At 9/29/09 10:35 PM, PlantFetish wrote:

Someone has to make sure we don't get invaded by Russia.

There is no Russia xD

At 9/29/09 10:33 PM, zombiemaster69 wrote:

At 9/29/09 10:32 PM, GetYiffy wrote: Feels good man.

a good reason please

How is that NOT a good reason.. hmmmmmm???

lol, lets argue some philosophy.

At 9/29/09 10:32 PM, GetYiffy wrote: Feels good man.

This ftw.

At 9/29/09 10:27 PM, knightsofthecircle wrote: What we should do is, we should take a northwest route around Asia into the Sea of Japan. There, we'll start taking over Ebaum's territory one by one. Then, we should take over Austailia. It has little defence and is a great spot to launch an attack in the Pacific Ocean, towards the US and Canada. Then with one final swoop, we'll go south to South America, defeat the 4Chanian scum and thus become the last remaining superpower.

But the only NW route is into NA and even then to get to Asia we have to go through that MASSIVE wiki army in Alaska.

At 6/27/09 10:44 AM, SuperMarioAlex wrote: But aren't there any mods on the boards?

This place is both and the mods don't give a shit as long as you don't break rules.

Max level is level 60, no individual has yet to reach this level.

At 6/26/09 11:47 PM, TECh2o wrote:

At 6/26/09 11:19 PM, Strength wrote: ...but in MY POINT OF VIEW and in MY OPINION weed will never be a drug...

I could've sworn you were trying to argue fact, not your opinion. Boy, you're stubborn.

I think we can all thoroughly agree that this guy fails hard at arguing.

Chicago has Rise Against and Kanye West.

we are so awesome lol jk.

At 6/26/09 11:19 PM, Strength wrote:

You can show me as many links and articles and flashy paragraphs as you fucking like, but you'll never fucking convince me that weed's a drug. I previously stated that I UNDERSTAND WEED'S CLASSIFIED AS A DRUG, but in MY POINT OF VIEW and in MY OPINION weed will never be a drug, I don't understand why that's so hard to understand you fuck. And I already told you, if you have any interest in debating this shit further then you can continue PMing me instead of ending your petty argument by saying "GUUD DAI SUR".

Then you sir are intolerant, stubborn, and closed-minded to logical change. You and your kind is the cancer that is killing America.

Yea Strength, the fact that several people have called you out on bullshit by now with various links and logical analysis kinda shows how incredibly flawed your argument is.

At 6/26/09 10:59 PM, Draxiss wrote: Weed can in fact cause harm. It is known to induce psychosis. How do I know? Well besides all the studies and history on it, it happened to me. If I were to describe what happened to me during that state you'll understand what being insane is like.

You had underlying conditions or are lying. THC has been proven to NOT do this ever since the AMA decided to step in and call bullshit on the "reefer madness" crap that was going on.

At 6/26/09 10:51 PM, Piss wrote: Coincidence? Yes.

The picture gets me every time. Thank you Piss.

this is like the 3rd time you have done this?

At 6/26/09 10:54 PM, Strength wrote:

Coming from the dumbass who doesn't know that there are rules saying you can't reply more than 4 times in a half an hour. I'm trying to continue this debate through PM's, and I'm going to get to each and every one of you cocksucking faggots at a time, just relax douchebag and hear me out before assuming I've been "Logically slaughtered".

How about instead of talking about refuting, you actually do it. No, that would require you to have a valid argument.

At 6/26/09 10:46 PM, Strength wrote:

At 6/26/09 10:44 PM, MrPercie wrote: We still talking about this? man I didnt even bother to read the bloody posts

No, you just know that everything you said is completely bullshit and you're simply afraid to admit the fact that you're a total moron, and in my opinion a virgin to the real world and life itself.

Coming from the idiot who hasn't responded to like 4 attacks on his previous posts in this thread because he knows he got logically slaughtered.

Too bad true atheists don't give a shit. Only the bandwagon "atheists" who just think its cool and hip do that shit.

ProTip: Anybody can be flamer on just about anything

Spoiler Alert: Calling another person a flamer based on their presentation of their beliefs w/o examining your own is considered hypocritical.

It would be like a fat slob walking into a gym and calling another fat slob "fat". Yea, that other guy is fat, no doubt, but the guy who said the insult is also fat, making him a hypocrite.

The true wise man in this situation follows nihilism.

At 6/26/09 10:27 PM, RWT wrote:

At 6/26/09 10:26 PM, BringMeTheDarkness wrote: So based on your logic a .38 caliber basic pistol or a rimrifle are not guns because a shotgun and an AK47 are much more powerful.

No, by his definition a squirtgun is not an assault rifle.

If it has conscious altering affects, no matter how small. Hell, if it has any physical altering affects, its considered a drug.

At 6/26/09 10:23 PM, Strength wrote:

By definition? So basically what you're saying is, is that due to the fact that the world CLASSIFIES marijuana as a DRUG that it's a DRUG? No motherfucker, no. Marijuana is not a drug. I've fucking done it all; acid, E, shrooms, you name it, and marijuana does NOT come close to fucking you up the way those do. AND, by doing ACTUAL drugs I know first hand the side effects and what they'll do to your brain. Weed doesn't do that shit. It's not a drug. Don't even try to discuss this shit.

So based on your logic a .38 caliber basic pistol or a rimrifle are not guns because a shotgun and an AK47 are much more powerful.

At 6/26/09 10:20 PM, D3NTATUS wrote: We did this in psychology, I was a 6, along with one other guy in the class. We exchanged high-fives.

At 6/26/09 10:08 PM, El-Verdadero-Diablo wrote: You are not a 5. Martin Luther King Jr. and Ghandi were considered 5s. You are not Martin Luther King Jr. I think the most common one was 3 to 4.

Right, because only heroes are fives and sixes.

I completely agree, i think the only reason i am not a 6 is because i just can't think of things in concepts and ideas w/o having my own emotions and opinions interfering.

At 6/26/09 10:18 PM, Eggys wrote:

At 6/26/09 08:58 PM, Chymeraxe wrote: If the concept of Satan was real, he wouldn't give a fuck about being hypocritical. He's immortal and gets off by torture and burning. You're still going to be a ball of fire in a lake of lava, no matter how hypocritical he'd be.

Not really. He'd be helping God's supposed cause through encouraging people to be good through fear of being tortured.

Yea, its kinda like the story of Iobe. Satan tortured him and God turned a blind eye to test Iobe's faith.

yea, they are both dicks.

He died a valiant death. His glory will be remembered!

Here is the link to the AMA report: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/no-index/abo ut-ama/13625.shtml

Only chronic users are at risk for anything.

At 6/26/09 10:08 PM, El-Verdadero-Diablo wrote: We learned about this in school.

You are not a 5. Martin Luther King Jr. and Ghandi were considered 5s. You are not Martin Luther King Jr. I think the most common one was 3 to 4.

The were 6, definitely 6.

You obviously are not aware of the number of people who do weed for meditative purposes nor are you aware of the AMA report on the medical uses of marijuana. Go look it up if you want to.

At 6/26/09 10:06 PM, Ansel wrote:

I think that's a shitty comparison. the milk truck is easily observable with just a bit of investigation

That is the point of science: furthering observation to come to conclusions

, and similarly to how the outward expansion of the universe can be observed now, it's a part of a larger process. Just from seeing the milk truck doesn't tell you where the truck came from, or how it got there.

Yet you are trying to answer the question of where the milk came from, if that leads you to the question of where the milk truck came from, did you not still answer or at least theorize the answer to the first direct question? Science is the art of discovering questions.

At 6/26/09 09:55 PM, Ansel wrote:

I'm one of the targets of this thread, but in fairness the Big Bang can't be proven any better than a biblical creation theory. A certain degree of agnosticism will always be necessary if you approach things completely scientifically.

Well the thing is that at least with the Big Bang Theory you can map out the progression of matter in the universe and then come to the theory of the Big Bang off of collected observations rather than just making up philosophical/mythological stories to magically explain everything.

It would be like me going to the store and noticing milk on the shelf and thinking "how did that milk get there". I could explain it by saying the "milk fairy" brought it from her castle and puts it on the shelf every night, but she is invisible and no way of detecting her putting the milk on the shelf, making that theory neither provable or disprovable while at the same time i could then look at the back of the store, notice a "milk truck" and come to the conclusion that the milk truck brings the milk, yet i never saw anybody unload the milk truck and therefore that theory is neither provable nor disprovable.

now which one sounds more logical to you?

At 6/26/09 09:59 PM, Sinitech wrote: You aren't even old enough to be on Newgrounds...

I lol'd.

Newgrounds wasn't old to be itself until this year lol.

Wank

that is all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27 s_stages_of_moral_development

I found this to be quite interesting, especially the hypothetical situation near the end of the article that shows what a person of each level would respond with. In my opinion, its the lack of individuals in the 5-6 range that is killing America.

Discuss? (like where do you think you fall)

I personally think i fall in a 5-ish range.

So wait, you would choose to believe in a system that can't factually support itself, rather than a system whose entire basis is to support itself factually?

you were obviously never the smart one.