|
snipeHaunted Antfarm posted:i still have a case of c2 are they worth money like crystal pepsi A freetard's ransom in bitcoins
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 00:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 09:43 |
|
|
if i have to drink any soda it's tab because i only put stuff in my body that will kill me
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 01:07
|
|
|
.
Phenwah fucked around with this message at 22:38 on May 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 22:54
|
|
|
Footboy posted:the shows were indeed canceled during Family Guy's hiatus.[99][100][101] people dont understand chronology anymore
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 23:14
|
|
|
i remember the tick
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 23:17
|
|
|
Coffee Quack posted:i remember the tick the tick owned at the time, but really don't go back and watch it now
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 23:22
|
|
|
please never read any wikipedia article about a tv comedy. please
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 23:56
|
|
|
theflyingexecutive posted:please never read any wikipedia article
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 23:57
|
|
|
.
Phenwah fucked around with this message at 22:38 on May 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 01:02
|
|
|
Footboy posted:Who's on First? is a vaudeville comedy routine made most famous by Abbott and Costello. In Abbott and Costello's version, the premise of the routine is that Abbott is identifying the players on a baseball team to Costello, but their names and nicknames can be interpreted as non-responsive answers to Costello's questions. In this context, the first baseman is named "Who"; thus, the utterance "Who's on first" is ambiguous between the question ("which person is the first baseman?") and the answer ("The name of the first baseman is 'Who'"). well great. 10 seconds in and you ruined the joke seymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 01:10
|
|
|
honestly, articles like that have to be a godsend for people with asd because it helps them get jokes
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 02:10
|
|
|
so I made a physics joke in another thread and wanted to read about time dilation so I opened the article and their "explanatory animation" is as follows:
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 07:33
|
|
|
qirex posted:so I made a physics joke in another thread and wanted to read about time dilation so I opened the article and their "explanatory animation" is as follows: i think the green team is winning bu tim not sure eaxctly
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 07:39
|
|
|
qirex posted:so I made a physics joke in another thread and wanted to read about time dilation so I opened the article and their "explanatory animation" is as follows: that's a stupid illustration, where's the cliff?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 13:05
|
|
|
The green dots and red dots in the animation represent spaceships. The ships of the green fleet have no velocity relative to each other, so for the clocks onboard the individual ships the same amount of time elapses relative to each other, and they can set up a procedure to maintain a synchronized standard fleet time. The ships of the "red fleet" are moving with a velocity of 0.866 of the speed of light with respect to the green fleet. The blue dots represent pulses of light. One cycle of light-pulses between two green ships takes two seconds of "green time", one second for each leg. As seen from the perspective of the reds, the transit time of the light pulses they exchange among each other is one second of "red time" for each leg. As seen from the perspective of the greens, the red ships' cycle of exchanging light pulses travels a diagonal path that is two light-seconds long. (As seen from the green perspective the reds travel 1.73 (√3) light-seconds of distance for every two seconds of green time.) One of the red ships emits a light pulse towards the greens every second of red time. These pulses are received by ships of the green fleet with two-second intervals as measured in green time. Not shown in the animation is that all aspects of physics are proportionally involved. The light pulses that are emitted by the reds at a particular frequency as measured in red time are received at a lower frequency as measured by the detectors of the green fleet that measure against green time, and vice versa. The animation cycles between the green perspective and the red perspective, to emphasize the symmetry. As there is no such thing as absolute motion in relativity (as is also the case for Newtonian mechanics), both the green and the red fleet are entitled to consider themselves motionless in their own frame of reference. Again, it is vital to understand that the results of these interactions and calculations reflect the real state of the ships as it emerges from their situation of relative motion. It is not a mere quirk of the method of measurement or communication. see that image makes perfect sense you just need to read this essay to understand it
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 13:53
|
|
|
a picture is worth a thousand words, and here they are:
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 14:18
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectangle i love the picture
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 17:41
|
|
|
johndis posted:i think the green team is winning bu tim not sure eaxctly
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 17:51
|
|
|
qirex posted:so I made a physics joke in another thread and wanted to read about time dilation so I opened the article and their "explanatory animation" is as follows: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 18:12
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:zybourne clock will never stop being the funniest thing SA has ever produced
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 18:21
|
|
|
haveblue posted:zybourne clock will never stop being the funniest thing SA has ever not produced ftfy
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 18:35
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:where's the wiki article?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 18:47
|
|
|
graph posted:idk someone used 'swish' earlier http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odhrP6czCL4&feature=player_detailpage#t=24s
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 18:54
|
|
|
CoupleBeersNoBeers posted:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odhrP6czCL4&feature=player_detailpage#t=24s oh cool more reasons to hate boston
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 19:19
|
|
|
NOG posted:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectangle
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 19:45
|
|
|
ChiralCondensate posted:does not exhibit golden ratio, get this poo poo off my free encyclopedia that anyone can edit start a edit war
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2011 19:47
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle it needs citations! how can I trust that half of a circles diameter is really its radius
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2011 01:51
|
|
|
Trig Discipline posted:YOSPOS: that's a stupid illustration, where's the cliff?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2011 03:33
|
|
|
not wikipedia but lol http://star-trek.answers.wikia.com/wiki/Has_Kirk_had_sex
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 06:35
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_scam#A_psychological_analysis_of_a_typical_scam_directed_towards_women The scammer's main tool is affection, devotion, and eventually love, which he displays to victims in a series of daily letters. The level of affection grows with each letter, and people who are lonely or unhappy soon find themselves dependent on these letters, which they think are addressed exclusively to them, but in reality are templates with their names inserted in appropriate places. Dispersed amongst the paragraphs describing how the sender is rapidly falling in love with the victim, there is usually a light description of a business venture as if the sender is describing intimate details of his business activities so the victim feels that her role is to support and advise him. This gives some mobility to what would otherwise be fairly abnormal love talk from a stranger. It also diverts the victim's attention from the unnaturalness of the rapid falling in love. At the same time the degree of apparent confidentiality shown by the scammer makes subsequent questioning regarding his business by the victim seem impolite. Subsequently the 'business venture' so developed is linked in chats to the enormous wealth and influence the scammer claims to have. Scammers use chats primarily to determine if the victim's financial position warrants developing them as a target. This is normally presented in a fairly casual and caring setting. For instance the scammer wants to know if he is using too much of the victim's time, or if all the victim's needs are taken care of. Frequent discussions of the victim's financial situation don't appear so suspicious after the scammer divulges his successful business career to the victim. The interest in money and numbers appears as natural traits of a businessman. Scammers compensate for poor English with excellent psychological reading of the victim. They know how and when to evoke pity, jealousy, duty, guilt, trueness to one's word and, in the end, fear of losing this magical love which is paramount in all. The victim feels unable to do anything which will place in jeopardy this world of magical love, which she may believe can occur only once in a lifetime. In effect, the victim nurtures this love and feels extreme happiness, although nothing in her life has actually changed, because the scammer never addresses reality in the letters, but only exudes cheap phrases expressing love and care. This addiction clouds all reason, and the fear of losing the scammer's love leads victims to acquiesce to financial favors for the scammer. For the scammer, the desire of victims favor him financially equates with proof of love. For the victim, financial favors are nothing, compared to losing the chance for a love of a lifetime. Victims misinterpret the situation because they have difficulty distinguishing devotion from predation. They fall prey to an illusion of love created by flattery, attention, and evocation of feelings of pity and jealousy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 11:13
|
|
|
ahmeni posted:not wikipedia but lol http://foresmutters.org/
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 14:53
|
|
|
ahmeni posted:not wikipedia but lol this is like a formerly theoretical level of denseness
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 17:41
|
|
|
want a list of every tv show or movie where someone gets pantsed? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debagging
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 20:19
|
|
|
in ugly betty episode "granny panties" betty skirt pulled down in flashback
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
# in ugly betty episode "granny panties" betty skirt pulled down in flashback e: you fucker e2: here http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Young_woman_in_Kiev.jpg
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
lazar wulf posted:want a list of every tv show or movie where someone gets pantsed? I like the detailed descriptions of what underwear the character was revealed to have on
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2011 21:21
|
|
|
haveblue posted:I like the detailed descriptions of what underwear the character was revealed to have on yeah that's my favorite part as well
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2011 03:29
|
|
|
.
Phenwah fucked around with this message at 22:38 on May 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
Footboy posted:I've started systematically editing the {nihongo} tags from pages that only include it because the subject of the article was created by a Japanese person, where the "Japanese" spelling of the videogame name is just the English name in Katakana.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 09:43 |
|
|
Footboy posted:I've started systematically editing the {nihongo} tags from pages that only include it because the subject of the article was created by a Japanese person, where the "Japanese" spelling of the videogame name is just the English name in Katakana. if this is an unironic post then you have embarked on a long and unenviable task
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2011 19:38
|
|