It's really pretty simple. Rand is an utter loon who just happens to be right one time. Rather like a broken clock.

If he gets the Republican nomination, that will be the tolling of the bell for the party, they'll have given up hope of fielding a legitimate candidate.

right on time to confirm Robert Schoch's theories.

>> ^jonny:

dead


I hope this is the right one. Time length almost matches. Thanks.

>> ^MrFisk:

Police need probable cause to search, not just mere suspicion.
Exercise your rights every time.


This is true and I certainly advocate it. However in practice I'd just let them search the damn car and be on my way. Sorry I'm white and this will never be a problem for me.

Police need probable cause to search, not just mere suspicion.

Exercise your rights every time.

For a country so obsessed with bacon, Americans have no idea what real bacon is.

THIS, my friends, is real bacon:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4811652518_9c16b35f72_o.jpg

A full rasher of bacon with the delicious rind which when cut off and fried separately, turn into a mini piece crunchy crackling. This is where bacon heaven lies... right breakfast time

Over one grammatical error? It's good to see (did I use it right that time? = P) that the sandy vagina brigade never rests.

Perhaps either of you would care to discuss the topic rather than being fucktards?

>> ^Fransky:

>> ^ant:
And..? McDonald's is popular, but it's food is still crap...

It's = It is.

Thank you.
Goddam kids these days

>> ^Sagemind:

@bmacs27
He clearly says that his chances of guessing the cards are 100% so he knows he'll get it right EVERY time. Just because he doesn't reveal his method doesn't mean there isn't an actual method in place.
He's debunking Mentalism, he couldn't do that if he was wrong eight times out of ten!


But that's the point. He's only "wrong" 3 times out of ten.

I mean, there are plenty of ways to do this with a trick but I don't think he cares to. Most of the audience fools themselves into being impressed with the odds by their own poor math. They think he only has a 20% chance to do something he has a 70% chance of doing.

Also, in case anyone was wondering, he does get the order wrong before flipping it.

@bmacs27
He clearly says that his chances of guessing the cards are 100% so he knows he'll get it right EVERY time. Just because he doesn't reveal his method doesn't mean there isn't an actual method in place.

He's debunking Mentalism, he couldn't do that if he was wrong eight times out of ten!

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I think GoT would make a great and deep strategy game. In addition to battles, you'd also have to make negotiations with other lords in order to increase troop levels. You could cut off supply lines and watch public support for your opponents plummet. You'd also have to take care to be merciful and not cut off too many heads, lest you lose support among your bannermen. Strategic Alliances. Spies. Scouts. Assassinations. And of course random encounters with the Others (white walkers).
BTW, the books are awesome. I'm halfway through Clash of Kings right now. Time to read some more.


There's both a strategy game and an RPG currently in development by Cyanide Studios.

I think GoT would make a great and deep strategy game. In addition to battles, you'd also have to make negotiations with other lords in order to increase troop levels. You could cut off supply lines and watch public support for your opponents plummet. You'd also have to take care to be merciful and not cut off too many heads, lest you lose support among your bannermen. Strategic Alliances. Spies. Scouts. Assassinations. And of course random encounters with the Others (white walkers).

BTW, the books are awesome. I'm halfway through Clash of Kings right now. Time to read some more.

>> ^BoneRemake:

>> ^bareboards2:
But why just them? They aren't in it alone. It takes that man with the stunningly fashionable glasses to set up the website. It takes the 100,000 men on the site to make it work.
It takes the internet to do .... what? Democratize the profession? Allow these college educated women, who grew up with an explosion of sexual images that no other generation has been party to, to have a different view of what they are doing? Heck, Dan Savage and the whole sex-positive sex worker movement might have some effect on these women's thinking.
This, to me, is so much more interesting a topic than just labeling these women "skanks" and letting that be the whole response.

>> ^BoneRemake:

My opinion on them is not relevant. Spreading your hoo hah to pay for school is my concern.


Not everyone is out to change the world and express opinions on everything, even when asked. To say that this is new and within the last generation or two is bullshit, pimps and whores have been around since the first fuck. You imply that I think the johns are any better then the slutteros, dont assume, you make an ass out of you not me.


Excellent handling of the moral crusader, if i may say so. It's easy for some people to claim you're only doing it because they're women and you kept above it.

Personally, i feel that as they weren't coerced into the situation in any way, but simply chose to do something for personal gain, they are by far the most culpable and deserving of scorn. If you're gonna scorn that kind of thing - i don't particularly mind.

Also, i hope all the sexism crusaders have absolutely no sympathy for drug users - people who are homeless, abandoned, that kind of thing - due to drugs. Because in the same way as here, they're as responsible as the "supplier", right? Next time i see any of you opining that a drug dealer is a horrible piece of shit, i want you to give an equal appraisal of drug users. Those poor drug dealers are being enabled by those horrible drug users! Though i suspect the righteousness doesn't stretch further than anything specifically male/female.

[redacted]

@RadHazG: First, pointing out that they called the planet a "star" does not change the fact that the dot of light in the sky was Venus. Second, your argument is addressing a point which I already admitted was a misunderstanding of Mcboinkens's original comment. Third, lucifer means "light-bearer", not "morning star", so your argument would fall apart even if it were relevant. "Morning Star" is an English creation.

@Mcboinkens: "It doesn't mention the planet Lucifer in the Bible, only the fallen angel." ... "Right, neither time does it refer to Satan."

2 Peter 1:19 sounds to me like they are, at the very least, using the planet's name metaphorically. Even if I'm wrong about that, it's clearly not a reference to Satan like you originally claimed.

In Isaiah it's clearly metaphorical as the King sought to rise higher than God only to fail and fall, the same way Venus rises low in the sky in the morning but then sets without ever climbing very high.

[redacted]