Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 7:07 am
Page 205 of 435
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 11:40 am
This ... is brilliant!
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 12:08 pm
I think the bacon flavor would be diluted by the pancake.
It'd improve the pancakes, but not as much as it would detract from the bacon I was going to eat with the pancakes anyway.
Edited By Paul on 1401466190
It'd improve the pancakes, but not as much as it would detract from the bacon I was going to eat with the pancakes anyway.
Edited By Paul on 1401466190
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 1:36 pm
Crabeater seal skull:
*They do not eat crabs. They eat krill.
Whale shoots raibows!
*They do not eat crabs. They eat krill.
Whale shoots raibows!
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 3:52 pm
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 9:53 pm
Leisher wrote:
True dat!
They are also way off in what equates an equal amount of blanket.
Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 12:49 am
Reminds me of thing:Leisher wrote:
I know that the great majority of people are not child kidnappers. That is obvious. Way less than 1% of the population. But that doesn't mean I would ever let my 8yo kid take rides from strangers. It isn't a wrong to not be stupid and take precautions.
That being said, don't put yourself in dangerous situations, and don't let yourselves get fukkin raped, ladies. Idiots.
Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 9:07 am
Teach "Don't kidnap" not "Don't take rides from strangers!"
Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 9:46 am
Star Trek stabilized
Edited By Paul on 1401545373
Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 1:50 pm
Picard: looks like he's having a slightly bumpy tea time on a train.
Riker: looks like he's riding a mechanical bronco.
Worf: looks like he's dancing uncomfortably in a shitty, overpriced club and just realized it.
Edited By Malcolm on 1401558713
Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 11:08 pm
No mention of the guy in blue ejaculating onto the control panel?
Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 11:10 pm
My head literally exploded when I saw how they are now defining "literally."
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:09 am
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:16 am
Is that their one funny bit for the year?
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:32 am
Paul wrote:My head literally exploded when I saw how they are now defining "literally."
Dictionaries don't define language, they catalog it. The usage has evolved enough that it's a done thing.
This is not the first time a word has changed meaning through popular misuse. It's not even the hundredth time.
Edited By TPRJones on 1401719554
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:20 pm
Yeah, but how often does a definition go from one meaning to also meaning the opposite.TPRJones wrote:This is not the first time a word has changed meaning through popular misuse. It's not even the hundredth time.
"Literally" literally means "not literally."
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:55 pm
So often that there is a wordfor those sorts of words. Many of the contronyms that aren't true homographs formed in exactly the same way.Paul wrote:Yeah, but how often does a definition go from one meaning to also meaning the opposite.
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 3:55 pm
TPRJones wrote:So often that there is a wordfor those sorts of words. Many of the contronyms that aren't true homographs formed in exactly the same way.Paul wrote:Yeah, but how often does a definition go from one meaning to also meaning the opposite.
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:44 pm
Goddamn English.
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:02 pm
I refuse to ever compromise on this. I will forever mock those who use that word incorrectly.