Dude stop embarrassing me in front of the Wizards.
Dude stop embarrassing me in front of the Wizards.
I was there. /v/ was ripping on Fuckley in the weeks leading to Loss. Every comic was dissected to find the joke, and then remixed to be funny (because CAD wasn’t).
And then Loss dropped, and /v/ went ape shit.
I miss old /v/ :(
Gimme one of those double pronger alien mits
Get a load of this guy, peeling their apples, grapes and tomatoes.
I do the same with rats
The problem is that the “thing” is either:
That’s what OP is saying. The wording could be clearer.
Essentially, if you can relate to what the comment says, then downvote.
Never have I ever heard “I’m proud of you” from my Dad :'(
First of all, it was an orangutan, which is not a monkey.
Second, it wasn’t a prostitute, as the orangutan wasn’t paid.
Third, I had no idea, as the orangutan was shaved, and they turned the lights off before I got into the bed.
They’re also burnt out just getting to and from work/home.
Some sleep at their office to avoid commuting. While others will rent wall-coffins.
It’s regrettable that it became part of “psychology 101” (in a general sense).
Can you imagine how much misinformation is piggybacking off these “facts” about human nature?
Sounds very penis’y
It’s my fourth time today, it’s gonna be a bit…
I think that makes you amnesic
Gnostic / Agnostic is simply a claim about knowledge.
I’m agnostic as to whether my bread is stale. (I don’t know if my bread is stale).
I’m gnostic about the planets shape (I know it’s a dodecahedron).
Theist / Atheist is a claim about belief.
Every person fits into one of the following:
A Gnostic Theist claims to know God exists (therefore implicitly believing)
A Gnostic Atheist claims to know God doesn’t exist.
An Agnostic Theist believes in God but doesn’t have sufficient evidence to make definitive claims.
An Agnostic Atheist doesn’t have sufficient evidence to make claims about God, and therefore doesn’t believe.
In terms of rationale, both Gnostic groups make definitive claims without sufficient evidence and should not be trusted.
The Gnostic Theists believe in something without evidence, this is a fallacy, but it’s something we all do every day. For example, I don’t know if it will rain, but I believe it might, so I bring an umbrella.
An Agnostic Atheist is the most rational. If you don’t have sufficient evidence to make a definitive claim, then why would you believe it?
You’re not making the point you think you are.
I understand the implications of both.
I don’t truly call Australian Aboriginals “Australians”, I was being facetious.
Also, I call them “Native Americans”.
Because.