Homer destroys God. .
x
Click to expand

Comments(321):

[ 321 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #38 to #31 - bigmanfifty (02/02/2014) [-]
Might be wrong, but isn't that stetson, not a fedora?
#43 to #38 - zaywoot (02/02/2014) [-]
Actually thats a proper fedora, where the neckbears wear trilbys
#46 to #43 - inuares (02/02/2014) [-]
Neck bears....
User avatar #213 to #110 - wimwam (02/02/2014) [-]
w- why do you have this?
#311 to #213 - blokrokker (02/03/2014) [-]
Because there's nobody who can stop me!
#177 to #110 - adifferentjones (02/02/2014) [-]
I'm saving this, you can't stop me.
I'm saving this, you can't stop me.
User avatar #180 to #177 - blokrokker (02/02/2014) [-]
I would never try to.
User avatar #182 to #180 - adifferentjones (02/02/2014) [-]
Well thank you, sir.
#125 to #110 - inuares (02/02/2014) [-]
I love it.
I love it.
User avatar #47 to #46 - zaywoot (02/02/2014) [-]
haha oh sorry, my mistake

But now I can't help but picture a fat bear wearing a trilby with only the neck part shaved
User avatar #48 to #47 - inuares (02/02/2014) [-]
I envisioned a live bear attached to someone's neck.
#136 to #43 - guanyu (02/02/2014) [-]
Because the difference actually matters, doesn't it.
User avatar #139 to #136 - zaywoot (02/02/2014) [-]
not at all, seen neckbeards wearing actual fedoras...

It just kinda bothers me that they call trilbys fedoras...
Also I feel like they're ruined both, I think trilbys and fedoras (when worn correctly) could be cool
User avatar #140 to #139 - guanyu (02/02/2014) [-]
Times sure have changed, huh?
User avatar #51 to #43 - galaxyguy (02/02/2014) [-]
Oh, thank goodness.

Couple years ago, I regularly wore a fedora. You just alleviated my fear that I might once have been one of those people.
User avatar #97 to #51 - theblondefetus (02/02/2014) [-]
It's not the fedora on your head that makes you one of them

It's the fedora in your heart
User avatar #127 to #97 - merrymarvelite (02/02/2014) [-]
That and the neckbeard.

Fedora's I can understand even if they're totally ruined now but I can't stand having a hairy neck.
User avatar #52 to #51 - smokedmeatlog (02/02/2014) [-]
[SPOILER ALERT] you still are
User avatar #118 to #54 - sabcy (02/02/2014) [-]
nooooooooooooooo.com/ was one "O" short.
0
#115 to #54 - sabcy has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #87 to #52 - dontdeletemyuser (02/02/2014) [-]
lol i even almost considered buying a fedora once. so i googled fedora and went through the pictures. neckbeards everywhere never again
#323 to #43 - John Cena (02/03/2014) [-]
it's a hat
#254 to #43 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
OK, I get that neckbeards/neckbears, bronies, and other beta fags all where trilbies, but just because someone has one, it shouldn't make them synonymous with any of the above. Both my little brother and I own one. We exclusively wear them in winter, and only on occasion. While I am single (by choice, most of the "girls" I know are sluts or friends) he has a girlfriend, we both hate my little pony, and are both very fit, we even fight taijutsu. I just think people shouldn't hate the hat, just the aforementioned fags who do.
User avatar #276 to #254 - zaywoot (02/02/2014) [-]
If you look at my other comments Mr. Anon, you'd see I do like the hats...

Also, saying "we even fight taijutsu..." taijutsu just means body technique.

What kinda naruto wannabe are you? do you practise bujinkan? do you practise judo or jujutsu? maybe karate?... Or do you just play fight in a garden?
Nothing wrong with practise in a garden as long as it is actual proper training...
User avatar #187 to #43 - captainrattrap (02/02/2014) [-]
I've seen many more people look good in "trilby"s and just indiana jones look good in a fedora. However I don't think this picture is accurate.
User avatar #195 to #187 - zaywoot (02/02/2014) [-]
sure, plenty of people can look good in trilbys, they just have a horrible reputation...
but wearing a trilby or fedora with a ******* hoodie is just wrong... a shirt with unbuttoned collar and maybe a vest? sure that can work... but hoodie? hell naw
User avatar #209 to #195 - captainrattrap (02/02/2014) [-]
It's more of a beach party kind of thing.
#42 to #38 - theism ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
I'm not sure but it's definitely not a trilby. which is the hat most associated with 'edgy' atheists.
#39 to #38 - dehumanizer (02/02/2014) [-]
Probably but there wouldnt be a better simpsons "tip fedora" pic unless they push the joke in purpose in a plot of some episode.
User avatar #119 to #31 - warzon (02/02/2014) [-]
looks like a cowboy hat.
User avatar #167 to #119 - vashford ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
You mean a stetson?
User avatar #248 to #167 - warzon (02/02/2014) [-]
Y...Yes?
#2 - CommonJoo (02/02/2014) [-]
It's amazing how big of a difference 50 IQ is
#8 to #2 - kez (02/02/2014) [-]
explain?
#145 to #8 - mutantpanda (02/02/2014) [-]
In that episode they removed a crayon from Homer's brain which boosted his IQ by 50 points. Homer discovers that he cannot enjoy life when he is so much smarter than everyone around him (except Lisa), causing him to yell out "Is there no place for the man with the 105 IQ." He then gets Moe to reinsert the crayon into his brain.

Season 12, Episode 9, HOMR if anyone is interested, it's a good episode.
#178 to #145 - kez (02/02/2014) [-]
cheers
#9 to #8 - winterguy (02/02/2014) [-]
I think that in that episode, they pulled something out of his brain (like nail or some **** ) and it boosted his IQ.

But I dont think that a 50 IQ boost will make you that kind of genius from a complete idiot.
#15 to #9 - FatherPedobear (02/02/2014) [-]
It may have been a crayon that got shoved so far into his nose, it got lost in his brain. I remember a particular episode where that happened.
User avatar #12 to #9 - iwasawa (02/02/2014) [-]
I think 50 points can make quite a difference, if I would to suddenly gain 50 points.. Well okay, weird phrasing, IQ points aren't actual things so I guess you could say my brain improved in a manner meassured by the equivellant of 50 IQ points. I most certainly think there'd be a great difference in capabilities. My classes would surely become easier, haha
#14 to #12 - winterguy (02/02/2014) [-]
yeah, but from Homer Simpson dumb, to Undeniable proof that god doesnt exist genius, takes a lot more then 50 points.
Lets say I have 90-110 (which is higher then Homer) and I gain smarts of 50IQ boost. I get to a level of 140-160 somwhere around Hawking who didnt exclude existence of god.
#16 to #14 - ripgeckosncherios (02/02/2014) [-]
yes but he did do soem pretty smart otehr things
still from 80 IQ to 130IQ (which i think would be much more realistic), you probably wouldnt figure something like that out.
stil the orignial comment (how big a difference 50IQpoints is) is still silly because 50 points is pretty much the difference from normal to genius and normal to "to dumb to poo"
#36 to #2 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
IQ doesn't make anyone smart.

If he was smart like this when the doctors cast the IQ buff on him, he was smart before too, if only unable to process his thoughts properly.

Some people with high IQ can't do the most basic math.
User avatar #50 to #36 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
IQ is one factor of measuring intelligence... So yes, it does measure how smart you are, it just doesn't measure EVERYTHING about your intelligence. Also you can score extremely high in almost every category and very low in one and still get a high average...
User avatar #194 to #50 - lyiat ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
IQ does not measure intellect, it measures the ability of someone to learn and process information. You can have a really high IQ and be dumb as a ******* brick if you don't actually apply yourself to learn anything. There are plenty of people with learning disorders with sky high IQ's that find it impossible to focus long enough to learn well.
User avatar #200 to #194 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
It's not about memorization of facts no, if that's what you mean... But I fail to see how it doesn't measure intelligence? Being quickwitted, is that not being intelligent?
User avatar #206 to #200 - lyiat ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
That is being keen, not intelligent. Intelligence is the degree of information that you know, not your ability to gain new information.
User avatar #207 to #206 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
"Intelligence has been defined in many different ways including logic, abstract thought, understanding, self-awareness, communication, learning, having emotional knowledge, retaining, planning, and problem solving"
Looking at other places it says intelligence doesn't have an exact definition, since people like to define it differently
Also IQ stands for intelligence quotient
User avatar #212 to #207 - lyiat ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
Look, I'm not getting invested into a battle about this as I have better things to do and you're just outright unwilling to listen. If you want a good example, take a look at savants. Gigantic IQ, massive capacity for learning, incapable of it due to learning defects. They typically only capable of learning one specific thing, nigh perfectly, and that is all. IQ is your ability to learn, not your actual level of intellect. There are leagues of people with high IQ scores who still haven't figured out PEMDAS.
User avatar #215 to #212 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
That still doesn't change the fact that intelligence has different definitions... Sure you might use it one way, but other people use it differently
If you want your way to be the defined definition, you should appeal to some big dictionary
I'm not saying what you're saying about these people is wrong, I'm just saying intelligence obviously means something different to, for example, the people who thought of the "Intelligence Quotient" scale. Since that's what they found intelligence to be
#59 to #50 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
I think you misunderstand IQ and what it means.
User avatar #62 to #59 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
No, I don't don't... It's a scale to measure intelligence. That's really all it is. But you're not "smart" in every way just because you can solve hard mathematical equations, also you're not smart in every way just because you understand all the inner workings of society or can write like Shakespeare. Different meanings of clever or smart. IQ is one way to test that, with tests, obviously
#78 to #62 - kez (02/02/2014) [-]
Its a way of measuring academic intelligence.

There are 9 forms of intelligence I believe.
#64 to #62 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
You're not smart if you score high on an IQ test either. That means you were good at taking the IQ tests.

What you're getting tested for on an IQ test doesn't translate into other sciences.
User avatar #65 to #64 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
So you're also not strong if you can bench press 700 pounds, you're just good at bench pressing?
And you're not smart if you can solve crazy mathematical theorems but you're just good at solving them?
Please.
I never said IQ was perfect, but it's pretty good... That's why it's so widely used
#67 to #65 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
No, exactly what you're saying now is proving how pointless an IQ test is.
User avatar #69 to #67 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
No it's not... It's a measurement. Like a thermometer. Or a history test. OR ANY OTHER ******* TEST. But IQ is more of an average than just doing a single thing, that's why it's good, because it doesn't just test one single thing... If it tested one single thing it would be about experience in the field and not general intelligence
#72 to #69 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
Tests are generally useless, because they can never accurately represent how good someone is at something.

It can show if you're incredibly stupid, but it can't show if you're good.
User avatar #73 to #72 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
IQ is pretty accurate though, because it's not something you can practice for. It's just off your personal skills and the way and how well your brain solves problems
#74 to #73 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
You can practice for an IQ test, just like you can for every other test.
User avatar #77 to #74 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
You could practice for IQ tests by taking A LOT of IQ tests, true, but as long as it's the first few IQ tests you take, it will give you a pretty good result
User avatar #76 to #74 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
But you have no idea what'll come up as questions... So not really... Not the offcial IQ tests anyways. An internet test won't show you anything, that's true
#79 to #76 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
Official IQ tests can be practiced for as well. You're thinking too highly of IQ tests for some reason.

I'll tell you that some of the smartest people I know wouldn't score high on an IQ test, and some of the dumbest people I know scored very high on it.
User avatar #81 to #79 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
That depends what you classify as dumb... Socially inept? Bad at maths? The IQ test will be very general
#82 to #81 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
"Will be very general"

Generality is the most useless thing imaginable when it comes to intelligence.
User avatar #83 to #82 - kallesyndrom (02/02/2014) [-]
Not for telling general intelligence, no... If you're only smart in one area, you won't score high on an IQ test no. But you might score very high on a maths test. IQ isn't specifict intelligence. If you're great at maths but suck at english, you may be seen as stupid by other people and smart by others, but if you score low on an IQ test even though you're really good at something, that's not unusual. You're just not a jack of all trades
#93 to #83 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
Nobody is a jack of all trades, but the point is that the IQ test is useless.

The IQ test will not check how good you are at english. It doesn't tes how good you are at concentrating. It doesn't test how good you are at studying. It doesn't test how good you are at understanding math.

I don't get why you'd ever defend it though. Nobody I know would ever tell you that the IQ tests can be used for anything. I scored to be in the top of the 1% and nothing good ever came of that. It's something stupid people use to brag, because they're insecure about their mediocrities.

The smartest people aren't the ones who score the highest on an IQ test. The smartest people are the ones who find something they like and stick with it.

Just to make it clear, believing that the IQ test (and tests in general) can prove anything is hurtful to society around you. Some of the smartest people won't be accepted into college because they're not good at taking tests and nobody should ever be considered smart because they scored high on an IQ test.

TL;DR: The IQ tests are useless and can show absolutely nothing of any value.
#144 to #93 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
www.sciencedump.com/content/10-people-highest-iq-world-infographic

Yet, people that have very high iq's seem to do very well. If propensity doesn't prove it nothing will. If you say that those people aren't intelligent, then you are completely ignorant. You aren't smart because you have a high iq, you have a high iq because you are smart.
#150 to #144 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
"Oh, he has a high IQ and went on to be successful, he must be truly smart."

"Oh, he has a high IQ and didn't become anything, he must not have lived up to his potential."

"Oh, he doesn't have a high IQ and went on to be successful, he must have worked hard."

"Oh, he doesn't have a high IQ and went on to become nothing, it was fate."
#152 to #150 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
There is no tendency for those with higher IQ to become more successful. It's false confirmation.
#137 to #93 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
You're the one who doesn't understand what an IQ test is. An IQ test measures a person's mental capability. It doesn't measure what you know. Say a young child took an IQ test and received a high score - this doesn't mean the child can write theorems or understand complex ideas and go straight to college. It just means that this child can do more challenging work in school if he applies himself.


Also, you cannot study to try to get a higher score on an IQ test. Think of an IQ test more as testing your brain, not your skills.
#148 to #137 - animeanimeanimoo (02/02/2014) [-]
That's the thing. It doesn't show their mental capability. It shows whether or not they excelled in concluding correctly whatever problems the tests proposed. That's the delusion that IQ tests put up. (Not to mention that it only tests for a very limited set of mental capabilities, but that's a completely different thing.)

You can study to get a higher score on an IQ test. One of the key things that people who believe IQ tests work believe in, is that understanding problems of one type will show that you can solve all other problems of the same type.

IQ is a delusion, put up by arrogant people so that they can convince thsemselves that they're smarter than other people. Now you're trying to send me some link that would supposedly "prove" that IQ tests work. If anything, it should prove that IQ tests show nothing, because Garry Kasparov won chess early, but proceeded to use the rest of his life to prove just how mediocre he truly was.
#324 to #148 - John Cena (02/03/2014) [-]
Sorry for the late reply - I didn't have internet access.

First of all, I didn't give you any link. That was a different anon.

Second, it sounds like you assume that IQ is something made up, like astrology. There is actual science behind testing IQ, and it's still being researched. IQ tests have evolved and improved as we have learned more about the human brain. We know that there is more than one type of intelligence, so IQ tests don't test for a single type of intelligence (academic), like you assume.

You cannot study for an IQ test. It doesn't give you equations to solve and such. It gives you ideas that you must understand. Having a wider range of knowledge will definitely help you understand some concepts and ideas, but you cannot study a few specific topics and call that "studying for an IQ test."

I don't understand where your hatred for IQ is coming from. It's not perfect, we know they aren't, but that's why they're being improved.
#255 to #148 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
User avatar #61 to #59 - epicpoke (02/02/2014) [-]
OH! I know! Intelligence Quotient!
#75 to #2 - kresskh (02/02/2014) [-]
Well yeah, it's like saying how big of a difference is 50 cm in height or 50 kg in weight.
User avatar #143 to #2 - niggernazi (02/02/2014) [-]
i love the feeling when i walking in to a room and raise the average iq with 50 points
User avatar #247 to #2 - onewithpokerface (02/02/2014) [-]
This might be completely wrong, but I heard IQ is logarithmic, like the pH or Richter scale. So the difference between a 150 IQ and 100 IQ might be the parallel to the difference between a 7 and an 8 on the Richter scale, in that it's a much higher value in spite of linear numerical ascension.
#13 to #2 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
The average IQ tends to be betweeen 90 and 110, give or take.

150 is a genius.

So yeah, a pretty big difference
#63 to #13 - xplosevdiarrhea (02/02/2014) [-]
I'm pretty sure the average IQ is 100.  Well, maybe just theoretically, since we don't actually change the number after every test.  But I'm pretty sure the average person is set to an IQ of 100, then everyone is compared to that.  Did this have a point?  I forget.  So I guess I'll try to improve this comment a little with a funny gif of russians killing a boar with a sink.
I'm pretty sure the average IQ is 100. Well, maybe just theoretically, since we don't actually change the number after every test. But I'm pretty sure the average person is set to an IQ of 100, then everyone is compared to that. Did this have a point? I forget. So I guess I'll try to improve this comment a little with a funny gif of russians killing a boar with a sink.
#96 to #63 - internetshakespear (02/02/2014) [-]
Psych grad reporting in. It used to be the average, with a standard deviation of 15. IQ is measured like so: (mental age / chronological age) x 100. So in theory, if a 20 year old had the intelligence of a 20 year old, they would have an IQ of 100. However, the average IQ is actually going up by about 3 points every 10 years - this phenomenon is known as the Flynn Effect.
Psych grad reporting in. It used to be the average, with a standard deviation of 15. IQ is measured like so: (mental age / chronological age) x 100. So in theory, if a 20 year old had the intelligence of a 20 year old, they would have an IQ of 100. However, the average IQ is actually going up by about 3 points every 10 years - this phenomenon is known as the Flynn Effect.
User avatar #304 to #96 - rokkarokkaali ONLINE (02/03/2014) [-]
According to that logic my IQ is 200+
User avatar #220 to #96 - serotonin (02/02/2014) [-]
I think that all mental age/cho. age was abandoned long time ago
#86 to #63 - existacne (02/02/2014) [-]
Fukken lost it, pretty sure these are Ukrainian dudes.
Fukken lost it, pretty sure these are Ukrainian dudes.
#204 to #86 - captnnorway (02/02/2014) [-]
I just happened to have another of gif matching yours, thought you might enjoy them as much as me
I just happened to have another of gif matching yours, thought you might enjoy them as much as me
#205 to #204 - existacne (02/02/2014) [-]
Thanks, here, have this.
User avatar #88 to #86 - xplosevdiarrhea (02/02/2014) [-]
Hunting With Sink and Car a Wild Boar in Russia [New / HQ] I wouldn't know. Video says russian, but who knows.
User avatar #90 to #88 - existacne (02/02/2014) [-]
Fukken lost it again.
Well, they are clearly talking in Russian and street named in Russian as well, so that must be in Russia indeed.
User avatar #232 to #63 - linktheherooftime (02/02/2014) [-]
So then what's an IQ of 135?
#228 to #63 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
but we do "change the number" after each test you uneducated moron
#80 to #63 - hillbillypowpow ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
An IQ is your mental age divided by your chronological age (that's why the Q is for quotient), so the average is theoretically 100, that would mean that your mental and chronological ages match up. So if everyone in an area, let's say a country, had a low mental age then their actual average would be below the theoretical average.
User avatar #295 to #13 - meganinja (02/02/2014) [-]
Being a genious doesn't mean all that much. It's not like one of those things you'd see on TV where you'd be an amazing inventor or whatever. My IQ is 160 and all that gets me is top of the class and pretty interesting philisophical debates. For instance, I can't even spell philisophical without looking it up, just because I'm a "genious" doesn't make me hyper intelligent.

InB4 thumbed down for 'bragging'
User avatar #128 - murrlogic ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
At least Ned acknowledged that Homer might be right but doesn't wanna ruin his day or the mood of his children
User avatar #104 - daentraya (02/02/2014) [-]
I have to give the Simpsons credit for balancing out the ignorant religiousness of Flanders with Flanders being a good person. Kinda cancels each other out and prevents ********** , as far as i can tell
User avatar #3 - zaxzwim ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
but God has showen up in the simpsons tonnes of times
User avatar #95 - DisgruntledTomato (02/02/2014) [-]
If you had the power to prove the existence of a God, would you?
User avatar #103 to #95 - kanduhuskedetder (02/02/2014) [-]
Am I suicidal?
User avatar #113 to #95 - sabcy (02/02/2014) [-]
no, I'd prove there's there's life on other planets.
User avatar #124 to #95 - lolmasterx (02/02/2014) [-]
Why wouldn't I?
User avatar #159 to #95 - finblob (02/02/2014) [-]
ye
#105 to #95 - haidbz (02/02/2014) [-]
This might get real fun. See, there is a distinct difference between "believing" and "knowing", since "believing" implies uncertainty. Despite this, most religions demand "belief" and "faith", denying knowledge to the people. That is, at the very least, my impression of religions...

Which gives so much power to the man who can give solid proof of Gods existence (or lack of thereof) when it comes down to manipulating believers.
User avatar #99 to #95 - thespartanpony (02/02/2014) [-]
no lol. i would worship him in secret with only a select few others who are allowed to ascend into godhood with me
User avatar #106 to #99 - PVTDickStryker (02/02/2014) [-]
Prove the existence of God =/= Ascension into godhood.
#109 to #99 - dontknowmeatall (02/02/2014) [-]
You just invented Mormons.
User avatar #199 to #109 - thespartanpony (02/02/2014) [-]
yeah except my god would make sense
+1
#208 to #199 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #107 to #95 - DiabloStrawhat (02/02/2014) [-]
Wouldn't that make faith obsolete?
0
#157 to #107 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #123 to #107 - merrymarvelite (02/02/2014) [-]
Faith is overrated.
User avatar #116 to #107 - warzon (02/02/2014) [-]
Yes.
User avatar #117 to #116 - warzon (02/02/2014) [-]
And no.
User avatar #126 to #95 - merrymarvelite (02/02/2014) [-]
Sounds like there'd be a Nobel prize in it for me. I'd do it.
User avatar #147 to #95 - bobthedilder (02/02/2014) [-]
Yes, but would they believe me?
User avatar #114 to #95 - warzon (02/02/2014) [-]
Yes because then we could agree
and then religion would stop filling rivers with blood.
#130 to #114 - albertjester (02/02/2014) [-]
>implying logic would stop religious bloodshed.
>implying logic would stop religious bloodshed.
User avatar #131 to #130 - warzon (02/02/2014) [-]
>Implying that If I could prove that there is god to everyone that id use logic.
Not everyone would accept logic.
User avatar #146 to #131 - bobthedilder (02/02/2014) [-]
All Islamic extremist would have no reason to fight.
#132 to #131 - albertjester (02/02/2014) [-]
ah, but you were implying that by proving there is a god withought a shadow of a doubt, people would stop arguing about it, which is logical. but they wouldnt. because people have a strange tendency to go looking for the truth but when they find it, when it's right in front of them, if they don't like it, "nope, can't see it." aye the majority might stop arguing, but the fanatics who cause bloodshed didn't get where they are by letting silly things like sanity get in the way.
User avatar #133 to #132 - warzon (02/02/2014) [-]
Well it would at least put a little less blood into the stream.
Then from there it might become easier
it might not.
But hopes.
#134 to #133 - albertjester (02/02/2014) [-]
ah, hope. now that i can respect. fair play to you.
User avatar #249 to #134 - warzon (02/02/2014) [-]
Thank you.
+3
#175 to #95 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #227 to #175 - kommandantvideo (02/02/2014) [-]
He said prove the existence, not convince everyone that there is.
0
#234 to #227 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #239 to #234 - bigsteamingpile (02/02/2014) [-]
Eh, it really doesn't. It implies having the knowledge and ability to prove His existence.
0
#245 to #239 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
+7
#135 to #95 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #166 to #135 - blesstheinternet (02/02/2014) [-]
but if you saved them time from praying, theyd just spend it masturbating. theyd still have the same amount of free time in the day
0
#168 to #166 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #170 to #168 - blesstheinternet (02/02/2014) [-]
cuz that's why people do it ; )
0
#172 to #170 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
#313 to #172 - blesstheinternet (02/03/2014) [-]
well i don't masturbate, i have a girlfriend...... ._.
#155 to #135 - spokenwun (02/02/2014) [-]
"some other things"
+1
#156 to #155 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
#11 - theblackcrow (02/02/2014) [-]
I just believe in one god and saviour, oh great and merciful ************ , we wholeheartedly rejoice in your blessing
User avatar #17 to #11 - manofbeardliness (02/02/2014) [-]
May your coffee and adderall run plentiful.
#267 - catchamp (02/02/2014) [-]
**catchamp rolled a random image posted in comment #9 at Sky ** what the hell is with all the ponies?
I needed a random picture
User avatar #274 to #267 - linktheherooftime (02/02/2014) [-]
**linktheherooftime rolls 72** check em'
User avatar #275 to #274 - linktheherooftime (02/02/2014) [-]
**linktheherooftime rolls 2** divided by this
#277 to #275 - linktheherooftime (02/02/2014) [-]
**linktheherooftime rolls 4** square root this
**linktheherooftime rolls 4** square root this
User avatar #278 to #277 - linktheherooftime (02/02/2014) [-]
Which equals 72 again.
User avatar #305 to #278 - keithspike (02/03/2014) [-]
**keithspike rolls 43** loser....
User avatar #268 to #267 - catchamp (02/02/2014) [-]
HOLY F HOW AM I THAT LUCKY IS THAT ROLL
#270 to #268 - xtiggerx (02/02/2014) [-]
you cheated somehow
you cheated somehow
#269 to #267 - saltyfries (02/02/2014) [-]
and it happens to be Simpsons... Well ****
#68 - toguro (02/02/2014) [-]
Any fans of QI answer this for me, didn't they feature an equation which does prove the existence of a God?   
   
gif unrelated
Any fans of QI answer this for me, didn't they feature an equation which does prove the existence of a God?

gif unrelated
User avatar #71 to #68 - theguythatisnotyou (02/02/2014) [-]
I think that gif is appropriate.
User avatar #92 to #68 - CaptalnPlanet (02/02/2014) [-]
IS THAT A ******* YELLOW GALLON OF MILK? WHY?
#169 to #92 - fuckyosixtyminutes (02/02/2014) [-]
It keeps light from getting in and... uh... removing the nutrients... or something. For real, that's the reason I heard,
User avatar #89 to #68 - noblexfenrir (02/02/2014) [-]
Don't know what QI is, but they most likely used Godel's theory, and to sum it up it basically says "If god can be conceptualized, he must exist". It doesn't prove anything.
#185 to #89 - brawndotheseadrago (02/02/2014) [-]
Qi is this sick British trivia show, where comedians come together and learn about the general ignorance of society, and all the facts most people are wrong about.
It's really Quite Interesting. That's the title
#158 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
Anyone know a reliable place to watch the classic episodes?   
 I don't trust half the sites on Google.
Anyone know a reliable place to watch the classic episodes?
I don't trust half the sites on Google.
#300 to #158 - bloodangel (02/02/2014) [-]
Project free tv
User avatar #256 to #158 - yaybacon ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
It's the World Wide Web I dont know but I do have the source for your gif
+35
#160 to #158 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
0
#165 to #163 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
#171 to #163 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
Pirate Gulf?
User avatar #174 to #171 - shadownigga (02/02/2014) [-]
Technically, it's a bay.
#210 to #160 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
i-is it safe to use the bay of pirates without a proxy?
0
#214 to #210 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
#316 to #214 - John Cena (02/03/2014) [-]
southern california
#224 - andrewld (02/02/2014) [-]
Homer was wrong though, there's BASED God.
#154 - fuckoatmeal (02/02/2014) [-]
** *********** rolled a random image posted in comment #252 at oh i see now ** one of my favorite episodes, right next to the medical marijuana one and the demoxinil one
#1 - clownsrock (02/02/2014) [-]
but they have also proved he is real
#18 to #5 - clownsrock (02/02/2014) [-]
let me modify my statement "in the simpsons world in one form or another (movie episode or game) there has been a few times where they have met him im the simpsons game you dance dance revolution battle him and I one or two episodes he has appered"


Sudoku marcuss shunkahawolf (just letting yall know I explaned my comment more)
User avatar #21 to #18 - fukitidk (02/02/2014) [-]
oh in that way....sorry about that then
#23 to #21 - clownsrock (02/02/2014) [-]
its ok that's why y I elaborated
#20 to #1 - samoaspider (02/02/2014) [-]
was it the "If god isn't real, then who wrote the Bible" statement?
was it the "If god isn't real, then who wrote the Bible" statement?
#22 to #20 - clownsrock (02/02/2014) [-]
look below for my newer comment
User avatar #27 to #1 - logicstrike (02/02/2014) [-]
don't thumb him down there is actually a symbolic mathematical that suggests the existence of god it was covered on an episode of QI
#28 to #27 - clownsrock (02/02/2014) [-]
I was referring to the Simpsons not real life
User avatar #29 to #28 - logicstrike (02/02/2014) [-]
but the funny thing is there actually is a mathematic proof for god it's called Gödel's ontological proof and it's ******* weird
#32 to #29 - clownsrock (02/02/2014) [-]
ya I stay away from religion in general because most of it doesn't seem logical and I honestly don't care enofe to care
User avatar #34 to #32 - logicstrike (02/02/2014) [-]
that is a wise religious stance
#4 to #1 - sudoku (02/02/2014) [-]
May I ask how? If yes, how?
User avatar #121 to #4 - screamy (02/02/2014) [-]
Pretty sure Homer met God in one of the episodes.
User avatar #55 to #4 - angelious (02/02/2014) [-]
well-for instance homer went to heaven at one point.and talked to god.even trashed heaven.

he has actually met god on multiple occasion.
User avatar #6 to #4 - marcuss (02/02/2014) [-]
Its simpsons crying out loud. you feel comfortable that a flax tax proposal in comic is enough to prove it wrong . and i think it is quite simple how they proved it also true . maybe a buss ticket ? or saw him
#7 to #6 - sudoku (02/02/2014) [-]
You're flying off the handle. I just asked how have they proved it's existence. It has neither been proven, or diproven. I was told there was proof, and I was merely curious at to what it was.
User avatar #112 to #7 - oceanfrank (02/02/2014) [-]
Wasn't there a fact compilation that said, "In the simpsons God is the only person with 5 fingers on each hand?"
#19 to #7 - ExorArgus (02/02/2014) [-]
He has appeared a couple times and in fact in the only one in the simpsons world who has 10 fingers.
User avatar #10 to #7 - shunkahawolf (02/02/2014) [-]
i think he appeared in an episode or something but it may have been a dream or a couch sequence.
User avatar #238 to #7 - JwBread (02/02/2014) [-]
I think he meant that is has been proven that he is real in the Simpson's world.
User avatar #33 to #4 - olmesy (02/02/2014) [-]
Oh, I read about that once. He's not wrong. This mathematics dude once decided to show that anything can be proven correct through mathematical logic, so he proved god to be true

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_ontological_proof
User avatar #108 to #33 - vos (02/02/2014) [-]
Impressive, But the crux of the argument relies on a dubious assumption of all-encompassing positivity being 'necessarily existent,' to paraphrase a very complex exercise in logic.
#217 to #108 - boylan (02/02/2014) [-]
I know some of these words
User avatar #223 to #33 - mathematics (02/02/2014) [-]
are you talking about me?
User avatar #257 to #223 - olmesy (02/02/2014) [-]
Bitch I might
#264 to #4 - baditch (02/02/2014) [-]
I was actually reading up on this the other day. Evidently, (I'm only going off of the the things I've read so be advised) Scientists have been studying quantum physics for some time now.

A quantum Physicist named Robert Lanza proved, usuing his famous double-split experiment that time is not linear and thus, death cannot exist in any real sense, "proving" the existence of an afterlife.

It may seem farfetched, but wait, there's more.

Lanza's theory of biocentrism claims that life and the universe are interconnected and that life created the universe, not the other way around. He explains biocentrism with this analogy: The universe around us is only as we perceive it. We are told that the sky is blue when theoretically, our cells could be modified to cause the sky to appear green or red. Evidently, (Again, evidently) Lanza's experiments prove this and are generally becoming more accepted by the science community.

But it goes deeper.

Evidently, further experimentation has found that everything in the universe is made up of the same stuff. And I'm not talkijg about atoms either. The energy and matter is all consistent with itself in one way or another on the quantum level, implying that we are all from the same source. This is consistent with the Big Bang theory, the idea that everything is constantly expanding from one partical which was set into motion by some unknown external force. Quantum scientists agree that the chances of such an occurrence without an external influence are astronomically small if not impossible.

So there you go. I may not be the best person at explaining it but that's the condensed version as I understand it. If anyone's interested, I encourage you to check it out independently.

TL;DR Science proved the existence of God more or less.
Scientists are baffled and the religious community is all like "Told you so"
#294 to #264 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
Your "therefore, God" arguments are not actually convincing, and your TL;DR is misleading. Some guy supposes biocentrism, sure, that's nice. They're supposedly becoming more accepted by the scientific community, but that's an unsupported assertion, and even if it weren't, that doesn't make it true.
Universe is made of the same elementary bits. That's great. Do we know what caused it? No. Does that mean that God did it? No. Can we know? Probably not. The existence of the universe is incredibly strange and maybe unlikely, but we can't know that for sure, either, since we're bound to this universe. Maybe universes are incredibly common and maybe they're not. Jumping to conclusions like "some exterior intelligent force probably did it!" is unwarranted.
User avatar #309 to #294 - RADDDDs (02/03/2014) [-]
As I see it:
"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you." -Mt 7:7
Search for God (but not by physical means) and you shall find Him. (just be careful not to stumble with the enemy impersonating Him)
User avatar #296 to #294 - baditch (02/02/2014) [-]
Yea my explanation is pretty much **** . But damn, when I was reading it it seemed convincing, or at least interesting. That's why I encourage others to look more into it if they're interested.
User avatar #266 to #264 - baditch (02/02/2014) [-]
I just realized we are talking about this particular episode of The Simpsons, not "we" referring to people in general.

My bad.

#307 to #4 - RADDDDs (02/03/2014) [-]
AFAIK recent (not very known) scientific studies have agreed that there is some kind of "superior intelligence" which has handled the whole process of existence (or at least the big bang).
Also, same or similar (not well known) studies show that evolution is impossible without external "help", main reason:
1. mutation is usually "destructive"? and not helpful for the creature (therefore natural selection will kick it out)
2. (i'm unsure of this one) mutation is not hereditary? (or if it is, it's not beneficial) (I think the example for this was cutting the lab-rat's tail off, for 10 generations, but even so the offspring still had their tail)

This was an attempt in giving a different viewpoint (even though I'm not very into it). Don't ask about it, I stumbled upon that info (not only once).
Cheers.
Might not be important for you 1: I believe in God. 2: I'm not a christian, though I could be "classified" as one. 3: Real christians/believers are into relationship with God, not by religion and with rules 4: Those that come from God, are like Him or at least try to be (lack of love=not from Him)
#25 to #1 - mrturferpop ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
I don't know why this comment is thumbed down.
#26 to #25 - clownsrock (02/02/2014) [-]
who knows
#176 - yuukoku (02/02/2014) [-]
Comment Picture
#53 - kanatana (02/02/2014) [-]
**kanatana rolled a random image posted in comment #19813 at PARTY CONTAINMENT CHAMBER. PARTY OR DIE. YOU CANNOT LEAVE ** Whether or not God exists isn't important. What is important is how you treat your fellow human beings with the time you have on this world.

I honestly don't know why more people don't understand this.
User avatar #56 to #53 - vgmddg ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
This is exactly how I think about life. Whether you follow the stories of the religion you grew up with is not important. What's important to me is that you follow the general life lessons that come from religion. Love thy neighbor. Don't steal or kill people. Don't be a dick.
Whether or not you believe in a god, act like there's someone watching you anyway. It'll make you a better person.

That relevant roll though too.
User avatar #57 to #56 - kanatana (02/02/2014) [-]
That's a perfectly reasonable train of thought, my friend.

And yeah, that roll's getting capped. Won't get thumbs for it, but I'm saving it.
User avatar #100 to #53 - bosskiss (02/02/2014) [-]
ever browsed /r/atheism?
User avatar #101 to #100 - kanatana (02/02/2014) [-]
Nah. I don't go to any of the chans unless I'm looking for a specific torrent magnet.
#271 - xtiggerx (02/02/2014) [-]
>mfw religion is gone
#282 to #271 - guanyu (02/02/2014) [-]
You appear to be standing in a blazing inferno.
You appear to be standing in a blazing inferno.
User avatar #285 to #282 - Lintutu (02/02/2014) [-]
he is ok with that
User avatar #302 to #282 - majormayor (02/02/2014) [-]
Guess what happens next in the comic that picture came from.
User avatar #326 to #282 - xtiggerx (02/12/2014) [-]
And I'm ok with it
User avatar #24 - gatorade (02/02/2014) [-]
There's no way to prove he does not exist, and there is no way to prove that he does exist. It's all based on faith.
User avatar #35 to #24 - lastweek (02/02/2014) [-]
You're free to believe there's a god and I'm free to believe you that after I die I will go to a land made of cake, ruled by the over cake who created all cakes in his image. He then created man kind because the cakes needed a purpose.

Just saying, you're free to believe it as long as you understand how stupid it sounds
#129 to #35 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
Sorry we aren't that closed-minded here you might have to go to 9gag
User avatar #292 to #129 - lastweek (02/02/2014) [-]
How am I narrow minded, I'm just saying that from an objective point of view it sounds stupid.
User avatar #60 to #35 - epicpoke (02/02/2014) [-]
And I think I understand how stupid you sound.
#153 to #24 - verby ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
Eh, there are certain concepts that exist within quantum mechanics and digital logic that would suggest that in order for our universe to exist as we understand there would have to be some kind of creator being.
0
#173 to #24 - douevensax has deleted their comment [-]
#30 to #24 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
some atheist fedorafag didnt agree with you
#37 to #24 - someoneforamoment (02/02/2014) [-]
Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot.
Or he can, but does not want to.
Or he cannot, and does not want to.

If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent.
If he can, but does not want to, then he is wicked.
If he neither can, nor wants to, he is both powerless and wicked.

If he is Impotent, then is he truly a god?
If he is wicked, then is he worth worshipping?
#49 to #37 - ainise (02/02/2014) [-]
I'm going to open with, I'm an atheist. I believe in no god and follow no religion. Now, lemme explain why that's ******** .

Let's start with "What is Evil?" Is it intention or is it what ultimately happens? If I intend to kill you, via giving you a poison, but as you get rushed to the hospital they find out you had a tumor in your brain. Thanks to this poison, you found out about it in stage 1 and it was easily dispatched. Am I evil? I just saved your life. Without me, you would not have survived.

What if I give poison to someone who is, by whatever criteria you use, evil. Saving his life, unintentionally? Am I evil? I have saved an evil mans life.

Look at the inverse, what if I intentionally succeeded in killing an evil man. Am I evil? What about a good man? Do we, as people, even have the capability of understanding the distant implications of our actions, let alone someone elses?

Evil isn't straight forward, it doesn't exist on its own. Things that were frowned upon 100 years ago are embraced today. Things that were embraced 100 years ago are considered evil today.

This argument, at a fundamental level, only works in a vacuum. This is where "God's plan" comes in.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG0a9WFkgzU Animated film, but very relevant.
User avatar #45 to #37 - inuares (02/02/2014) [-]
Ah yes. My class just went over this argument. Basically, the most common answer that my classmates posed was that god has a purpose for everything that happens. Of course, when questioned why little timmy would have to be run over by a steam roller at the age of twelve, become paraplegic, and die at age 85, they couldn't quite say anything but "he moves in mysterious ways"
#84 to #45 - ainise (02/02/2014) [-]
I can think of a few possible rationalizations I can see a religious person using.

1) Lil timmy got hit at age 12 and became a paraplegic. He devoted the rest of his life to somehow bettering the world(IE: awareness for paraplegics or due to this, became a scholar and assisted everyone he could) or
2) Lil Timmy was the next mass murderer who got stopped.
or
3) Let's assume Lil Timmy is saved, but thanks to that many other people aren't as aware and cautious with their children. Lil Timmy is saved, but someone else ended up losing their life due to parents negligence that wouldn't have happened without timmy.


There are plenty of other options, as well. Religion, fundamentally, is based on leaps of faith. Not knowing, being able to prove and understanding is at the center of religion. If knowing, proof and understanding was truly important, they wouldn't be religious, or at least not in the way we see a majority of religious leaders.
User avatar #149 to #37 - Truth ONLINE (02/02/2014) [-]
You restated the same thing twice in your opener.

I was told god does not abolish evil because he does not want to appear to be challenged by it. Were god to abolish evil, he would (as I'm left to assume) fertilize another rebellion against him by his angels.

"If he wants to but cannot, he is impotent."
That is a similar conflict for any human who is self-aware and who sees evil.
"If he can but does not want to, then he is wicked."
You mean to propose that he is letting the evil play its role, while having the might and wisdom to abolish it so very easily? If so, then wicked is what one may hold as an opinion of god.
"If he neither can, nor wants to, he is both powerless and wicked.
Again, someone may hold that opinion when considering the conditions which you provided.

"If he is impotent, then is he truly a god?"
It depends on what you will accept as god. If god is impotent in the ways which you describe, yet no other being is greater than 'god' in the ways that mark greatness, then you may want to ask yourself: is he still the {supreme ruler / creator} of the universe? You have to ask yourself about your idea of god, this is what I suggest.

"If he is wicked, then is he worth worshipping?"
I suggest again that you ask yourself if you want to worship the image of god which you find in your mind. Maybe you fear him and want to appease him, remain loyal to him, or maybe you think something else. You could have any idea which promotes the worship of the believed god, just as you could have an idea that declines the same given worship.
#41 to #24 - zeedeveel (02/02/2014) [-]
But since you have the ridiculous and unfounded allegations, you have the burden of proof, not I.
#44 to #41 - flyinarrow (02/02/2014) [-]
well said
#58 to #24 - kegget (02/02/2014) [-]
Could say the same for unicorns
Could say the same for unicorns
User avatar #66 to #58 - gatorade (02/02/2014) [-]
Yes, you're right.
User avatar #122 to #66 - huntergriff (02/02/2014) [-]
I wish to drink you, what flavor may you be, scoundrel?
User avatar #181 to #122 - gatorade (02/02/2014) [-]
I'm all flavors, but none of them. I'm every mix yet also alone.
User avatar #183 to #181 - huntergriff (02/02/2014) [-]
...So you're that ****** glacier ice flavor.
User avatar #189 to #183 - gatorade (02/02/2014) [-]
I'm whatever you want me to be baby...
User avatar #193 to #189 - huntergriff (02/02/2014) [-]
Orange. I want you to be orange gatorade.
User avatar #197 to #193 - gatorade (02/02/2014) [-]
Your wish is my command!
User avatar #201 to #197 - huntergriff (02/02/2014) [-]
**huntergriff drinks the orange gatorade**
0
#198 to #197 - huntergriff has deleted their comment [-]
+2
#164 to #24 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #293 to #164 - lastweek (02/02/2014) [-]
He's relevant if he exists but there might as well be a god that tortures people for believing in religious things.
User avatar #184 to #164 - gatorade (02/02/2014) [-]
Yeah, tell a hard core Christian that. What may not be evidence to you may be evidence to them. If they have faith that the evidence is proof then his influence is ultimate.
+1
#186 to #184 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #188 to #186 - gatorade (02/02/2014) [-]
It's irrelevant to you as you don't see the Bible, or Qur'an as proof. Yet it is very relevant to an extremist. It's extremely relevant to a religious person who takes the word as full truth and proof.

Saying it does not have an influence seems silly since it's the most influential thing that has ever happened to mankind.
+1
#190 to #188 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
0
#192 to #188 - testaburger has deleted their comment [-]
#299 - dujuhuh (02/02/2014) [-]
Mfw Flanders was religious.
Seriously. He's a ******* stupid christian and I hated him. I loved every single episode where he died or got hurt.
#301 to #299 - spceinvdr (02/02/2014) [-]
trying too hard/10
User avatar #314 to #301 - dujuhuh (02/03/2014) [-]
Actually, I rarely get on anymore.
#251 - John Cena (02/02/2014) [-]
The writers for the Simpsons are actually made up of people with Math Majors, so that sheet you see in Homer's hand is most likely legitimate math. (whether it's actual proof that God/and or gods don't exist, I can't say).
[ 321 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)