Be a Man. . When we find out that your great great grandad helped build the titania!! ' ssh and 27 tethers like this. didn' t do a very good job did he BE A MAN
x
Click to expand

Comments(211):

sonicwind has disabled anonymous comments.
[ 211 comments ]
#60 - shmedly (06/05/2013) [-]
i read this as batman press enter....
i read this as batman press enter....
User avatar #162 to #60 - shaneac (06/06/2013) [-]
wtf IS he doing?
User avatar #175 to #162 - cocoman (06/06/2013) [-]
Fixin' the mustard stain ofcourse
#110 to #60 - flyinjoo (06/05/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #12 - ravinosso (06/05/2013) [-]
"Be a man
Press enter"

profile pic shows 2 girls...
#152 to #12 - slashendrix (06/06/2013) [-]
His bitches.
User avatar #14 to #12 - lupislord (06/05/2013) [-]
1 man is opposite of 1 girl
girl = man * (-1)
girl^2 = (-man) * (-man)
(1)^2 = (-1)^2
conclusion: 2 girls are 2 men
User avatar #21 to #14 - danniegurl (06/05/2013) [-]
i know what your saying, but the final product of your math is faulty
woman= -man
2 women, therefore
woman x woman= -man x -man
woman^2= -man^2
-man^2= +man
2 women=1 man
User avatar #22 to #21 - lupislord (06/05/2013) [-]
2 women + 1 man = 3 people
half life three confirmed

you were right, thanks
#26 to #22 - yearofthemonkey (06/05/2013) [-]
Since you know, you must die.
User avatar #23 to #21 - danniegurl (06/05/2013) [-]
Oh my god, I have never made this mistake in my life.
You're*

I am ashamed of myself.
User avatar #118 to #12 - themurrey (06/05/2013) [-]
guess he really is a "pussy"
#13 to #12 - Pred (06/05/2013) [-]
well.. she'll be really manly girl
#135 - imonaboatman (06/06/2013) [-]
When people start a sentence with "when", it really pisses me the 			****		 off. When will they ever learn?
When people start a sentence with "when", it really pisses me the **** off. When will they ever learn?
User avatar #136 to #135 - zyconx (06/06/2013) [-]
I cant tell if you are making the second sentence a joke...
#142 to #136 - imonaboatman (06/06/2013) [-]
I am.
I am.
User avatar #141 to #136 - yutakenusername (06/06/2013) [-]
If you take close notice, zyconx, the first sentence also starts with "when".
#145 to #141 - godofthunder (06/06/2013) [-]
dude thats the joke
dude thats the joke
User avatar #148 to #145 - yutakenusername (06/06/2013) [-]
I did not get the joke.
User avatar #149 to #148 - godofthunder (06/06/2013) [-]
lol well he meant he hates when people use the word "when" at the beginning of sentences and he started the second one with the word "when" hopefully this helps man
User avatar #150 to #149 - yutakenusername (06/06/2013) [-]
I got his joke, but I didn't get zyconx's joke.
User avatar #171 to #149 - cormy (06/06/2013) [-]
And then Yutaken indicated that the first sentence also started with when.
It wasn't just the second one despite the fact that's the only one Zyconx noticed.
User avatar #184 to #145 - desiduratum (06/06/2013) [-]
Actually, at first, I didn't notice the first "when", only the second.
User avatar #163 to #135 - shaneac (06/06/2013) [-]
When will they learn? When pigs fly.
User avatar #192 - legionofbronies (06/06/2013) [-]
Be A Man
Press Enter with the swiftness of a coursing river
Press Enter with the force of a great typhoon
Press Enter with strength of a raging fire
Press Enter as mysteriously as the dark side of the moon.
User avatar #199 to #192 - lolzponies (06/06/2013) [-]
insert .gif "clapping" here
#86 - tehpwnz (06/05/2013) [-]
I ******* hate when people start a post with when. That's not how you write a ******* sentence.
#156 to #86 - clumzysurgeon ONLINE (06/06/2013) [-]
When does that ever happen, c'mon man
User avatar #131 to #86 - shadowhorn (06/06/2013) [-]
When the elephant farted, the people died.

Is that not grammatically correct?
User avatar #99 to #86 - subaqueousreach (06/05/2013) [-]
'When' is a perfectly acceptable word to start a sentence with. I don't see why you're so flustered.
User avatar #146 to #99 - tehpwnz (06/06/2013) [-]
i meant when they leave it as a subordninate clause.
User avatar #147 to #146 - tehpwnz (06/06/2013) [-]
subordinate*
User avatar #91 to #86 - dedaluminus (06/05/2013) [-]
When I see that, it just drives me crazy.
User avatar #94 to #91 - tehpwnz (06/05/2013) [-]
I see what you did there, and what I forgot to take into account. But you know what I meant.
#43 - lolfire (06/05/2013) [-]
IT SAILED OUT OF BELFAST FINE.
IT WAS WHEN THE BLOODY ENGLISH GOT IT THAT IT SANK.
0
#89 to #43 - elitechristovsky **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #90 to #89 - lolfire (06/05/2013) [-]
Hey, we weren't the ones who thought it was a great idea to sail it into a ******* iceberg.
#121 to #43 - nahingerii ONLINE (06/06/2013) [-]
It was fine when it left harland and wolff, i swear
User avatar #15 - internetrage (06/05/2013) [-]
i agree, these arent funny when they havent actually posted it
User avatar #173 - iamkagji ONLINE (06/06/2013) [-]
Except no, it's not the engineer's fault. Every machine can break, and no hull is impenetrable. Besides, it's not like he crashed the damn thing.
#187 to #173 - thefatmenace (06/06/2013) [-]
I agree with you. The problem also went with the Titanic's overall design (considering it lacked the necessary supply of life rafts) and the fact nobody saw the ice berg coming. The Titanic worked perfectly in the engineering sense.
User avatar #191 to #187 - iamkagji ONLINE (06/06/2013) [-]
Technically the lack of life rafts wasn't a design flaw, they just weren't equipped with the proper amount, what with the whole "unsinkable" thing.
#195 to #191 - thefatmenace (06/06/2013) [-]
I apologize. I would believe that the number of life rafts stored onto the ship be in best compared to a design flaw rather then an engineering flaw.
User avatar #197 to #195 - iamkagji ONLINE (06/06/2013) [-]
Understandable. They had the space for the right amount, just not the actual rafts.
#48 - ishotthedeputy (06/05/2013) [-]
The profile pic also shows 2 girls
#206 - Seority (06/06/2013) [-]
But, I have to be a man!
#159 - annaisocoolike (06/06/2013) [-]
idk if its just me, but i always found these to be a bit insensitive...
#181 to #159 - AlanbalMIT (06/06/2013) [-]
I found that a little too much 			*******		 fun
I found that a little too much ******* fun
User avatar #10 - blasthardcheese (06/05/2013) [-]
If you're from Northern Ireland, one of your relatives probably help build the titanic, particularly if you're of protestant descent.
#168 - zynonick (06/06/2013) [-]
Bet he didn't do it.
Bet he didn't do it.
User avatar #169 to #168 - nge (06/06/2013) [-]
2lift
User avatar #228 to #169 - zynonick (06/21/2013) [-]
CLGLiftLift
#154 - digitalpixel (06/06/2013) [-]
Bee-man Presenter
User avatar #1 - Razorstyx (06/05/2013) [-]
There was nothing wrong with the Titanic.

Just saying..
User avatar #5 to #1 - europe (06/05/2013) [-]
Well, not entirely true but it should've managed just fine.
#2 to #1 - pureevil ONLINE (06/05/2013) [-]
#20 to #1 - anon (06/05/2013) [-]
I heard there was a hole in hull
#4 to #1 - Drumachine (06/05/2013) [-]
it was built with a rudder too small for a ship of its size
watertight compartments had no coverings
wrought iron rivets used in the hull had weak spots due to substandard material
User avatar #8 to #4 - blademontane (06/05/2013) [-]
Not to mention the fact that they were so arrogant in the belief that it was unsinkable, they didn't even put half of the lifeboats needed on the boat to get everyone off if it sank.
User avatar #151 to #8 - ihaveakeyboard (06/06/2013) [-]
also, they ran straight through an area they knew had icebergs in the dead of night at full speed because they were so confidant that it was unsinkable
User avatar #24 to #8 - wastelandgunner (06/05/2013) [-]
Actually, they had plenty of lifeboats. It was a common mentality at the time that men had to die for their families. The rich were considered more important as well, so men and the poor had to die while some greedy bastards launched half-full lifeboats into the sea. They could have saved everyone.
#123 to #24 - nightstar (06/06/2013) [-]
Men are expected to die as are the poor, but they could have saved everyone?

I don't follow your math.
User avatar #124 to #123 - wastelandgunner (06/06/2013) [-]
They launched half-full life boats, which could have been filled to save everyone.
#126 to #124 - nightstar (06/06/2013) [-]
33 - the percentage of the ships total passengers and crew that the lifeboats could accommodate.

472 - the number of lifeboat spaces that went unused.

More than 472 people died.
User avatar #130 to #126 - wastelandgunner (06/06/2013) [-]
My bad, let me rephrase this.

The titanic had enough spots in all the lifeboats to accomodate 1178 passengers, almost half of all passengers. Only about 700 survived, indicating that not all were full.

I guess my point is that they could have saved much more, especially if the California (might be the name), a ship that was 50 miles away and saw the emergency flares (they thought the flares were fireworks), had been smart enough to realize something was wrong. Almost all passengers might have been able to be saved if it had arrived.
User avatar #143 to #8 - RiflemanFunny (06/06/2013) [-]
IT was coined unsinkable AFTER it sank.
User avatar #204 to #143 - boeingninja (06/06/2013) [-]
False. A news paper article referred to it as unsinkable whilst being laid in the drydock.
User avatar #213 to #204 - RiflemanFunny (06/06/2013) [-]
Haha dumb british. Ah well, I accept I was wrong
#166 to #4 - davedavesonite (06/06/2013) [-]
It actually was structurally sound, if it had hit the iceberg head-on it would have survived the impact, but the rookie replacement capitan tried to go around, creating a massive gash in the many layers of hulls and sinking the ship
User avatar #157 to #4 - jokersaysamuseme ONLINE (06/06/2013) [-]
Not to mention not enough life boats
#139 to #4 - Xolare (06/06/2013) [-]
It also hit a ******* iceberg.
#120 to #4 - asadffdsa (06/05/2013) [-]
Then wouldn't that be the engineers fault not the workers?
User avatar #67 to #4 - therealsuperguy (06/05/2013) [-]
I miss read that as 'the rubber was too small for a ship that size'

but anyway, there was warning that the captain ignored about the iceberg, I mean I know it was suppose to be unsinkable, but they didn't say it was unstoppable, I mean it's not like it was gonna bust right through
User avatar #218 to #67 - emrakul (06/06/2013) [-]
Actually, the ship would not have sunk if they had just decided to bust right through it. It would have taken hull damage, yes, but probably only the front compartment would have filled. The reason it sank was that they tried to get out of the way at the last instant and scraped the entire length of the ship against the iceberg.
User avatar #221 to #218 - therealsuperguy (06/06/2013) [-]
well yeah, he had warnings and could have moved long before, and what I was saying about busting through it is icebergs aren't just a block of ice the size of a house, it would have probably scrapped it the same way but across the bottom from the huge ice underneath. plus if it didn't shatter the iceberg, it would have stopped the ship because all it is, is a big metal tube full of air and people with little motors moving it, it would have probably stopped it right there in its path
User avatar #222 to #221 - emrakul (06/06/2013) [-]
Fair enough. I should have qualified that with "probably".
User avatar #138 to #4 - propanex (06/06/2013) [-]
This says your wrong.

youtu.be/O9fL7XiFeAA?t=3m47s
#220 to #138 - anon (06/06/2013) [-]
"The uploader hasn't made this video available for your country".

...
User avatar #227 to #220 - mrshrapnel ONLINE (06/06/2013) [-]
Kim says no to youtube mate
User avatar #207 to #4 - vonboon (06/06/2013) [-]
he helped build it, not design it
User avatar #225 to #207 - sarhon (06/06/2013) [-]
He's responding to whether or not the titanic had anything wrong with it.

Not to the post.
#7 to #4 - Monkeysuit **User deleted account** (06/05/2013) [-]
As far as I understand it you are correct. The iron rivets used in the titanic had a horrible ductile to brittle ratio and became far too rigid in the icy waters it needed to traverse and, on impact, caused shattering instead of bending/plastic yielding. additionally (though im not 100% sure about this part) the hull itself suffered from this same issue to some degree.
As far as I understand it you are correct. The iron rivets used in the titanic had a horrible ductile to brittle ratio and became far too rigid in the icy waters it needed to traverse and, on impact, caused shattering instead of bending/plastic yielding. additionally (though im not 100% sure about this part) the hull itself suffered from this same issue to some degree.
User avatar #210 to #7 - aaliass (06/06/2013) [-]
As i understand it part of the problem with the rivets was that they incorporated glass, which could have strengthened the rivets had it been properly spread, but flaws in the manufacturing lead to clumping, which in turn dramatically weakened the rivets. I also vaguely remember reading about some group making replica rivets with the same technique and discovering the heads sheared right off.
User avatar #119 to #7 - xsnowshark (06/05/2013) [-]
+1 For material science knowledge.

And there was a ductile to brittle transition mainly in the hull due to the moderate carbon content.
User avatar #158 to #4 - lukasv (06/06/2013) [-]
So it was the architect's fault, not the builders'?
0
#117 to #4 - xsnowshark has deleted their comment [-]
#107 to #4 - atlasproud (06/05/2013) [-]
But he was just following the blue-print

The ******** who made the idea of it is to blame...
User avatar #18 to #4 - datbosspimp (06/05/2013) [-]
also whoever the hell thought taking the majority of the life boats off the ship was a good idea should not have been part of the planning department..
#164 - guinessguy (06/06/2013) [-]
I was really hoping for some Mulan material.
#180 - creosote (06/06/2013) [-]
MFW I almost pressed "Enter"
#211 to #208 - creosote (06/06/2013) [-]
Yeah. I read his status but I didn't notice the yet to be entered comment, and so I was completely confused by it. My brain was being weird.
Yeah. I read his status but I didn't notice the yet to be entered comment, and so I was completely confused by it. My brain was being weird.
User avatar #188 to #180 - sonicwind (06/06/2013) [-]
^this guy
#114 - neoexdeath (06/05/2013) [-]
What a coincidence, mine did too, and the Hindenberg, and...he might of worked in Halifax briefly...
What a coincidence, mine did too, and the Hindenberg, and...he might of worked in Halifax briefly...
#31 - kiermatv (06/05/2013) [-]
to those who cant see it: Fredrick Fleet- Survivor
Titanic Crew, lookout
#125 to #31 - nightstar (06/06/2013) [-]
He did see it. Wasn't that all his job entailed?
#200 - wafflegrunt ONLINE (06/06/2013) [-]
Well he didn't do a very good job did he   
   
All right, can I have a mustache now?
Well he didn't do a very good job did he

All right, can I have a mustache now?
[ 211 comments ]
 Friends (0)