Total posts: 3,556
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I have faith in scienceSo your belief in science is faith.
You are just a fountain of deep insights, can I quote you on that too?
I'm talking about philosophyMost philosophers were considered insane. Most philosophers begin with logic, but end up with crap.
If you don't know anything at all about philosophy, then why did you start a thread about philosophy?
Is that why you can't give a single example of something you believe that isn't based on faith?Its irrelevant to the topic.
It is the topic, you don't even understand your own post?
If you think everything is faith, then you lack a way to determine what is true.
This idea that everything is faith is your idea, not mine. You are really talking about yourself in this thread, you obviously lack a way to determine what is true, that's why you can't bring yourself to make a true statement. I think it's time to go back to talking to Shila about your dick.
Science usually uses observations, not faith. This is why they say "proved by observation". They dont say "proved by faith".
LOL, oh yes, please do teach me all about science Einstein, I could use me some learning about that science stuff.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I understand that you think your faith is on equal level as scientific observations, which is a common delusion religious people have.
I have faith in science, and I'm not talking about religion, I'm talking about philosophy, specifically, your complete lack of understanding of the philosophical concepts of faith, proof and truth.
However, if you lack ability to determine if something is true, then you cannot at the same time have ability to determine if something is true.
Yes, I get it, you are devout in your unfounded beliefs, sounds like you are one of the "religious people".
This is very simple.People who have faith by definition have no ability to determine if their belief is true.
Is that why you can't give a single example of something you believe that isn't based on faith? Because you have no ability to determine is your beliefs are true?
If they had such ability, then their belief would be proved and it would be considered scientific.
Apparently, you don't have a single belief that can be proven.
So, unless you want to change definition of faith, at this point you might as well claim that magic is real.
Unless you can learn the first thing about philosophy, perhaps you should stick to doing posts about your dick.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Something never comes from nothing.
Agreed, and therefore the Universe was not created, allow me to explain.
The generally accepted Standard Model of Cosmology assumes conventional physics, especially the General Theory of Relativity (GR), and utilizes the FLRW metric (maybe you’ve heard of it). Logically, it represents the Universe as uncreated.
Here’s what I mean by that, logically, for something to be created, it must temporally move from not existing to existing, there must have been a time when the universe did not exist, followed by a time when the universe did exist. But per the General Theory of Relativity, the Standard Model of Cosmology says that this is not the case, temporally speaking, the Universe is finite, around fourteen billion years old, but there was not a time when it did not exist, so it was not “created”.
The Standard model says that time came into existence at the moment of the Big Bang, which means time began when the universe began, consequently, there was no "before" the Big Bang as the concept of time itself is considered to have started then. The question of "what came before" is generally considered to be meaningless within the Standard Model of Cosmology. If there was no time when the Universe did not exist, then it is meaningless to say it was “created”.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
It's time to rethink what created the Universe.
Why do you believe the universe must have been created by something?
The consensus scientific opinion seems to be that the universe was not created.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
It seems that your faith is based on magic.
We aren't talking about my faith, we are talking about your faith, you have done nothing but make assertions without proof.
By abandoning proof, you cannot at the same time have proof.
Without proof you can't have proof, my my, how profound, can I quote you on that deep insight?
Proof represents the ability(the system) to determine what is true.
So now you are saying you don't know what the word proof means either?
Thus, by abandoning the ability to determine what is true, you cannot at the same time have such ability.
By abandoning an ability you can't have such ability, wow, another deep insight, can I quote you on this too?
So unless your faith isnt "belief without proof", I think we are done here.
We aren't talking about my faith, you don't know what my faith is, and you obvious;y wouldn't understand it anyway.
So, are you still afraid to try to give me an example of something you believe with proof?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
If you want to contradict yourself, fine. I really dont care for your AI response, or your opinion that self-contradicting statement can be true.
You are the one contradicting yourself.
an axiom is a statement that is accepted as true without proofBy that logic, everything is an axiom. But no, thats not what axiom is.
You don't even know what an axiom is? Like I said, you are on the internet, nothing could be easier than becoming informed.
But hey, I'll play along with your "make shit up" approach to philosophy, please tell me what an axiom is then.
You didn't respond to my simple request, tell me something you believe about the real world that is not based on faith, something you believe that has been "proven"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Do you not know what a logical contradiction is?
Yes, I know what a logical contradiction is, and your faith-based belief that "for something to be considered true, it must be proved to be true." is a logical fallacy.
Do you not know what the word "true" means?
System for determining truth is a logical axiom.
You are self-refuting again.
In logic, an axiom is a statement that is accepted as true without proof, which you have declared "belief without proof" to be a logical fallacy.
Your reasoning is circular and self-negating, and because it is strictly faith based, according to you, it is a logical fallacy.
If you remove the system and dont replace it with anything, then nothing can be considered true. Thus, your faith isnt true. But it is logically impossible for nothing to be true, thus the mere removal of a system is a logical fallacy.
There is no proof of this faith-based assertion, it is itself a logical fallacy.
If you remove the system and say that everything is true, then system also becomes true and you commit a contradiction.
Your belief without proof, a logical fallacy.
Your only way is to replace this system with another system.
This is your belief without proof.
But there is no other system for determining truth other than by proof.
As I suspected, you don't understand what a "system for determining truth" is.
Thus, since you have no system to replace it with, it remains true.
You are on the internet, becoming informed about the subject matter you are talking about is as easy as a few keystrokes. Here is AI response to ""system for determining truth", note that philosophically, there are multiple different systems for determining truth and none of them asserts that "for something to be considered true, it must be proved to be true."
A "system for determining truth" typically refers to a philosophical framework or set of criteria used to evaluate whether a statement or belief is true, often including theories like the "correspondence theory," "coherence theory," "pragmatic theory," or a combination of these, which each approach the question of truth from a different angle, considering factors like how well a statement aligns with reality, fits within a logical system, or proves useful in practice.
Key points about different truth-determination systems:
- Correspondence theory:A statement is true if it accurately reflects reality, meaning there is a direct correspondence between the statement and the world.
- Coherence theory:A statement is true if it logically fits within a broader system of beliefs, forming a coherent picture without contradictions.
- Pragmatic theory:A statement is true if it has practical benefits or leads to useful outcomes in the real world.
Important considerations when evaluating a "system for determining truth":
- Context:The appropriate system for determining truth can depend on the situation, subject matter, and purpose of the inquiry.
- Limitations:No single system is perfect, and each can have challenges in specific scenarios, such as dealing with complex or nuanced issues.
- Critical thinking:To effectively determine truth, one needs to critically analyze information, consider multiple perspectives, and be aware of potential biases.
Please give me an example of something, that is not abstract mathematics or logic, anything you believe about the real world, that has been proven to be true.
Tell me something you believe to be true that is not based on faith?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Your faith-based belief without proof that "In order for something to be considered true, it must be proved to be true." is a logical fallacy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
In order for something to be considered true, it must be proved to be true.Can you prove that, or do you just take it on faith?If proof is a requirement for something to be considered true, then the statement is true, as thats what it says.
So you are saying you have faith that the statement proves itself to be true.
If proof isnt a requirement for something to be considered true, then the statement above is true again.
This is not a statement of fact, it is a statement of your faith.
Thus, the statement above cannot be "not true".
You believe this without proof.
To say that "Proof isnt a requirement for something to be considered true" is a self negating statement, because if true, then the opposite statement of it must be considered true as well. A logical absurd.
That's my point, your initial assertion is a self-negating statement, there is nothing here but attempts to assert your beliefs without proof.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Do you define faith as "belief without proof"?In that case, faith is a logical fallacy.In order for something to be considered true, it must be proved to be true.
Can you prove that, or do you just take it on faith?
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Green is both blue and yellow, and yet, it is neither blue, nor yellow.
Created:
-->
@FishChaser
In order to be right you have to IDENTIFY which answer is right. If you just say everything then you aren't right even if one of those things is right because you still don't know which one is right.
They call that the weave, and its genius.
Created:
-->
@IlDiavolo
The Trump bible teaches reintarnation, which says when you die, you come back as a hillbilly, that's where MAGA voters come from.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
Well, remember that if you are rich you can buy growth hormones for your kid that will make him grow to 6'-7.
...and you can grab a woman by the pussy without even asking, they just let you.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
To get the pardon, Ross had to promise he'd carry Trump watches, Trump tennis shoes, and Trump Bibles on the ‘Silk Road’ website.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RemyBrown
Why else would you pardon all these people?Political violence is acceptable if you wear a MAGA hat according to Trump and anyone that supports Trump after this decides that this isn't a deal breaker and to me, that makes literally no sense.
The message is that behavior we saw on Jan 6 is OK, protected by the first amendment in fact.
I'm sure if a Black Lives Matter protest got out of hand, and they attacked the capital, they would be treated the same.
Well....except for all of them being killed before they even made it to the steps of the Capital building...but other than that, they would be treated the same I'm sure.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RemyBrown
The reason is not because of economic policy (I'm fine with letting the trailer parks starve so I can save tax money); the sole reason is because Trump says anyone who hates or doesn't like him is a communist.Alright; I'm a communist now. The label I don't really care about.
Trump lied again.
On the Communist Application, if you check the box that says, "I hate or don't like Donald Trump", they automatically reject you.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Have you read the book 1984 where the government decided what was and wasn't true?Thats what we have in Europe and Canada, and somewhat in USA.
"What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening" - Donald Trump
"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - George Orwell (In his novel 1984)
Created:
-->
@sadolite
@zedvictor4
@ebuc
If your reading this message, then your hallucinating. This site was shutdown on Jan 20th. Please seek some alcohol to stop the hallucinations.Humanity will come to an end 2015, was my prognostication based on the formula involving;1} triangulating { to get a fix on somethings location } ergo #3,2} Cosmic Pi-time 66.4,3} speed-of-EMradiation, that, led to a value coinciding with the human population in 2015.Where now 10 years beyond that date.
It's been like a fucking Fellini movie since 2015, God I hope I've been hallucinating everything for the last 10 years.
I'm hoping I wake up, and it's still 2015, and then I realize I took acid and none of this surrealistic shit really happened.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
What's wrong with the poorly educated?
They voted for Trump, that's what's wrong with them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Aww, why did you have to go admit you're a really good person publicly online? Now they will show you no mercy!(I always kept your secret)
Well, I revealed while I was bitch slapping n8nrgim, that should count for something.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
you have a lot of good points, that would need ironed out if this plan were to be implemented. but those are just the details.
No, they are the fundamental reasons your plan is insane. You didn’t answer my first question, why can’t foreigners and corporations own homes? How does that benefit anyone?
i think the crux of the issue, is that i think home builders would just find a new price point that isn't so ridiculously high, and you think they wouldn't be able to muster it. only an empirical study of this would show who is right,
So your plan is counting on magic?
You are talking about my business, and the home construction industry empirically studies the living shit out of these issues. We are talking about a cyclical business where the players are investing hundreds of millions into building homes to meet demand, those hundreds of millions are at risk if they get the market wrong, and they spend millions on empirical studies to make sure that doesn’t happen. Like I said before, in 2007 we had a collapse like you are describing and half of the builders went bankrupt, the industry still hasn’t fully recovered, the reason home prices have gone up so much is the supply just isn’t there, the demand is great, and the higher the prices and interest rates get, the more people can’t afford to buy, there are more young families living with relatives than at any other time in history because there just aren’t enough homes.
but, i think at least if we did this fifty years ago or sooner, it wouldn't be such a blast to the status quo. and, that's all you for sure have here... this would for sure be a blast to the status quo, and it could even cause recessions or even a depression if done the wrong way. but that's the thing with actual policy that actually helps people,
Yeah, it sounds real nice to say this “actually helps people”, impressive even, but you still haven’t explained how this devastation to the status quo helps people, all homeowners lose equity, many many go bankrupt, home builders are devastated, and the US Economy goes to shit, and millions and millions of jobs go away, who exactly are the people this “actually helps”?
it's a crash to the status quo and scandalous if not a blast to the existing power brokers. that doesn't mean they're bad ideas,
No, the fact that they ruin the housing market and the US Economy and destroy the net worth of the vast majority of Americans and increases unemployment astronomically means they’re bad ideas.
they just need gradually phased in, or something. take almost any policy solution to the problems that ail us, and you will see existing power brokers lose out and entrenched lobbyists throw all hell at preventing change. this all doesn't mean all change is bad...
If everyone must suffer, so you can stick it to the sp called “power brokers” then so be it, right. Who are those dark nefarious power brokers we must fight against again? Homeowners, builders, the millions of people employed by the construction industry, renters, yeah, let’s fuck everyone over so the secret behind the scenes “power brokers” get there’s.
there's winners and losers to everything. that doesn't mean we shouldn’t try to form a more perfect union and do better. at any rate, this is a democracy and someone like trump would come along and deregulate it again and say it was common sense all along what we're doing. that dont mean it's true, though. most of major change that can help people, healthcare, gun policy, education, housing, etc, would require major shock to the system.Just tear it all down, something good will come out of it, if everyone suffers we can be sure those secret bad people suffer too.you'd be the one standing in the way every single time. what's your usual method to help people? just criticize other ideas, like libertarians, or maybe do you just like to take incremental approaches that aren't such a shock to the system? my guess is that you dont have too many original ideas, and maybe just some DNC talking points.
Rather than sit on my mom’s couch eating Cheetos, complaining and typing stupid shit you know nothing about and comically thinking you are "helping people" like you are doing, I’m in the arena, actually helping people. I’ve run a therapeutic riding center for the last 30 years (Sidewalker is a term from Therapeutic riding), I personally have helped thousands of handicap people live better lives. My business is affordable housing, I work for a builder proving new homes for people who can’t normally afford one, and I’ve put hundreds of families into their first home in the last 8 years. That’s some of my usual methods to help people, now it’s your turn pumpkin.
You seem to think sitting on your mom’s couch eating Cheetos and thinking up stupid shit is "helping people", and you are comically arrogant about it, well, other than that, is there anything else you do, have you ever actually been in the arena, ever actually helped someone by actually doing something to help, not counting doing something inanely theoretical on the couch, something you had to get off the couch to do that actually helped someone? Time to make something up and tell us all about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Why is this all about California for you, do you live in California?
The other 49 states have houses too you know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It makes sense if you can steal a person's life savings without killing him that is evidence enough for the government caring and not being greedy at all.
Careful you don't give Trump any ideas, he would love to steal everyone's life savings
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
Home developers would still build houses. That's their thing, so they'd just find a new equilibrium on the price point.
No, they wouldn't, their thing is to make a profit, if home prices crash, the cost of materials and labor become greater than what you can sell the home for and they stop building. New home construction is very cyclical, the crash of 2007 put half of the builders out of business, the ones that made it stopped building homes, years later when prices came back up they started building again, we still haven't caught up with demand, there are fewer homes than there are people who need a home to live it.
Incomes r still high in the usa and some landlords would still own multiple properties.
No they wouldn't, investors buy homes looking for a return on investment, this is a combination of rent payments vs mortgage and maintenance costs, plus price appreciation. When the return on investment in housing goes down, they find better places to put their money.
Instead of the the average house being 400k in the usa, which is self evidently absurd, maybe the new price point would be 200k.
It costs more than that to build one, and if that happened, the homeowners would all lose $200K in equity. So everyone is fucked, homeowners get ruined, builders go away, and renters don't have a place to rent.
I doubt it'd go as low as 100k but I dunno. Plus there would still be upward pressure in housing prices not just from high incomes, but our embedded mortgage system. The bottom line is that there would just be a better price point and u r too critical to obvious solutions. If u lived when cars were made, u would be one of the people saying cars hurtling past each other at 55 mph is a disaster waiting to happen.
If u lived when cars were made you'd say manufacturers should be allowed to make a profit, but they would magically still make cars because that's what they do, and if that happened, we'd all still be driving horse and buggy to work.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
This seems like a California ideaCalifornia is one of the safest states in USA.
Not in Palisades.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
First corporations and foreigners shouldn't even be allowed to own houses
Why not?
Next, to discourage rich people from hoarding property at the expense of others,
Why is it that rich people hoarding property be at the expense of others, typically they rent them to people who don't yet have the means to buy a home.
the second house they own should be taxed at 10 percent of the profits, third house at 20 percent profits, and so forth, up to 90 percent tax on 10th and all subsequent houses.
How do you calculate profit on a house, if it's rented are you considering the rent to be profit? If the owner took a mortgage, then is it the difference, and if there is a negative cash flow, should that be deducted from their taxes? How about price appreciation, how does that impact the profit calculation?
Apartment buildings should be taxed the same way, except it's not based on number of apartments but number of buildings. This would encourage efficiency in building and living
How would that encourage efficiency in building and living? Almost all apartment buildings are owned by corporations, are you saying apartment ownership can't be incorporated.
This all would lower house prices and encourage more home ownershipWhy is this such a bad idea?
It's a terrible idea because it would not lower house prices and it would not encourage more home ownership. It would devastate the housing market, and people who own just one house would lose their equity, the supply of homes would end up being reduced, there would be more people that want homes than there would be homes available, that makes the home price go up for first time home buyers, so pretty much everybody would be screwed.
If you fuck up the housing market, you fuck up the entire US economy, construction is the engine driving economic growth.
Other than all that, good idea.
Created:
Posted in:
I am pond scum and should be the poster child for retroactive abortions, but here are the top 41 ways to cook and eat tree bark...
Created:
Posted in:
Or this?
If Trump had lost the election, civilization would come to an end, and we would be overrun by (multiple racial slur words go here)...
Created:
Posted in:
Who is this?
Occupied space is a quadrated by a polyhedron represented in Buckminster Fuller's geodesic area...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Okay there haven't been enough new threads in here in too long and I'm finally bored enough to start making some. D'you see what y'all've driven me to. Gawd.Let us take, for instance, the example of ancient Athens. Aristotle writes, "the male is by nature superior and the female inferior, the male ruler and the female subject." He writes that her intellect can never have authority or participation in politics. Naturally, women were not allowed in philosophical schools or pursuits.Pretty standard thinking for the day. My question is this: why was Athens' divine concept of wisdom female? Why didn't they conceptualize that deity as male? In fact, Athena was also the goddess of battle and civilization -- all things it seems Athenians should see as pretty masculine.
Historically, I think that there were a lot of matriarchal societies that predated the patriarchal societies, over time the more egalitarian, matrilineal societies got displaced by more hierarchical patriarchal systems. Matriarchal societies were characterized by earth mother goddesses, and I think the idea of wisdom being personified as female is a tradition the ancient Greeks inherited from the past. The actual word for wisdom is grammatically feminine. I think the Greek origin story for Athena reflected that historical development, because Zeus swallowed Metis, the Goddess of wisdom and cunning, Athena came forth from his forehead.
Plus, I think, just like today, from the very beginning of humanity, men have thought more with their dicks than their brain, nobody would associate the way we think with the word “wisdom”, if there was a Greek God of dumbass, he would definitely be masculine, but wisdom, no way.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
Here’s a game idea: write a post in the style of another poster and see how many tries it takes to guess the correct poster. It’s not a very large group here, so it shouldn’t be too difficult. Here goes:The sun rises… the sun sets.In between, we must “toil the earth” and whatnot.Hopefully, there’s also time to live a little and love a little… or a lot even.Wash, rinse, repeat.Life in a nutshell…Who am I?
Zedvictor4 no doubt.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Like I said, I don't know much about it, so my attitude on only this comes from my own lack of understanding. I can't even conceive of how they could surmise the trajectory from the detected particles after a collision. Especially when the outcome is described as mysteriousWell at least it is'nt a false narrative, even if their conclusion is false. I think you understand the differrence there, and I will avoid politics of immoral false narratives we see on the in last 15 years in USA and other countries
I don't think anybody is misrepresenting anything, maybe they have too much enthusiasm, and maybe they really do have techniques that allow them to accurately trace the trajectory like that, I'm sure if they tried to explain it to me it would look like magic.
I would imagine studying cosmic rays would be the most tedious thing you could do, they probably spend decades waiting for something interesting to happen, when something finally happens, they get ecstatic and want to publish and make noise and all that. The gist of the message is, "hey everybody, something unusual finally happened, and it's mysterious, isn't that interesting".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
To the best of the technical abilities they have on hand, I believe is what they surmise to be correct conclusion via those mechanisms at hand.Stigma 1,2,3,4 5? Who knows, and I dont think their claiming any of those..." sur·mise
Like I said, I don't know much about it, so my attitude on only this comes from my own lack of understanding. I can't even conceive of how they could surmise the trajectory from the detected particles after a collision. Especially when the outcome is described as mysterious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
The Aryan race will rise up from the trailer parks and reign for a thousand years, hallelujah!It's also going to be good for lesser races as well since they also can avoid living in the third world shit hole that not electing him would createSo yes Aryans benefit but so do niggers, kikes, chinks, faggots and the Irish
the rocks and stones themselves, will start to sing.
Hosanna Trump
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
The Amaaterassu particle and another like it, appear to come from rather empty voids of space.got time stamp 2:06 and watch for 30 seconds or so to hear the story of these ultra-highly charged cosmic ray particles that are not easy to know where they came from, unless very amplified like this one is
By mysterious, I think they just mean to say we don't know shit about it, but I suspect it's not nearly as mysterious as they think.
Keep in mind, the particle wasn't detected directly, it was only inferred, the results of a collision sent overt twenty particles down to the detectors and they surmised everything from that, including a trajectory that looks like it came from a Void in space.
Most of these lower energy cosmic rays bounce all over the place on their way here, but this one was so high energy, they assume it probably didn't get affected by the things that affect lower energy rays, like gravity fields, etc. I'm no expert, but it seems they are figuring the trajectory from all these collided particles like its billiard balls or something, maybe they can do that, but I find it hard to believe you can take the trajectory of over twenty particles and trace it back to a collision and from that, know the trajectory of the original particle. This void is supposed to be next to the milky way, I suspect they missed something, and it came from a source in the milky way, or something like that.
I think the bigger mystery is why they think they can surmise so much from what was detected.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Every zoomer on the planet just saw Trump save TikTok. When you log back in a big thank you message to Trump appears.He essentially threatened to nuke the middle east of the Israeli hostages weren't returned as well and that is going down as you read this.Republicans won't win the Jewish vote despite the saves, but it's the right thing and the world saw it and no it wouldn't happen under Democrats.The tik Tok save is probably wrong but it's extremely popular and zoomers will not forget this. We just won 2026 midterms and 2028. We're back niggas. Speaking of niggas, the illegals are mostly stealing black jobs and subsidies so we won the Nigger vote as well. Get ready for the golden age of America where we can all live in safe neighborhoods and be achieved the American dream
The Aryan race will rise up from the trailer parks and reign for a thousand years, hallelujah!
Supremacy, thy name is Trump.
Created:
-->
@RemyBrown
That's not native born.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It was due to global warming.
Sure, that's what the deep state wants you to believe.
And Michelle Obama isn't going to be there, you don't find that suspicious? What is she up to? What are those drones in New Jersey up to?
Created:
Posted in:
C'mon, we can do better than that, use Marjorie Taylor Greene for inspiration, let's hear some conspiracies, why did the deep state move it indoors.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RemyBrown
Lets invite some members of the MAGA religion to see if they value capitalism more, or the trailer parks more.I value capitalism more; fuck the trailer park trash!!!
Trailer parks is where MAGA lives.
Created:
-->
@Shila
What you do to your pet will remain private.
A blob of toothpaste is called a nurdle
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
God did not come upon Mary often or accidentally.
Snails have teeth
Created:
-->
@Shila
What does hybrid car mean?
An "ultracrepidarian" is someone who someone gives an opinion on something they know nothing about.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
What was Hitlers rank at that time?
You can't lick your own elbow
Created:
-->
@Shila
Does not apply to poker.
Venus is the only planet to spin clockwise
Created:
-->
@Shila
A responsive dick can be very reassuring, reducing or eliminating worry or uncertainty.
Alfred Hitchcock didn’t have a bellybutton
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Next you will be quoting Kim Jung Un. Hurry up finish with Hitler who was a loser.
next
1: immediately adjacent (as in place, rank, or time)
Created: