I'm going to adjust my doner card to stipulate that my cock is to be used only for vaginal intercourse with XX females above the age of consent. I'd roll over in the grave if somebody was getting my cock all covered with shit.
What if it's the shit of a female above the age of consent? Pro tip: You won't care where your cock is going, be it the ass of a sexy man or the vagina of a turtle. You'll be unconscious and rotting in the ground my friend, that's what happens when you die  |
|
|
|
Drugs are pretty good these days if i do say so myself. has anyone ever tried kratom? pretty herbal plant, it helps life easier.
Is cheaper too and some companies are selling it online for this is not illegal in most states. check this krakenkratom.com
That's more like Indonesian or Philippines scene isn't it ? However Saliva is the best alternative if you want to trip balls. Kratom is pretty nice, it's a plant containing opioid alkaloids, gives a subtle high, good for social anxiety and motivation. Also very relaxing, but bear in mind it is addictive if used daily. Kenr, I think you meant "Salvia". I'm not a big fan of it to be honest, although some enjoy it. It's more of a dissociative rather than a classic psychedelic, it doesn't act on the 5HT2-A receptors like most psychs. Where LSD or Mushrooms will enhance your visual field and mindset, Salvia will generally confuse you and dissociate you from your surroundings. But yes, it will certainly make you trip balls, just not pleasant balls IMO. |
|
|
|
There was a Middle East king who had 3 ambassadors. He wanted to make one of them his prime minister. So he devised a test to find out which of the three was most qualified. The king had the 3 guys sit down in a circle (triangle?) facing each other. Then he showed them 5 little stones in his hand. Two of the stones were black, and three of them where white. Then the king walked around the 3 guys and placed a little white stone in the top-front of the turban of each. He positioned the stones where an ambassador could not see the stone in the top of his own turban, but the other two could see it easily. The king tucked the two black stones away in his robe without revealing which stones he had tucked away. Then the king said, "The man who can tell me the color of the stone in his own turban can be my prime minister. But if you guess, and you guess wrong, it is off with your head. In addition, no cheating, or it is off with your head." The guys sat and thought about it for a while. But finally one of the guys said, "I can't figure this out. I give up. It isn't worth guessing about." A short time later a second ambassador said essentially the same thing, and gave up, as well. The third ambassador jumped up and said, "I have a white stone." He knew he had a white stone. He wasn't guessing. How did he know that he had a white stone? There is a logical way to figure out how he knew that he had a white stone. It doesn't have anything to do with guessing, or with the idea that the other two guys gave up anyway. When you figure it out, apply that kind of reasoning to what we know about 9/11, and you will see that the official story is one of the worst conspiracy theories of all.  So the first guy thinks that if he has a black stone, then guy number 2 would know that if he also has a black stone guy number 3 would have said "I have a white stone". But he doesn't. The same applies to guy number 3 - if he had a black stone as well as guy number 1, then number 2 would have shouted out. Because both guy number 2 and number 3 give up, he concludes that he must have a white stone. If he was the only guy with the black stone, one of the other guys could have worked out that their stones was white because neither claimed to have the white stone. I think this is a solution, but I think that it does depend on the 2 guys giving up, I don't see how the logic problem is solvable without the 2 guys giving up. I also don't see how this applies to the topic. Here's one for you: Two 9/11 conspiracy theorists die in a plane crash, reach the afterlife and come face to face with God, who tells them: "You may enter heaven my children" So one of the conspiracy theorists asks God "Before we go, there's one thing we'd like to ask you..." "Go ahead my child, what do you wish to know?" "Well, who was actually responsible for the 9/11 attacks?" God replies, "It was the muslim extremists, Al Quaeda and Osama bin Laden of course, they hijacked planes and caused the whole atrocity!" One conspiracy theorist turns to the other and says: "Shit man, this conspiracy goes way higher up than we realized!" |
|
|
|
Medical drugs are worse than illegal ones. What about Sativex, made by GW Pharma and extracted from weed grown in their UK grow facility? Dude, I get your points about weed, I know that it's pretty benign and certainly should be legalised. But it's not some magical cure-all super plant. I used to smoke a lot, and have recently stopped because it gives me negative mental effects - it basically makes me lazy and anti-social, and I function much better without it. Of course, I can see that for some people it has very positive effects, but remember that everyone's body chemistry is different so what works for one person may not work for another. There's no conclusive evidence that it cures cancer, however there is conclusive evidence that it helps with chemotherapy side-effects for instance, amongst many other things. Like all drugs, legal/illegal/pharmaceutical, there are side-effects and it doesn't work the same on everyone. And  at your "no butthole" comments, I literally spat out some beer at my monitor. Like, where does the waste go? Were we some sort of crazy 100% efficient digestion machine? What happened since then to bring down our efficiency so much? Do enzymes exist that could somehow turn 100% of our food intake into some sort of gas that just evaporates out of our skin? Brave Old World... |
|
|
|
That is cool. Big firing button. I just built mine this morning and wicked it. 26g twisted kanthal, 7 wraps 2.5mm .29ohm 3.61v 45w. https://i.imgur.com/L7PceaH.jpgSweet mate, that's some serious coilage you got going on! I haven't ventured into building my own coils, but it's something I might start doing - I got an old multimeter lying around and it looks like a fun hobby. 'vape-juice'
personally i'd be glad to see the majority of you 'juice' vapers stopped in your tracks.
do you care if that shit you vape bothers others.... of course not!
while its 'better' than the stench of tobacco, its still annoying as shit to have it blown all over you & your kids by a smirking piece of shit 'vaper'
with the 'logic' of these people, i'm half expecting flesh-light aficionados to be 'doing their thing' in public before long!!
To be fair you shouldn't be hating on the whole vape movement just because of a few discourteous vapers, personally I've seen no-one blowing it "all over people and their kids", smirking or otherwise. Maybe it's a regional thing. Also why would you "be glad to see the majority of juice vapers stopped in their tracks"? You realize that the majority (like myself) do it to help quit tobacco, and it fucking works? It has obvious health benefits over tobacco, both for the person vaping and those around them. And the "logic of these people" someone causes a ridiculous slippery slope whereby we will soon see public masturbation with fleshlights? Fucking grow up grandad. |
|
|
|
Let's say hypothetically that there was a controlled demolition of the twin towers, plus building 7. In that case, then why the hell did planes crash into the towers in the first place, and why did they blow up building 7 too?
It makes absolutely no logical sense to me, why spend more resources on having planes fly into them? And why blow up a third tower when the huge twin towers were already going to fall, no added shock value was added by having building 7 fall too, it seems needless. Think I asked this question earlier in this thread but no-one had a good answer.
As far as I'm concerned, even without delving into the mechanics on whether this could or couldn't have occured, the logic of the controlled demoliton theory is massively flawed.
+1 I've tried and failed to get this very basic subject discussed. It'd be nice to see internal consistency among the conspiracy theories, but there isn't any. That's an indication it's more active dis information by groups who are adversaries to the US on the world stage, of course. They don't need quality theories, just crap repeated over and over to ignorant populations, such as in Jordon, Pakistan and Egypt. By contrast the JFK killing is a very clean, simple conspiracy theory. There was one bullet or several; there were several assassins or only one. Yeah, a few people have answered the WTC7 problem with the generic "It was about the money/Enron case/insurance" blah blah blah, but I don't buy any of it. It doesn't make sense, as far as I can see, a range of 0-1 people died in the collapse, depending on sources, and the tower fell hours after the others, after being on fire. Even if the building didn't fall, it probably would have been damaged beyond repair by the debris. If it was blown up, then why didn't they fly a plane into it as well, following the pattern of the twin towers? Plus no-one has even attempted to tackle the problem of "why run the horse over, cut off its head, then shoot it?". Agree with you about the JFK theory - it's a great example of a simple, easy to explain theory, which makes it plausible. Unlike the controlled demolition theory, which requires multiple layers of explanation, with increasingly poor logic. |
|
|
|
|
Let's say hypothetically that there was a controlled demolition of the twin towers, plus building 7. In that case, then why the hell did planes crash into the towers in the first place, and why did they blow up building 7 too?
It makes absolutely no logical sense to me, why spend more resources on having planes fly into them? And why blow up a third tower when the huge twin towers were already going to fall, no added shock value was added by having building 7 fall too, it seems needless. Think I asked this question earlier in this thread but no-one had a good answer.
As far as I'm concerned, even without delving into the mechanics on whether this could or couldn't have occured, the logic of the controlled demoliton theory is massively flawed.
|
|
|
|
 Wanted to quit smoking so I bought a vape, this is a Vaporesso Target (max 75 W) with the tank it comes with, 0.9 ohms. Seems awesome, I've been using Ruthless Jungle Fever juice and it's delicious, but I have to fill it up more than I thought I would. I've also got an Aspire Cleito tank and an Aspire Nautilus mouth-to-lung, but I'm loving the standard kanthal ceramic coils on the Vaporesso, the flavour is amazing. |
|
|
|
Go back home, crackers. You don't belong in the USA either. But there may not be enough room for you back in your homelands any more. Refugee camps for all. Probably in the Azores.
When you put it like that, it makes you think. Ireland and Italy maybe? I don't think the UK will have many of them back, looking at the general attitude towards immigration right now. Maybe if they're white americans that can prove their European heritage? |
|
|
|
Both sides of this debate are too fear driven. Anthropogenists say: "and if we don't do something, we're gonna be living in an awful world!!!!1" Denialists say: "and if we don't do something, we're gonna be living in an awful world!!!!1" Not very tempted by either of those arguments to be honest. I've looked at the scientific evidence from both camps, and tried to trace the source of the funding. It's not a very clear picture, on balance.
The non-partisan facts appear to be:
Carbon based energy definitely does pollute the atmosphere. But not necessarily with CO2 and other greenhouse gases. Non-carbon based energy is more sustainable, and we will eventually have to make an economic decision to stop using carbon fairly soon anyway. Non-carbon based energy sources carry either less or no pollutants. Once well/fully developed, there is no way to carbon tax non-sources of CO2 emissions.
Short term nuclear is the best option, but heavy isotopic nuclear fuel is not so great. There are alternative nuclear fuels though, such as thorium, which is being developed heavily by India (who have very large natural deposits). A prototype for an early design of commercial thorium power plant is said to be coming online in India next year.
As far as vehicles go, it looks like the pipe dream has actually arrived. Toyota, along with BMW, Honda and Hyundai, have commercial hydrogen fuel cell vehicles ready for 2015-2016. Looks like the issue with using expensive platinum hydrolysis catalysts has been solved (although the reports I've read make no mention of how). The all electric vehicle is still a little range bound and battery hampered, but some kind of supercapacitor style battery technology, be it graphene or otherwise based, should be available within a decade or two. I think the hydrogen models will be just fine before that problem is dealt with, we will proabably see both technologies featuring in vehicles of the 2020's (depending on the space/weight/energy density merits as per the type of vehicle).
So it's all too much FUD and not enough realism. I think this decade is set to be an all-time FUD fest. If you choose neo-luddism, you will probably die of stress related illnesses before either tax tyranny on imperceptible swings in climatic conditions, or any actual freak hurricane/typhoon/tsunami/desertification/ice age do. The politics driving both FUD camps is likely pretty complex in reality, transcending both is the only worthwhile route.
Agree with pretty much everything you've said here. You might enjoy the latest episode of "FutureProofing" on BBC radio 4, where they attempted to quantify the benefits of solar vs nuclear fusion power, and which might be better to pursue in the future. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b079r5lvGood series, they even did an episode on blockchain technology last season. |
|
|
|
....
I understand that some of this data may been tweaked...
It's important to understand that the ground based thermometer database is AMENDABLE TO TWEAKING. Period. OK, without any ad hominem attacks (which this thread seems to be descending into), can someone explain simply what's wrong with this data:
....
Specifically, the claim that the GMST in 2015 was the warmest since 1880, and that "15 of the 16 warmest years on record occurred since 2001".
....
If the data is invalid, I would appreciate a clear and concise explanation as to why this is the case. ....
Ground temperature data is okay for regional climate issue, but not global. By it's nature, "ground temperature data" attempts to combine multiphase physical systems into an aggregate of "temperature." To see the problem with this, consider trying to take the temperature above an ice cube, or six inches above a pan of boiling water. These systems are not in thermal equilibrium. A temperature reading from a polar orbiting satellite measures aspects of gas ONLY, say at 10k feet. It is thus a measure of a system which is in thermal equilibrium and which thus is credible. The ground temperature network is inappropriate and actually ridiculous for attempting to derive a "global temperature." The fact that in the US, an obscure sub agency of NASA uses NOAA data to produce propaganda on "Latest record shattering Temperature <<blah blah blah>>" is irrelevant. A reasonable way to deal with this would be to consider as credible, the satellite data, and not as credible, the ground based thermometer networks, for matters concerning "climate change." This will eventually come to pass, but for some years expect to see the bureaucracies built on top of the thermometer networks to continue to shout. I see your point, but as a couple of others have said, I'm not sure why ground temperature data is as dismissable as you say - it seems a reasonable measure of aggregate global warming to me. However, I've been reading some information from here: https://www.skepticalscience.com/satellite-measurements-warming-troposphere-advanced.htm and I have to say, the satellite data seems to corroborate the surface temp data. Thanks for your reply, I have been on the fence re: warming for a number of years, all I want is some well thought-out conclusions in relation to the actual data. I'm no expert, but I am studying a science degree and appreciate every line of questioning regarding this subject. |
|
|
|
This is funny, because if you read the article, you find that he specifically talks about increasing the small number of women on the TfL board, an idea which radical muslims would actually have a problem with. He does mention ethnic minorities, but the overwhelming accent is on gender equality. Now don't get me wrong, I think that's a poor argument because I believe the best person for the job should be chosen, regardless of gender. However I can certainly appreciate the irony that here we have a muslim that is actually standing up for women's rights - in direct opposition to the ideology of extreme muslims, which is to repress women in society. Something to think about... |
|
|
|
OK, without any ad hominem attacks (which this thread seems to be descending into), can someone explain simply what's wrong with this data: http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-noaa-analyses-reveal-record-shattering-global-warm-temperatures-in-2015Specifically, the claim that the GMST in 2015 was the warmest since 1880, and that "15 of the 16 warmest years on record occurred since 2001". I understand that some of this data may been tweaked, but I've read from reputable sources that this tweaking is a valid manipulation of skewed data from the past; ie. it is correcting inconsistencies due to recording and locational anomalies. If the data is invalid, I would appreciate a clear and concise explanation as to why this is the case. If data from another source is more valid, please reference the data and explain why it is more valid. I hate how both sides of the climate change debate have descended into shit-slinging and misinformation, I just want some unbiased information. |
|
|
|
i am really feel sorry for that baby having such lunatic parents.. but this case totally prove that faith-healing and other so called miracle things dont exsist on earth.. we should trust science not god..
Organized religion is the biggest enemy of science. Many of the renowned scientists, including Charles Darwin, Nicolaus Copernicus, and Galileo Galilei were demonized and vilified by the church, for making discoveries which questioned the basics of religion. Islam is even worse. It makes sure that the followers remain illiterate and uneducated, so that the clerics can enslave them. For once I sincerely agree with you, but don't forget that Islam used to be different, in fact in medieval times most scientific discoveries came from the Islamic civilisation. Unfortunately contemporary Islam is different, but it's worth noting that the majority of religious people aren't as extreme as they're made out to be, we only see the outliers. For example, most christians would have taken this kid to hospital, and most muslims wouldn't condone blowing up buildings. But the ones that do, create a bad name for everyone else that believes in the bullshit. |
|
|
|
|
I don't like Apple as a company, but of course I'm on their side in this debate. I don't care what the terrorist did, unlocking the phone would set a precedent and be very dangerous for everyone.
It's funny how everyone asking Apple to do this are technologically clueless, when all the tech-related people are on Apple's side. That should tell us something.
It's a bit like politicians in general saying silly things like "encryption should be banned", they don't know what they're talking about and just want to secure votes from the clueless electorate so it looks like they're doing something against terrorism and child porn etc. It makes me mad.
|
|
|
|
Amazing, I love it. The girl is an awesome vocalist. The whole thing reminds me a bit of Bjork. You might like this band I recently discovered, GoGo Penguin. They're a 3 piece instrumental group with a pianist, drummer and double-bass player, kind of relaxing jazzy stuff but really well done. The drummer does a lot of cool technical breakbeats which anyone into dnb will appreciate. Gogo Penguin - KamalokaGoGo Penguin - HopoponoTheir album called "V2.0" is well worth checking out. |
|
|
|
How about this  Preview pic from Weyland-Yutani's most recent Off-World Defence brochure. The girl in the photo is a human/alien hybrid, where the genetic traits of the egg pods (the normal birth method for face huggers) is genetically engineered into a human vagina, allowing for these female hybrids to give birth to multiple face hugger offspring in a far shorter time frame than the classic egg pods do. The engorged clitoris has a purpose, it allows the immature face huggers to suckle on something just after birth, to give them positive reinforcement of sucking on enemies faces. However, to avoid unneccesary damage to the host, the face huggers are quickly injected with a strong barbiturate solution which renders them docile enough to be quickly relocated to holding cages, before deployment in off world combat zones. Unfortunately the sever trauma of the births themselves destroy the mutated vaginal walls very quickly, so the hybrid hosts tend to be torn apart within 50-120 face hugger births. However the Weyland-Yutani corporation is researching novel new methods to increase the cellular strength of the hybrid's vaginal walls and labia, which include strong synthetic polymer webbing to support the already strained uterus and vagina. The second generation of hybrid hosts are close to deployment, and will guarantee Weyland-Yutani shares to rally hard in the near future. Invest now into Weyland-Yutani Corporation - Building Better Worlds TM |
|
|
|
|
Also what's with these chickens and ducks bagged up behind peoples cars, is that like a Florida thing or something? seems bizarre haha.
|
|
|
|
I wanna meet this girl. Unless a bloke did this, in which case I would need to re-evaluate my life a little before meeting him  |
|
|
|
Quite a few years ago, I went to the aid of a bus driver who was being attacked by three yobs.
Trying to rob this man of his daily takings, foolishly I took them on and threw them off the bus, problem solved I thought.
Unknown to me another assailant was also on the rampage and hidden on the bus, I never even seen it coming.
Blinded by some incredible light my eyes see red, it was blood, never knew it at the time, it was making my head throb, thump thump thump.
I learn later that the robber that hit me over the head , used a retractable steel baton.
Any how, to cut a long story short, the fkrs got off with it, busman retired due to (whatever) do not know.
As for me, bad memory forget a lot of things, pains still in my head, due to the severe arterial bleed, I had.
Would I do the same thing again (help) sure I would, and have come, even recenttly to others, in distress.
A lot more can be added here, about how my Father died the very same night as this happened, but this is a bit much even thinking abut it it, hope you understand it ws related to the event.
I will never forget.
Oh shit son, that sounds gnarly as fuck. Luckily I've never had the misfortune to witness such a messed up situation. Much respect to you for getting involved when many people would certainly have turned a blind eye. Sorry to hear about your father, that must have been a very intense night for you, I can't imagine how you would have coped mentally with all that nonsense, especially as it seemed justice was not done in this case... Hope you have recovered a bit since the incident, I would have been in pieces I reckon, even years later. Chin up my friend, don't let the fuckers in this world bring you down, you heroic mofo. World needs more people like you. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
