Welcome to Thunderdome

Posted: **Thu Jul 10, 2014 5:51 pm**

Paul wrote:

That Impossible Odds pic seems bogus.

Being President of the USA is only 1 in 10 million, but winning a gold medal is 1 in 23.4 million?

There is only one President of the United States, but 302 gold medals were given out at the last Summer Olympics.

Yeah, seemed like crap to me.

Although... the 1 in 10 million... out of what?

I mean, there's probably, what... 10 presidents during your electable years? 300 million people in the US? 1 in 30 million seems better odds.

302 gold medals, but 7 billion people, so 1 in 23 Million? But if you include lifetime, and the average person could be in, oh, let's say 4 olympics... 1 in 5.75 million?

Posted: **Thu Jul 10, 2014 6:31 pm**

Interesting. Running is apparently kicking ass. Swimming puts about a billion times less strain on your joints, though.

The misspelling is so much bonus.

Sprinkle in a few tantrums, and that dog is my 3 year old.

Even the dog food, milk bones, and tail?

302 gold medals, but 7 billion people, so 1 in 23 Million? But if you include lifetime, and the average person could be in, oh, let's say 4 olympics... 1 in 5.75 million?

Ok. Quick sanity check. There are maybe 300M people in the US. Assume you've got as even a chance as anyone else and you're up every 4 years. Let's say you are up every year starting at age 35 and you're electable up to 70. That's 35 years ~= 9 chances to get elected. 3/100M = 3/100M = 3 * 10 ^ -8 Depending how you play with those numbers, you could bullshit them to the 1:10M ratio, only an order of magnitude away.

Now, the Summer Olympics that take place every four years, you've got the rest of the world to compete with. 302 golds and you've got 302*(1/7B) chance to get one every four years you're physically able, which is a way shorter time frame. Even the best athletes make it to maybe four Olympics tops, so we'll say 4*302*(1/7B) = 1216/7B ~= 174/1B = 1.74 x 10 ^ -7. This is also bullshitable by an order of magnitude, depending on your numbers.

Posted: **Thu Jul 10, 2014 7:11 pm**

Malcolm wrote:Ok. Quick sanity check. There are maybe 300M people in the US. Assume you've got as even a chance as anyone else and you're up every 4 years. Let's say you are up every year starting at age 35 and you're electable up to 70. That's 35 years ~= 9 chances to get elected. 3/100M = 3/100M = 3 * 10 ^ -8 Depending how you play with those numbers, you could bullshit them to the 1:10M ratio, only an order of magnitude away.

Now, the Summer Olympics that take place every four years, you've got the rest of the world to compete with. 302 golds and you've got 302*(1/7B) chance to get one every four years you're physically able, which is a way shorter time frame. Even the best athletes make it to maybe four Olympics tops, so we'll say 4*302*(1/7B) = 1216/7B ~= 174/1B = 1.74 x 10 ^ -7. This is also bullshitable by an order of magnitude, depending on your numbers.

First.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 9:45 pm**

Yeah. Just saying it's well within the bullshit range.

Posted: **Sat Jul 12, 2014 9:42 pm**

Posted: **Sat Jul 12, 2014 9:44 pm**

I need to find a woman born on February 29th and do this.

Posted: **Sat Jul 12, 2014 10:35 pm**

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:35 am**

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2014 9:47 pm**

"You should be running."

vid

Posted: **Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:17 pm**

Posted: **Tue Jul 15, 2014 2:44 pm**

Yes, this is who it looks like. If you don't know, then you don't have kids that watch Nickelodeon.

Posted: **Tue Jul 15, 2014 6:58 pm**

No idea who that is.

Posted: **Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:23 pm**

That's Sam from iCarly and Sam and Cat (which was just cancelled because she and Cat were always fighting).

Posted: **Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:48 pm**

She's not very attractive. butterface.

Posted: **Tue Jul 15, 2014 8:53 pm**

Posted: **Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:34 pm**

Leisher wrote:Yes, this is who it looks like. If you don't know, then you don't have kids that watch Nickelodeon.

That's Jennette McCurdy? My daughter watched her all the time on iCarley and Sam & Kat.
I was always impressed with her. She was one of the better actors on iCarley and she was an excellent dancer.
I remember there was some off-camera stuff that impressed me as well but I foget what it was.
I'm disappointed that she has a photo like that.

"Met this guy at a pub and we had an awesome time drinking, talking, and laughing but then..."

Posted: **Tue Jul 15, 2014 10:09 pm**

TheCatt wrote:She's not very attractive. butterface.

I'd hit it.

And all the girls from your next post.

I'm disappointed that she has a photo like that.

She has publicly stated that it was created for and sent to a single individual who leaked it after they broke up.

Posted: **Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:13 am**

Yeah I just read that she sent it to one person.
And the article mentioned that a few weeks earlier she had made fun of that one person during an interview.

Posted: **Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:17 am**

Well then... she's not a bright one.

Posted: **Wed Jul 16, 2014 10:56 am**

Not in any sense.

Famous people cannot do naked selfies without them getting out, ever. I would be surprised if her manager did not tell her that.

Welcome to Thunderdome

Random Images from Around the Web *NSFW*

Random Images from Around the Web NSFW