eddie?
“Comin’ down on a sunny day”
I know it, Diss. Love it, too.
No, no, NO, silly. That’s AIDS. It was created in a laboratory to eradicate promiscuity, homosexuality, and IV drug use
But that is the CIA, not SCIENTISTS.
I worked with a guy who was convinced that AIDS was invented by the US Federal Government to control the black slave population but they didn’t realize that slave owners were sleeping with their slaves, causing it to spread amongst the general population. (Yes, he was serious, and yes, he was referring to the government of the 1800′s developing this).
He did a LOT of drugs……I don’t think that has anything to do with it though.
There are folks in the world who honestly believe that the polio vaccine is designed to cause sterility in Muslim boys. *sigh*
Oh, that’s one I never heard before! I totally believe that. It makes perfect sense.
It’s not working fast enough
Wait, what?
Yeah, because if they do get polio they’ll be -that- much more likely to survive and reproduce.
Hard to be inconspicuous with a bomb-jacket when your leg braces are squaking….
Dude, that’ awful but funny.
*starts packing for her trip to hell*
Yeah, but nobody’s going to search you if you’re in an iron lung.
*descends to a level deeper*
Yeah, but who you gonna convince to shove the C-4 up your a@@ and wheel your wheezy a@@ into the synagogue?
Brimstone s’mores, anyone?
Oooh, sulfur-icious!
Well I wasn’t paid to say this but I’m going to anyways. You’re a douchebag.
That’s spookily close to the truth; there is no better way of ruining a career in science than disagreeing with the “holy cow” theories of your field.
Unless you can actually prove the holy cows wrong. In which case, there’s no better way to secure a sinecure.
Even in a rigorous field, it rarely works that way — you usually have to wait around for the older generation to die off. It remains to be seen if that model will hold true in activist science.
“activist science”. Tee hee! The level of grant awards per applications sent is now down around 20%. (grant application reviews are done by senior scientists at the NSF, NIH and the like). If you can’t fund it, you can’t do any research. And for most university-level faculty, as much as 80% of your own salary has to come from grant money (salary level determined by the university, though). Which means without a grant, you lose your income, and shortly you will lose your job. Which means that real science is VERY conservative these days.
And the scientists who get the grants act all superior!
So doesn’t that imply that controversial/long-shot/etc. research is even less likely to be approved?
Most scientists I know are using their previous grant’s funds to do the research for their next grant’s work. This is because the grants are very competitive, so you have to be able to already show results for the work you’re “going to do”. Therefore, if you’ve made a breakthrough discovery you will get grant money. I’m not aware of a single case where people with astounding results have been turned down.
What do you mean by “activist science”? Are you referring to science such as evolution or climatology where there’s an “activist” fringe (and by “activist”, I mean corporate or church sponsored, depending on the situation) using faith-based science in order to “prove” their conclusions?
I mean wayward disciplines which emphasize the (usually politically connected) message more than professional rigor and the scientific method. So, yes, climatology, anti-vaccine research, the South Korean cloner, that kind of thing.
I could be wrong, but I don’t believe that CRU, the Met Office, and Goddard, for example, are substantially funded by religious groups or corporations.
Or government sponsored in order to “prove” their own conclusions? Possibly pushed by special interest lobbies?
Both side of the fences we’re talking. I think everyone needs to realize that there is a difference between today’s sciecne and the science of yore. Science, like most things, has now become commercialized.
Gonna disagree with you on one point: science has always been done for the purpose of getting grant money, or the money of an important noble or plutocrat. Other than a few self financed individuals, of course. Other than that, carry on.
Sir Issac Newton (great cookie maker)….. not in it for the money. Gallileau (butchered sp) was almost killed for his scienctific research. Greeks really did it as well for the benefit of society (Ancient Greeks)
Um, those fall into the category of “a few self financed individuals.”
Galileo was funded by Cosimo II de’ Medici. This was the reason he pretended to see those moons around Jupiter, so that he could name them after his benefactor (he called them “Medicean stars”). Luckily, we now know Jupiter has no moons.
Mrph. You are right. (How annoying.
) Now I will have to try to remember which Greek I was thinking of….
Well, FWIW, AFAIK, Newton was self-financed during the time when he made his greatest discoveries. And, Albert Einstein was, of course, working at a patent office when he wrote his paper on Special Relativity, IIRC.
EINSTEIN WAS A SOCIALIST!!!!!!
Yeah I was gonna say. Naming any famous scientist from the Renaissance wouldn’t work. Most of them and the prominent artists were funded by the Medici family. Galileo was almost killed for his beliefs over the simple fact that his patrons had fallen from grace in the church’s eyes.
If I remember correctly…
Oh, and beware of Greeks bearing gifts. In all seriousness, I wouldn’t put too much stock in their lofty ideals. As with modern day scientists, there definitely was a desire to pursue truth, but they were not above the allure of money. They took students whose parents were wealthy and could fund their “research”.
Besides, while the name of the game might be grants, that doesn’t mean the scientists aren’t doing what they love and researching to help the world.
It’s a matter of balance.
Other than in novelizations, however, I’m not aware of any government funding that puts limits on what you can publish. This is not uncommon when the funding comes from commercial sources. I.e., if you’re being funded to study XYZ, and you come to the conclusion that ABC, there are no constraints on you publishing that. Furthermore, if you have solid evidence, you will earn the esteem of your colleagues, which will help you secure future grants.
Nebs: Good in theory, but if you’re getting funded to “study” XYZ from a commercial business or the government and you come up with the opposite of XYZ, and publish it. You’re biting the hand that feeds you. Therefore in the future when you go for more studies, you could get black-balled. It’s great you have the esteem of your colleagues, but your colleagues aren’t funding the grants/ studies.
That’s true for a commercial business, but that’s not true of any government agency I’ve ever interacted with, explicitly or implicitly. Government agencies (with a few possible exceptions that don’t fund much research) aren’t funding you to “prove” XYZ (despite allegations to the contrary), they’re funding you to study XYZ. They want you to publish ABC if that’s the conclusion that the data draws you to. In fact, they’ll punish you if you publish XYZ when the data demonstrates ABC. (There are cases of this, usually indicating fraud.)
Only if said Fraud was caught. Nebs, I’m saying that BOTH sides do this, not just liberals or conservatives. I’m also not saying ALL science either, but it’s really hard to put 100% faith in a Study about Global Change funded by the EPA. It’s in the best interest of the EPA to ensure that Global Warming is 100% REAL and man made, b/c in the end it’ll give them more power. Similar things happen in the DoD, DoT, etc…. with limited Tax dollars, agencies now have to make themselves viable for money.
Most studies that I’m aware of regarding climatology, however, are not funded by the EPA. They’re funded by organizations such as the American Meteorological Society, the National Science Foundation, etc.
PS: To see what the funding sources of a journal article are, just go to the Acknowledgments section. Here’s one from a random article I found at scirus.com:
NOAA = Department of Commerce, once again it would benefit the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration if there were concerns with the Earth’s climate, especially effecting the Ocean and Atmosphere…. plus they need money to fund their ships.
The other two I haven’t researched yet. But I find it scary that you don’t think funding can have impact on outcome of the research.
Actually, the biggest benefit to NOAA is to understand how the climate really works, wouldn’t you say?
As for funding having an impact on the outcome of research, I acknowledged below that it does. However, (US) government agencies don’t bar you from publishing results they don’t like, whereas companies and other private organizations often do.
I should clarify two things, however:
(1) Commercial business includes lobby groups not directly tied to any business. There was an impressive study some time back showing that the “health benefits” of fruit juice or milk found in studies funded by the juice or milk special interest groups were clear, when they weren’t (or were shown to be unhealthy) in studies funded by other sources.
(2) Scientists, like all humans, are capable of deceiving themselves. Although your funding may not be tied to you proving XYZ, if you believe XYZ, you’re much more likely to find results supporting your theory.
There is good reason for governments and companies to support and fund science because quite simply knowledge is power and there is nothing really wrong with that.
The problem really arises when governments and corporations try to own that knowledge and use it to further their own agendas whether it be making money or creating fear from climate change, evolution, computer science, mathematics, astronomy or whatever the idea might be. When corporations and/or governments think they own an idea they’ll do everything to protect that idea including attempting to discredit opposing ideas even if those ideas have scientific merit.
How’s that saying go “He who is powerless fears gaining power, he who is powerful fears losing it”
The fact that governments and companies today think they can throw money at scientists to influence studies is a very dangerous exercise but us private citizens can have a role to play as well, we should be checking the results of studies, we should be peer-reviewing and conducting our own tests to see if the empirical results can be replicated even if it is only on a tiny sample. A 5 year old today has been exposed to more information than our grandparents did in their entire lives yet we seem to be more ignorant of the world around us, how is that possible?
I don’t know if they are more ignorant of the world around us as much as they haven’t had the the childhood experiences that your grandparents had. Most kids today probably don’t get more than 1 kilometer from home, unless they’re in the car with mom and dad. But they have a wealth of exposure to the world at their fingertips via the internet. Unfortunately, it’s not quite the same as seeing it up close and personal.
I would disagree on that–our grandparents grew up seeing folks make things from scratch, or repairing things. I know because my parents grew up that way. Which means I can take apart a window frame to rehang a window weight, and I can also sew a false hem on a pair of slacks. Can you?
I don’t really know what a false hem is. I do know that I had a pet project for making a full mascot costume from scratch and the internet was helpful, but nothing compared to sitting down and just figuring it out myself.
False hems are when you undo a hem, sew a ribbon to the end of the material, and then roll the fabric barely back up and sew the ribbon to the fabric. You can get an additional half to one inch of length in your slacks–important for vikings!
Really? Exactly how many people are able to do this on, for example,
the health risks of nanotechnology?
You mean you haven’t read Stephens Theory on Nanosciences? Geezus, are you living in the dark ages or what?!?!
(just kidding of course, I actually agree with you!)
Actually, I have read a couple of articles on nanotechnology and use of nanoparticles in common products (such as sunscreen). It’s not exactly my field, though.
Gah! Smart ass..
You likely didn’t intend it that way, but that’s actually an excellent example.
I don’t know any reasonable geneticist who thinks we’re anywhere close to understanding the underpinnings of something as complex and multi-linked as human sexuality, and wouldn’t be comfortable drawing even simple links based on what we know today. Ergo, researchers who trumpet such “findings” are generally exaggerating at best, and are most likely after attention, funding, or both.
No, it’s not as what she was dismissing was ornithologists’ observations of same sex bird pairings. They were not ‘trumpeting’ anything, merely presenting that observation along with all their other nursery observations.
Like I said, you probably didn’t intend it that way. Your comment motivated my answer, which was limited to human sexuality — do try to keep up…
And of course we NEVER look at animals’ behavior for insights into our behavior. Nor do research on animals in lieu of humans.
I was responding to your statement about ‘trumpeting’ results.
Honestly, I don’t know why you’re having such trouble with this concept — you’re talking about something completely different.
You’re bent on either getting in the last word or proving yourself “right”; whatever the motivation, your off-topic prattling is starting to get embarrassing.
I’m sorry that you’re embarrassed by being wrong.
LOL! You know, it’s a shame you don’t realize just how hysterical you can be.
Let me guess — local government job?
You have a local government job? How nice for you. I believe someone just mentioned how insulting people on a lol thread was the resort of those who know their argument is wrong.
Well, you’ve already decided you’re right and I’m wrong, regardless of what the record clearly says — who am I to argue?
You know, at this point, your relatively minor error doesn’t even matter — it’s your protracted juvenile behavior that speaks volumes. It’s a little scary to think that you jump to this kind of irrational behavior when you decide you don’t like someone, but it certainly explains a few things.
You are the one who pointed out that people who resort to arguments do so because their arguments are wrong.
Sorry, mistype: You are the one who pointed out that people who resort to insults do so because their arguments are wrong.
I repeatedly pointed out your error, to no effect. Yet you keep talking. Obviously you have something else to discuss…
I’m not aware of any geneticist who thinks we’re close to understanding the genetics behind human sexuality, either, but there has been some very impressive work on the sexuality of fruit flies. (I’m not being sarcastic. In male fruit flies, a single gene can determine whether the fly tries to mate exclusively with females, exclusively with males, or is indiscriminate.)
I’m also not aware of any published studies suggesting we’re close to understanding the genetics behind human sexuality, so how is that activist science?
I would lean towards homosexuality NOT being a choice. There are those who are exceptions to the rule (Ann Hasche sp?)…..
Well, my theory, and it’s not my research field, so take it with a grain of salt, is that instinctively, we’re not unlike those fruit flies, in that some of us men are strongly drawn towards women, some of us are strongly drawn towards men, and some are indiscriminate. Interacting with those instincts are libido (environmentally and genetically influenced) and “free will” (don’t get me started on my opinions of that, but I use the term as a stand-in for our complicated minds). Men who are strongly drawn towards other men can choose not to act on those instincts, and can even fool themselves into thinking they don’t have those instincts, but the basic instinct is still there. I also think that most men who argue that sexuality is a choice fall into the camp of being indiscriminate (in their desires, not necessarily in their actions).
Women, as always, are a mystery.
We do that on purpose.
For sure!
Ah, sweet mystery of life, at last I found you!
Heehee, couldn’t resist.
All chicks are bi. Give me a grant, and I’ll prove it. The research might, uh, take a while. Heh.
Ew. No. Disproved your theory already. *runs off with Rando’s grant money* I’m going to prove that petting kitties lowers your BP.
I haven’t gotten do my research yet! C’mon, I’ve got lots of really fun research to do!
You should see Kinsey’s scale of attraction. I think it’s the most accurate thing out there and it’s not new research.
Charro’s back! *hugs*
Well, sort of anyway. I’m oh, a zombie.
The problem is that a lot of Kinsey’s work is based on men and women having the same sexual flexibility. While the sexuality of women does work on a continuum, at least on average, the average man’s sexuality tends to be more fixed.
And nevermind, I’ll be damned if I can find sources right now so have a hug instead. *hugs*
Kinsey’s scale is also to small. Most people I know end up with decimal points. Though I do know a solid 6.
Ok… at work, that link is blocked because of “Sex Education”.
Stupid Southern States!
I rank around 3, I think.
To sum up the scale (from the website)
0- Exclusively heterosexual with no homosexual
1- Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2- Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3- Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4- Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5- Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6- Exclusively homosexual
*looks over the scale* Ooookay… I should be a 1. Then again, I suppose the questions did screw me over. :/
Actually, I think a big flaw in any of these studies is that people lie more about sex than any other subject. It’s very difficult to normalize for lying. I find reading about how the researchers try to weed out the lying more interesting than their results.
Yes, I know I’m weird.
Dammit! I’m a zero. But what do I rate if I LOVE to watch same gender pron??? O.o
Oh, that actually does sound interesting! Yay! I’m weird too!
Incidentally, I’m around a 1.5ish on the scale
I believe it means you might be fibbing a bit about where you are on the scale.
Let me rephrase: opposite gender, same-gender-on-gender pron? Weird, eh?
Ah, I believe TMI is the expression you’re looking for.
LOL! I believe you’ve nailed this head, mabsba!
Oh, indubitably.
They DO have the same rights. We all heve the right to get married. Nobody’s infringing that right. They just can’t marry each other. That’s the rub.
No, I can marry a woman, but women can’t. That’s different rights. That’s like saying that blacks had the same rights as whites when they were allowed to drink from their own fountains or attend their own schools.
Right. You can marry. So can she. That’s equal rights.
Hey! We LET the black people marry other black people. Obviously the same rights. /sarcasm
@It’s so obvious: If I give you a dollar and give mabsba a million dollars, would you say the amount I gave you was equal because I gave you both money?
Your analogy is ≠ this discussion.
I do! I do! *jumps up and down, waiting for her money*
mabs is a woman; she should only get $0.72 for each of ISO’s dollars.
*whacks HOW with rolled up newspaper* Shush! Quit reducing my money with logic!
Actually, it’s a perfect analogy. You’re saying marriage is marriage, but I’m pointing out that, assuming you’re a guy, you wouldn’t feel that way if you were only allowed to marry guys. (If you’re a woman, I’ll trust that you can make the appropriate substitution.)
So, to make the analogy perfectly clear. To me:
being able to marry a woman:being able to marry a man::$1 million:$1
Now, do you understand the analogy?
Who is being rude? I’m just trying to explain how analogies work. I’m not saying that money equals marriage. I’m saying that just like all marriages aren’t equal, all amounts of money aren’t equal.
Let me put it simply: would you like it if you were only allowed to marry men?
lol. Fine. Be rude. Let me put it simply to you, too, then. Everyone has the right to marry. That means everyone has that right. Who someone marries is a DIFFERENT right.
Got it now?
OK, so then you agree that, despite what you said earlier, they do NOT have the same rights, then, right? (Since “Who someone marries is a DIFFERENT right.”)
Glad we finally got that settled.
(PS. I still don’t think it’s rude to point out that analogies are not equalities. Some people have difficulty with the English language and pointing out their mistakes does not make one rude, as long as one doesn’t do it rudely, and I don’t think I was rude about pointing out your mistake.)
Like I said, it’s a different right. Which means different legislation, and a different law. The law IS equal. Thanks.
Does the law allow men to marry women, but not women to marry women? If so, then the laws aren’t equal, since “who someone marries is a DIFFERENT right.” It doesn’t matter if it’s equal in one way – if it’s unequal in another way, it’s unequal. If A=A, but B ≠ C, then A+B≠A+C, regardless of how much A=A.
ISO, that argument is deliberately obtuse and you know it.
Rando, that IS the argument. I didn’t create it, I’m just as intrigued by it as you are.
It might be, but it’s correct — and it’s important to keep in mind, lest we redefine “discrimination” and set a bad precedent.
Thank you, Rando, that’s exactly what I was thinking! I would flash you but I remember you’ve gotten tired of seeing them.
@Dhoti: What’s correct, that A+B=A+C when A=C and B≠C? I’m really not sure what you’re saying is correct, but as for setting a bad precedent for discrimination, I’m hoping you’re kidding. Otherwise, I’m sure that’s what the plaintiffs were thinking in Loving v. Virginia. (The Supreme court decided, unanimously, against Virginia in that case, btw.)
ISO: it might be the argument, and perhaps you were just playing devil’s advocate, but if so, the devil should hire a new one because you essentially proved the argument invalid. (A classic example of reductio ad absurdum.)
Nebbie: The argument is invalid because Shaq is holding a panda.
In your mind I proved it wrong. Really, I don’t care what you think. But thanks for being rude and patronizing.
Here’s all I’m saying:
Discriminatory law: a man and a woman of the same race can get married
Non-discriminatory law: any man and any woman, regardless of race, sexual orientation, whatever, can get married
Any comparison to the civil rights movement falls flat, because one was actually fighting for civil equality, whereas the other is asking for an expansion of something existing.
ISO: you think I’m being rude and patronizing, but that sounds like an excuse to ignore that your argument is self-contradictory. No matter how much you might say it, however, pointing out the contradiction is not rude.
Well spoken, Dhoti. I’m trying to do 5,000 things at once right now and don’t have time to really delve into the meat of this argument, as iit IS the argument, and I’m still rolling it around in my head
Dhoti: so let me get this straight:
I hate it when I mess up the closing tag.
And yours is hogwash, and totally denigrating to people who are actually suffering from sexual discrimination.
…not only good for property values, but also aesthetically pleasing, as well! Besides, if I have to suffer the *ahem* joys of marriage, EVERYONE should be allowed to, as well.
How is it hogwash? Let’s try this question and answer series: is telling someone who you can marry based off race racial discrimination? If so, then how is telling someone who you can marry based off sex not sexual discrimination? Please explain the difference to me.
Now that’s a reasonable counterargument, Dhoti. I would say that male-only or female-only locker rooms and restrooms are discriminatory, but that it’s acceptable discrimination. There are a lot of other places in society where such discrimination exists, and I’d say it exists on a spectrum of acceptability. Pay is different for the same job? Not acceptable. Girls aren’t allowed to play football in many high schools (because they can’t play on boys’ teams, and not enough girls want to play to form a girls’ team)? Not acceptable to me, but not as clear cut as the previous example. Men aren’t allowed in female pageant shows? Less clear cut, but not one I’m going to the mat for. Men aren’t allowed in women’s restrooms? Mostly acceptable, although I am concerned about transgendered people.
I think that, since your definition of “discrimination” is more expansive than mine, we’re stuck.
Urgh. Meeting.
Agreed, Dhoti. Very expansive, indeed. By Nebton’s logic, it would be religious discrimination disallowing the practice of Mormon polygamy, and god only KNOWS what would happen if we allowed those folks recognized plural marriages
And I think that’s where the argument ends up going in circles. We have different definitions of discrimination than you do. Which you’re right, it means we’re stuck. Which is nothing new. LOL
@ Rando: then the entire practice of law and legal system must be obtuse, since it’s all about nuances and semantics…. couched as legal precedent (apologies to diss).
I don’t think it’s quite that bad, Rando — I think we can agree on the definition; it’s just a matter of extent.
Out of curiosity, where do you fall on the locker room/single-sex sports league/dudes in beauty pageants issues? Do you share Neb’s “acceptable discrimination” viewpoint?
At the very least, I think my definition of discrimination is very simple and straight-forward. If you’re discriminating (a pretty well-defined word, IMO) on the basis of sex, it’s discrimination. That does punt the question, of course, to what is acceptable discrimination, since most people would consider that such cases exist (e.g., locker rooms, although what about cases like Caster Semenya?). To me, a straightforward legal approach is to start with the question, what’s the benefit of the discrimination and what’s the harm? Most people would evaluate the locker room situation and decide that the benefit outweighs the harm, but that special consideration might be given for special cases. One would then need to argue what the benefits are and damages are for allowing a woman to marry another woman (for example) instead of a man.
As for ISOs concern about religious discrimination, that comparison fails here. AFAIK, no one is ever told who they can marry based off religious identity. No one can marry more than one person (legally) in the US, whether they’re Catholic, Episcopalian, or Mormon. There are religious issues (just like with some religions and illegal drugs), of course, but the arguments I’m making for discrimination aren’t relevant to multiple marriages, as I see it. (And yes, there is species discrimination, if you want to get ridiculous. That’s true all over the place. When’s the last time a dog got a driver’s license, for example, or was even allowed to take the test to get one?)
Here’s the problem — what you’re calling “harmful discrimination” is what the law calls plain old “discrimination”. You think harmful discrimination should be eliminated; the law is required to eliminate discrimination. But, since the legal version doesn’t include your concept of “beneficial discrimination”, your terms are not interchangeable.
I think this distinction’s important because, without it, I worry that the net effect will be to elevate the power of the judiciary over the legislature. More fundamentally, I don’t believe that members of protected classes have an ability to challenge laws they disagree with that the rest of society does not have.
Well, to pick on an edge case, what about situations where a person has the sex organs of a female, believes herself to be female, but has a Y chromosome? (IIRC, that’s the rumor around Caster Semenya, which may or may not be true, but it does happen.) Should such a person be allowed to marry a male or a female? What about (natural) hermaphrodites? Of course, these same concerns apply to the locker room.
It would be discrimination, strictly speaking, but not religious discrimination. Rather, it would be marital status discrimination, and there’s already plenty of examples of that. As I mentioned earlier, there’s also cases of species discrimination, but no one’s fighting to change that. As you indicate, there are certain recognized classes of discrimination: sexual, racial, and religious being the ones we’ve discussed here. Marital status is not a recognized class of discrimination. Just to be clear, I’m not disputing how discrimination is defined legally, for two reasons: (1) IANAL, and (2) nothing legal is ever simple. That said, I do think my definition is a very simple dictionary definition.
So you recognize that your definition is different from the legal one, but you think the legal system should ignore its own definition and use yours in some, or all, cases? That hardly seems fair.
That seems to lead back into my original point — if you don’t like the law, change it. Don’t engage in judicial activism; apart from being antithetical to the rule of law, it presupposes that your position on every issue will always be “right”.
Actually, my IANAL statement does not acknowledge that the law is different, just that it wouldn’t surprise me. That said, I’m talking about what should be, not what necessarily is. Part of the problem with law (and language in general) is that definitions are not static. I doubt that discrimination is defined as concretely as both of us would like to be. (I’m assuming that you’re like me in that you prefer precise laws wherever possible.)
That said, if we go off assumed intent (i.e., the meaning of the law as understood by those who wrote and voted on it), then you’re probably mostly right that sexual discrimination legally would not include all cases of sexual discrimination, and that, more specifically, it would not include homosexual marriage. However, the same argument could be made about laws regarding racial discrimination and interracial marriage (the amendments that are most frequently cited date to right after the Civil War, after all). Thus, laws (or amendments) should’ve been required to allow interracial marriage, as well. If I were going to be truly rigorous in insisting on no judicial activism whatsoever, that’s the position I’d take. Can you paint a difference between the Supreme Court ruling in interracial marriage and a similar hypothetical ruling on same-sex marriage? Keep in mind that there is also a limited amount of racial discrimination we allow.
P.S. You’ve done an excellent job in arguing your case as you’ve essentially backed me into the corner of “They do it, too” and “Because I want it to be that way”.
I am not certain that the law in any state distinguishes between all male and all female scholarship programs. Public conceptions of political correctness does, but I am not sure there would be legal repercussions for the creation of one.
Not intended to be contentious- just interested in being involved on the longest thread on PK ever
OK, I’ll buy that. Every group of people, including scientists, has their glory hogs.
Publish or perish, bay-bee.
What’s the first thing a newly sitting first term president does?
Give an inaugural address?
Starts planning his re-election campaign, silly!
Actually, it’s usually easier to publish the non-sexy stuff, as it tends to be less scrutinized. Of course, in the computer science field, most researchers can demonstrate their results pretty clearly.
If you’re publishing in legitimate journals or “Science”. If you’re going for the “National Enquirer” than it’s pretty damn easy… lol!
Hey now! The Enquirer is some of the best investigative journalism on the planet. The. Planet!!!
Which planet?
Kolob
Enter a room full of shadowy, cigar smoking figures and watch a second, never before released film of the Kennedy assasination? One taken from somewhere near the grassy knoll?
Hey Captain Wow–and after Obama’s call, Kentucky promptly went out and lost to South Carolina–basically full of fail. Double hell yes.
And the fact that you CANNOT figure out the reply button is full of fail. D!ckbag.
If he’s from SC, it explains alot. Their Lt Gov wants to starve poor children.
Didn’t he call them “Stray Animals” or something?
Yes, yes he did. He said if you feed them, they’ll “breed”. :eyeroll:
Now, technically, I suppose if we can starve the children to death before they reach puberty….
Somehow, I don’t think that qualifies as “compassionate conservatism”.
Now, now, you don’t have to starve them to death. You can semi-starve them, which will delay puberty…or it will suppress ovulation on girls, if they have already ‘pubed’.
Hmm. I guess that means that you DO have to starve the post-pubescent males to death, after all!
Oh, yeah, that’s obviously Obama’s fault
Nah, it’s Kentucky’s fault… for sucking. *starts a containment fire*
Yeah, 19W 1L is sucking. :eyeroll:
Actually, I don’t follow sports at all (and it probably shows). I was just going for the obvious flame war to keep things toasty around here.
Well you don’t want to start one with a Kentucky girl (evil glare) we have been known to blow a fuse/get rabid. Kentucky Basketball is serious business around here.
It’s not like TExas though who lost to UCONN (women’s that is..
)
Your cleverness is matched only by your ability to use the Reply button.
Kentucky,
The state that’s window licking good.
DOn’t forget that delicious Kentucky bourbon
I get pissy when people say Jack Daniels is Bourbon. ITS NOT! It’s only bourbon if it comes from Kentucky. Period.
Because we’re awesome like that.
Anywhere in Kentucky, or does it have to be made in Bourbon County?
Whatever it is, it’s only good for cooking mushrooms in. The food kind of mushrooms. Great for creamy sauces, J.D-cooked mushrooms.
lol. First time I went in a liquor store in Texas (‘hard’ alcohol is sold in separate stores, unlike here), I nearly ran into a ten foot high pyramid of cases of JD.
So Kentukian Moon Shine = Bourbon? What about the Bourbon Chicken I have, is it the sauce or the chicken that has to come from Kentucky?
I thought we killed this one too. WTF is happening with all of these zombie trolls??!!
Hey, cgray, NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU THINK. EVER.
No one cares what you think.
No one cares what you think, even before you think it… or not.
Same goes double for you, Smurfette.
Me mind on fire, me soul on fire
Feelin’ hot hot hot . . .
Party people, all around me
Feelin hot hot hot . . .
‘Fire burnin, in my soul…” Lou Reed?
For some reason all I can think when looking at this picture is:
“the phantom of the climate is there, inside my mind…”
Line deleted from scene…
“NoooooOoooo… My biodegradable and eco-friendly flesh is melting under these inhuman lights!!!”
Then somebody pointed out that Gore wasn’t making a monster film and that all fleshy human meat sacks have biodegradable and eco-friendly flesh and he didn’t invent it. Gore stood befuddled by this for a while and then opted to sing in a bad Alto for the next hour.
Which proceeded to melt the biodegradable and eco-friendly flesh off the audience. There will be a service next week. Bring your own earphones.
*notes this as a fail and flies back to the drawing board*
I liked it, I just couldn’t think of the proper response. I do enjoy the confusion over whether Gore is making a monster film. He seems rather creepy recently.
Just recently?
Actually his creepiness goes back several years.. just sayin’
I think you’re confusing creepy with mind-boggingly dull. Even when he’s being dramatic he’s dull.
Maybe, but he’s been mind-boggingly dull in a creepy zombie sort of way..
I see your point.
Look Rando, Al Gore came within a corrupted gnat’s nit of being President, rather than that other nit, GWB. In another reality, that is George Junior himself belching the light bulb.
Gee once upon a time Al Gore could put people to sleep just by talking, this was back in the day when he was VP Gore – man he was a boring old coot, now it seems his power has grown (to over 9000!!) and his voice is melting peoples flesh?
Where is Son Goku when you really need him
It was when he tried to sing in alto that flesh started to melt. Goku would need to die a couple times and come back before he could endure it.
On the way to Namek.
One last ball.
He’ll be right back.
A tragic opera at that.. He must be suffereing from major heartburn these days because it looks like he’s horking up a ball of fire.
It’s from injesting all that carbon. Now you know where it goes after you buy the credits from him
IF I WERE TO EAT A GIANT HOT DOG I WOULD DO SO IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER! OM NOMNOMNOMNOM
This made me laugh like hell.
Is it just me? I mean, I am a bit odd.
I dunno. This may have moved you from the ‘a bit’ category to ‘a bit’ further over on the odd spectrum.
Gads, the first thing I thought of for this was the opera at the end of “the devil’s hands are idle play things”
You, sir, are a genius.
My hammer is at your service.
Damn, the visuals were awesome! I can honestly picture that, especially Algorio being carted off to the underworld..
Dude. This is epic win with a side of awesomesauce
That’s actually pretty entertaining there.
I’d pay money to see that opera
kinda epic
Are you going to get that Italian guy, Joe Green, to do the music writing?
In the spirit of modern times, and since Signor Verdi is no lionger with us, many of the songs will be recycled. They will include:
Baby it’s cold outside
Blowin’ in the wind
Money money money
Liar Liar
It’s the end of the world as we know it
Let it snow
You’ve got to pick a pocket or two
Can we squeeze the ABC’s into act three? I think it will give it a greater appeal to the younger generation.
Well, it worked in Chicago, and Mama Mia.
I’m actually very impressed, especially since I can’t think of any way that I would change or improve it since I like where it is so much right now. *stamps approval and flies off*
I’ve seen that crap before, sung in Italian that I never understood. I got my money back then, and I want it back again, now.
You’ll have to talk to your ISP if you want a refund.
I can’t understand what anyone down at my ISP says… they’re Italian.
I begin to suspect that learning Italian may be a good choice for you.
Scusami?
Poperazzi.
Pepperami.
Wottsamattayou?
I’m Hueydoc and I approve this script.
Dang! It’s taken me ages to realise it was YOUR caption! Nice one mate! Damn funny – keep up the good work!
Huey, just because you are last right now, does not give you the right to say anything at all. Anyway, you vote for Al? I might have guessed…
For a second, I thought he was going all “KAMEEEHAAAMEEEEEEHAAAA–!!1!” there.
*realizes she’s being a nerd*
*sits down quietly*
OMG! Double D! You’re back! Yay!
*glomps HOW*
Helleuu, m’ dahling lifeguard.
Saved any endangered species today?
Hey, Miss Fit is back! Yay! I think HOW’s job is to save the very endangered humans-capable-of-expressing-rational-thoughts-on-the-internet species. She’s doing very well, except that she did stink up the place with some carcasses recently.
I sure feel welcomed when I come here~ *pinks a tear away* Thanks, guys.
Haha! Well, that’s gonna be a bit of an environmental problem with all those gasses.. Where’s Al Gore when you need him? …Oh wait, he was dragged to the underworld… Hmm, oh well, back to the SUVs.
Not so nerdy.
My first thought actually.
Phew! I was already scared that people would only think of a certain horrible live-action movie that has raped many childhood memories when I said that. Ahh Toriyama, what did you do, selling your soul to the devil like that? *suddenly has a strong sense of deja vu* Wait, haven’t I already read this before? Something about Algorio…
Didn’t even watch that wretched movie. Saw previews and read the blurbs and it became evident that the movie we had waited for so long was going to be a piece of sh*t. Ah…what coulda been.
I couldn’t bring myself to go and watch it, either. Previews were enough to make my inner twelve-year-old cry. Previews, and a bit of Rotten Tomatoes reviews to get at least a laugh out of the whole thing. I mean, FFS, Piccolo. What The Duck, he was fvcking yellow or something.
..Oh well, I’ll just go and watch DBZ Abridged on youtube or something. Now that’s lame – and funny.
Haha this pic is fantastic XD
also PLEASE CHECK OUT MY BLOG
No.
Finally, something all of us, left and right, religious and atheist, men and women (et al.), etc., etc., can agree on!
I will and tell you to fvck off and die in the comments, spam troll.
Ohhh, extinction imminent, I say.
Oh Gene Pool Lifeguard, you saved us again! Whatever would we be without you…
…I’m not sarcastic, by the way. <3
Did you do it? That would be awesome.
I tried to look but was blinded by the overload of YouTube-clips on it.
Apparently, he’s a Dido-fan. *does not further indulge herself in the potential jokes on that subject*
A what-fan? Oh, misread. :red:
‘s okay, I never knew who Dido was before Eminem’s vid, either. Or… is she not at all known in the US? o_o I mean, I believe she was pretty popular here in Europe, but I’m not sure how her songs were received at the other side of the big puddle.
I’m probably not the best person to ask that. *looks around furtively* Shhhh…I like country and folk music and what’s now old rock.
Do you all call the Atlantic ‘the big puddle’? Lol. On BBC they always call it ‘the pond.’
Ohhh, Classic Rock, eh? 8D I totally took over my dad’s obsession with it. Where I live, I’m one of the few 19-year-old-CR fans in a world full of Gangsta Rap-kids. I don’t even mind Hiphop, as long as it’s got something to tell — something other than how many hoe’s and kilos of gold around the neck the ‘pimp’ (of hustler? Sweet son of a crap, I feel so old for not knowing this. D:) in question possesses.
My fave music would be oldschool Punk, though. So my name’s not inspired by the workout ladies on TV, but a certain band.
OMG. You’re 19 and feel ‘so old’? *sigh* My SON is 17. *goes to sit in corner*
We’re not old Mabs, We’re Vintage!
My parents always say that I’m an old soul in a young body – or something spiritual like that. Funny thing is, they’re as down-to-earth as one can get. You guys would probably like them.
It’s probably true, though. At high school I was looked at weirdly by kids when I stated that I had no clue who Chris Brown was, nor pretended to have an interest in the latest ANTM winner. And once they found out that I was a huge fan of obscure punk bands they tended to inch away slowly. Oh well. I’m not going to apologize for not liking Beyoncé’s music. To each his own, right?
*sigh* I had to google ANTM. Beyonce I think one of my students played for me once (she’s 15).
Hee hee, ‘s alright, Mabs – I never would’ve known what it was either, if it weren’t for the fact that it’s kinda impossible to escape when you’re my age.
The same student is always so disappointed that I haven’t watched American Idol. I love her dearly*, but there ARE limits to what I’ll watch just to be able to talk to my students.
*In a totally proper teacher way, which I have to add as front page earlier this week was four local teacher who had had sex with their teenage students. *sigh* I haz a sad. A really, really big sad.
I haz a sad, too. Where were those teachers when I was a teenage boy? (They were female teachers, right?)
In all seriousness, I used to be a school teacher myself, and during orientation we were given specific instructions never to be in a room alone with a student (regardless of sex) if the door is closed, and this was nearly two decades ago. (At the time, there was reportedly a female “gang” initiation ritual that involved accusing a male teacher of sexual misconduct, or at least that’s what we were warned of.)
3 male, 1 female. They have the same rule in Scouts, BTW.
I’ve heard of Dido and I’m pretty pop music ignorant, so I think she’s pretty well known here in the States.
I think what you should go now and do is
Fvck yrsf and DIE.
Well done HueyDoc, you get a WIN from me.