Call me old fashioned, but I'm pretty sure bigfoot's dick is *nsfw

>> ^Fantomas:

How does that woman know what bigfoot's dick smells like?


Sir, I cannot count the times the phrase "Smells like Bigfoot's dick" has come in handy.

How does that woman know what bigfoot's dick smells like?

Git! Git!

I love the bigfoot reference.

"He had beautiful hair."

Hallooe! My name is aniggermantoyooe. You killed my father, prepaihr to die!

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

My father was killed by a 6 fingered man.

Wait, so per the drawing bigfoot is a 10' tall, death metal playing wizard with six fingers on each hand.

...oh, and beautiful hair.

How would you feel if when you brought up some controversy about representative democracy, I said, 'well, that's not a true democracy. In a true democracy, none of these problems would exist.'? That's how I feel arguing with you. You accept no responsibility for the many likely vulnerabilities your hypothetical doctrine has to corruption.

Assumptions can be right. - Yes, just because you've made an assumption doesn't mean that it's wrong, but if you have no evidence to back up your claim, or if your entire body of evidence consists of criticism of competing ideas, it makes your own assumption less persuasive.

Your assumption vs. my assumption - Your 'assumptions' are hypothetical, as a free market system has never existed or been attempted (unless you count Darfur or Rwanda). My 'assumptions' about representative government are based on evidence of a system that has been around for a long time. It's strengths and weaknesses are well known. There is a huge difference between hypothetical assumptions and assumptions based on observable evidence.

Argument from fallacy - That's actually pretty hilarious that calling out a fallacy is itself a fallacy. Ironic.... dontcha think? Guilty as charged, but you do this too hypocrite.

Red Herring - Half of your PQ is filled with Red Herrings. We both use these.

Negative proof - Yes, because something cannot be proven true doesn't mean it is false. How appropriate. Religious people use this one often and atheists usually rebut 'yes, but that's where evidence comes in'. Yes, blanky, that's where evidence comes in. I know you believe the free market would work as you want it to, but without any evidence to prove this, my brain will not allow me to believe in it, just as my brain will not allow me to believe in God. It doesn't mean you are wrong. You may be right. Bigfoot might be real. Aliens might abduct cows. Could be? Who knows?

Ridicule - You make political jokes too. Are you really suggesting we take humor out of the equation? Fuck that. No jokes and this becomes a droll exercise. It's getting a little stale as it is, but you've pumped some life into the discussion with this whole fallacy thing.

Example - I never said free markets are false, just impossible to achieve as you envision them. Considering that no political ideology has ever existed in its purest, corruption-free form, I feel like history backs me on this one. To clarify, my belief is that the 'free market' is too prone to corruption to make the world a better place, and would almost certainly make the world a worse place, not that it's false.

Repetition - I've never used the fact that you repeat the same arguments over and over as a way of trying to prove you wrong. I'm just noting personal frustration.

Repetition - I've never used the fact that you repeat the same arguments over and over as a way of trying to prove you wrong. I'm just noting personal frustration.

Consequences - I'm not saying deregulation MAY lead to problems, I'm saying it DOES. There are plenty of real life examples of the consequences of deregulation, one big one at the top of the page. We've lived them for decades. Is observable evidence really a fallacy?

Your example of me 'begging the question' - If you limit the role the public plays in affairs of state and country, the public will have less of a role in affairs of state and country. Lewd cat is lewd. Those with means would absolutely have more influence without having to compete with the will of the people. This doesn't seem like a controversial statement to me. What do you find untrue, unproven or unrealistic about this statement?

How does your system end a corporate dictatorship or achieve things? This is the simple question that has prompted much monkey dancing and tangents from you. I want to know specifically how we get from a to b, and doctrinal hypotheticals don't do it for me. Tell me a story, something that could make this seem real and possible.

Example: Dick and Jane open up a competing corporate dictatorship, make a shit ton of cash, then they buy a majority share of the other company and put it out of business. That's not a very believable story. If I could think of a good believable story, I would probably become a libertarian. That's where you come in. This is your bright shining moment to make some sense of this bullshit.

UFO's and crop circles.. popular lately. Did you see the google homepage?
A good tool for distraction - the paranormal. Ghosts, UFOs, Bigfoot..

Some good points, but he doesn't believe in the moon landing and does believe in bigfoot? *thumbs down*

Wait wait wait... are you telling me that all those people who see UFOs, Bigfoots, Loch Ness Monsters, Jesus in a cheeto could be WRONG?!?!#?$

This is a commercial for Bentoel cigarettes. If you look closely, the truck's door doesn't read "Bigfoot", it reads "BENTOEL".

Actually, let me take it to the next level.

Remember the first Harry Potter book? You know why it was so popular? Because at its core, it is everyone's ultimate fantasy. I don't mean the magic, I mean the fundamental theme: your life sucks and you discover that you are actually a very special and unique person; suddenly you are whisked away from your shit life and lead and exciting existence beyond your wildest dreams.

To me this the the fundamental principal of all social delusion. People who say they have seen a UFO, people who say they saw bigfoot, people who say they hear god talking to them, people who say they are vampires, etc.

Now, I think after a while, as you lie you yourself over and over, or perhaps because you are taught to lie to yourself from such an early age you don't know any better, you start to believe the lie and even worse, depend on it for your identity.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to wake up tomorrow to some wonderful revelation about magic of some kind in the universe. The problem is that there is NEVER any reasonable evidence and eye-witness accounts are worth nothing because of this basic principal. Show me a "credible" UFO witness and I'll show you a person who has finally become "special" because something interesting happened to them. Even so-called alien abductees who claim to not want the terrible knowledge they have are in my mind reveling in the attention they get.... they are on tv, with their funny glasses... looking at themselves on their taped playbacks and saying "woe is me, I'm special."

As for the vampires, like anything else, put them in front of a doctor and they will tell you invariably that they are just people like any other. They don't burn instantly in the sunlight, they can't live on they so-called "feeding" alone. Most pathetically, many of their "traits" can clearly be traced back to movies and literature which have defined them, not to anything historically relevant.

I suppose that the fringe amuses me in a further way than normal because it always seems like the people who lead the most pathetic lives are the ones who find themselves suddenly "special" like that 300lb psychic vampire. To go back to my original comment... I'm sure she got obese by eating pint after pint of Ben and Jerry's and not by sucking psychic energy from her enabling friends.

I give upvotes for bigfoot. Love dat sasquatch. Oh, and those are awesome tricks.

I couldn't understand what she was saying at first.

"My husband works for organization called BRFO - they are hunting for sasquatch professionally"

http://www.bfro.net/ - The Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization

Bigfoot gets around.