Upload
Login or register

scio

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 24
Date Signed Up:6/07/2011
Last Login:5/26/2016
Location:Denmark
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#21228
Highest Content Rank:#5383
Highest Comment Rank:#3898
Content Thumbs: 1497 total,  1599 ,  102
Comment Thumbs: 2467 total,  2887 ,  420
Content Level Progress: 96% (96/100)
Level 114 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 115 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 90% (90/100)
Level 221 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 222 Comments: Mind Blower
Subscribers:0
Content Views:38203
Times Content Favorited:30 times
Total Comments Made:376
FJ Points:3758

latest user's comments

#65 - It's funny. You're getting thumbed down from people for having…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/27/2013 on religion, bitches. +2
User avatar
#69 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
Haha, thanks for the observation. I actually don't mind it since I got enough thumbs on an earlier comment from today to make up for this and it merely supports my position on the Funnyjunk community when it comes to logical reasoning and the issue of religion vs. evolution. It was nice talking with you as well.
#42 - I think the real problem is that science tries to explain HOW…  [+] (4 new replies) 02/27/2013 on religion, bitches. +2
User avatar
#43 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I agree. I think it's a problem of extremes, with neither side bothering to look at the logical motivations for their viewpoint, and devoting their faith to something instead of thinking about the shortcomings of both.
User avatar
#65 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
It's funny. You're getting thumbed down from people for having a different viewpoint and arguing from your point of view. Yet said people can't see why they get bashed for being atheists who have different viewpoints.

The hypocrisy is astonishing. Well, nice debating to you. I will find you in the sea of red thumbs!
User avatar
#69 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
Haha, thanks for the observation. I actually don't mind it since I got enough thumbs on an earlier comment from today to make up for this and it merely supports my position on the Funnyjunk community when it comes to logical reasoning and the issue of religion vs. evolution. It was nice talking with you as well.
#44 - anon (02/27/2013) [-]
horribad trull, og klil yrslf!
#38 - Reminds me of one time I was in USA and saw a guy with the T-s…  [+] (6 new replies) 02/27/2013 on religion, bitches. +3
User avatar
#41 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
They were traditionally scorned, but less so in modern popular culture (despite the fact that the majority of Americans believe in God, evolution and by extension atheism, has rapidly become more socially acceptable). The problem is that we aren't handling that with much grace, humility, of profundity.
User avatar
#42 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
I think the real problem is that science tries to explain HOW we got here, whereas religion tries to explain (or atleast give suggestions to) WHY we are here.

When people uses science to explain why, or religion to how, we got here people tend to disagree on every aspect. When people learn stuff like "the earth was founded 6000 years ago" really means it was created a really, really long time ago and stop taking the bible (if we're taking christianity for example) litteraly people will start get along.
User avatar
#43 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I agree. I think it's a problem of extremes, with neither side bothering to look at the logical motivations for their viewpoint, and devoting their faith to something instead of thinking about the shortcomings of both.
User avatar
#65 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
It's funny. You're getting thumbed down from people for having a different viewpoint and arguing from your point of view. Yet said people can't see why they get bashed for being atheists who have different viewpoints.

The hypocrisy is astonishing. Well, nice debating to you. I will find you in the sea of red thumbs!
User avatar
#69 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
Haha, thanks for the observation. I actually don't mind it since I got enough thumbs on an earlier comment from today to make up for this and it merely supports my position on the Funnyjunk community when it comes to logical reasoning and the issue of religion vs. evolution. It was nice talking with you as well.
#44 - anon (02/27/2013) [-]
horribad trull, og klil yrslf!
#34 - But I mean in this thought experience - lets consider there is…  [+] (8 new replies) 02/27/2013 on religion, bitches. +4
User avatar
#37 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I don't think that the internet would apply to this, since the entirety of the world is inside of the classroom, so it be more like somebody who merely rejects the books. Sure, atheists are as varied as any other group, but on Funnyjunk most atheists are like the whiny kid in the hoddie who thinks he's cool just because he doesn't read the textbooks. That's why I used my example instead. If the metaphor had been more expansive, or the target demographic more diverse, then maybe I could see your internet example as being more valid, but given the circumstances...I'm gonna stick by my original statement.
User avatar
#38 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
Reminds me of one time I was in USA and saw a guy with the T-shirt that said "I'm an atheist - debate me" and all I could think of was "If this guy's ego had mass, we'd all be looking at a black hole."

But meh, that's what social supression does to you (in america atleast). So I guess the attitude is inevitable when atheists are being social outcasts by beleiving what they think is right. (Although I must admit I don't really know that much about American history, so if I'm wrong on my assumptions please correct me.)
User avatar
#41 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
They were traditionally scorned, but less so in modern popular culture (despite the fact that the majority of Americans believe in God, evolution and by extension atheism, has rapidly become more socially acceptable). The problem is that we aren't handling that with much grace, humility, of profundity.
User avatar
#42 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
I think the real problem is that science tries to explain HOW we got here, whereas religion tries to explain (or atleast give suggestions to) WHY we are here.

When people uses science to explain why, or religion to how, we got here people tend to disagree on every aspect. When people learn stuff like "the earth was founded 6000 years ago" really means it was created a really, really long time ago and stop taking the bible (if we're taking christianity for example) litteraly people will start get along.
User avatar
#43 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I agree. I think it's a problem of extremes, with neither side bothering to look at the logical motivations for their viewpoint, and devoting their faith to something instead of thinking about the shortcomings of both.
User avatar
#65 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
It's funny. You're getting thumbed down from people for having a different viewpoint and arguing from your point of view. Yet said people can't see why they get bashed for being atheists who have different viewpoints.

The hypocrisy is astonishing. Well, nice debating to you. I will find you in the sea of red thumbs!
User avatar
#69 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
Haha, thanks for the observation. I actually don't mind it since I got enough thumbs on an earlier comment from today to make up for this and it merely supports my position on the Funnyjunk community when it comes to logical reasoning and the issue of religion vs. evolution. It was nice talking with you as well.
#44 - anon (02/27/2013) [-]
horribad trull, og klil yrslf!
#29 - True. But while a 'proper education' is best for giving you th…  [+] (10 new replies) 02/27/2013 on religion, bitches. +2
User avatar
#31 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
True. You do have a point on alternative education at the college or maybe even high school level. But in the context of this post, I'm not sure if it applies to the target community of Funnyjunk.
User avatar
#34 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
But I mean in this thought experience - lets consider there is no outer sources (ie. no internet, only the books) - the atheists would be the one who disregarded the books to look around the world and see if they could figure everything out on there own. And sure, it would take a lot of more time than reading the books, but the books may be wrong whereas their theories have been tested and proven by themselves.

(a little side-track, just trying to answar your first question without the possibility of the internet).

But idk - really i couldn't care less if you beleive in god, Allah, or the flying spaghetti monster. As long as you don't shut yourself away from information we as a society gather through times. I mean, that's just retarded really.
User avatar
#37 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I don't think that the internet would apply to this, since the entirety of the world is inside of the classroom, so it be more like somebody who merely rejects the books. Sure, atheists are as varied as any other group, but on Funnyjunk most atheists are like the whiny kid in the hoddie who thinks he's cool just because he doesn't read the textbooks. That's why I used my example instead. If the metaphor had been more expansive, or the target demographic more diverse, then maybe I could see your internet example as being more valid, but given the circumstances...I'm gonna stick by my original statement.
User avatar
#38 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
Reminds me of one time I was in USA and saw a guy with the T-shirt that said "I'm an atheist - debate me" and all I could think of was "If this guy's ego had mass, we'd all be looking at a black hole."

But meh, that's what social supression does to you (in america atleast). So I guess the attitude is inevitable when atheists are being social outcasts by beleiving what they think is right. (Although I must admit I don't really know that much about American history, so if I'm wrong on my assumptions please correct me.)
User avatar
#41 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
They were traditionally scorned, but less so in modern popular culture (despite the fact that the majority of Americans believe in God, evolution and by extension atheism, has rapidly become more socially acceptable). The problem is that we aren't handling that with much grace, humility, of profundity.
User avatar
#42 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
I think the real problem is that science tries to explain HOW we got here, whereas religion tries to explain (or atleast give suggestions to) WHY we are here.

When people uses science to explain why, or religion to how, we got here people tend to disagree on every aspect. When people learn stuff like "the earth was founded 6000 years ago" really means it was created a really, really long time ago and stop taking the bible (if we're taking christianity for example) litteraly people will start get along.
User avatar
#43 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I agree. I think it's a problem of extremes, with neither side bothering to look at the logical motivations for their viewpoint, and devoting their faith to something instead of thinking about the shortcomings of both.
User avatar
#65 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
It's funny. You're getting thumbed down from people for having a different viewpoint and arguing from your point of view. Yet said people can't see why they get bashed for being atheists who have different viewpoints.

The hypocrisy is astonishing. Well, nice debating to you. I will find you in the sea of red thumbs!
User avatar
#69 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
Haha, thanks for the observation. I actually don't mind it since I got enough thumbs on an earlier comment from today to make up for this and it merely supports my position on the Funnyjunk community when it comes to logical reasoning and the issue of religion vs. evolution. It was nice talking with you as well.
#44 - anon (02/27/2013) [-]
horribad trull, og klil yrslf!
#25 - You can learn virtually everything through google - and by tha…  [+] (12 new replies) 02/27/2013 on religion, bitches. +6
User avatar
#27 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
It seems like a lot of the internet is dominated by anti-theists calling themselves atheists, who just make sarcastic jokes about religion (specifically Christianity) and don't really know much about either viewpoint. While you may be able to learn a lot on Google, it'd be very time consuming and difficult to acquire a cohesive education through random internet searches and forums instead of just a large amount of knowledge.
User avatar
#29 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
True. But while a 'proper education' is best for giving you the basic understanding, google can be really helpful if you want to succeed in one specific subject.

This "classroom" could be elementary school as well as college (where you would have a basic understanding and the know-how to educate yourself online).
User avatar
#31 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
True. You do have a point on alternative education at the college or maybe even high school level. But in the context of this post, I'm not sure if it applies to the target community of Funnyjunk.
User avatar
#34 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
But I mean in this thought experience - lets consider there is no outer sources (ie. no internet, only the books) - the atheists would be the one who disregarded the books to look around the world and see if they could figure everything out on there own. And sure, it would take a lot of more time than reading the books, but the books may be wrong whereas their theories have been tested and proven by themselves.

(a little side-track, just trying to answar your first question without the possibility of the internet).

But idk - really i couldn't care less if you beleive in god, Allah, or the flying spaghetti monster. As long as you don't shut yourself away from information we as a society gather through times. I mean, that's just retarded really.
User avatar
#37 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I don't think that the internet would apply to this, since the entirety of the world is inside of the classroom, so it be more like somebody who merely rejects the books. Sure, atheists are as varied as any other group, but on Funnyjunk most atheists are like the whiny kid in the hoddie who thinks he's cool just because he doesn't read the textbooks. That's why I used my example instead. If the metaphor had been more expansive, or the target demographic more diverse, then maybe I could see your internet example as being more valid, but given the circumstances...I'm gonna stick by my original statement.
User avatar
#38 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
Reminds me of one time I was in USA and saw a guy with the T-shirt that said "I'm an atheist - debate me" and all I could think of was "If this guy's ego had mass, we'd all be looking at a black hole."

But meh, that's what social supression does to you (in america atleast). So I guess the attitude is inevitable when atheists are being social outcasts by beleiving what they think is right. (Although I must admit I don't really know that much about American history, so if I'm wrong on my assumptions please correct me.)
User avatar
#41 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
They were traditionally scorned, but less so in modern popular culture (despite the fact that the majority of Americans believe in God, evolution and by extension atheism, has rapidly become more socially acceptable). The problem is that we aren't handling that with much grace, humility, of profundity.
User avatar
#42 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
I think the real problem is that science tries to explain HOW we got here, whereas religion tries to explain (or atleast give suggestions to) WHY we are here.

When people uses science to explain why, or religion to how, we got here people tend to disagree on every aspect. When people learn stuff like "the earth was founded 6000 years ago" really means it was created a really, really long time ago and stop taking the bible (if we're taking christianity for example) litteraly people will start get along.
User avatar
#43 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I agree. I think it's a problem of extremes, with neither side bothering to look at the logical motivations for their viewpoint, and devoting their faith to something instead of thinking about the shortcomings of both.
User avatar
#65 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
It's funny. You're getting thumbed down from people for having a different viewpoint and arguing from your point of view. Yet said people can't see why they get bashed for being atheists who have different viewpoints.

The hypocrisy is astonishing. Well, nice debating to you. I will find you in the sea of red thumbs!
User avatar
#69 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
Haha, thanks for the observation. I actually don't mind it since I got enough thumbs on an earlier comment from today to make up for this and it merely supports my position on the Funnyjunk community when it comes to logical reasoning and the issue of religion vs. evolution. It was nice talking with you as well.
#44 - anon (02/27/2013) [-]
horribad trull, og klil yrslf!
#21 - Atheists are the one that says "This is stupid. We dont e…  [+] (15 new replies) 02/27/2013 on religion, bitches. +9
User avatar
#23 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
Because Google is a sufficient source for an education -_-

I may disagree with a lot of the things traditional christianity promotes (or christianity in general) but being an ass about it and using ad hoc logical fallacies to support an argument instead of laying out evidence and making rational arguments is just...stupid.
#40 - anon (02/27/2013) [-]
Well let's look... who was an ass here.. (hint: it was the guy in the post that started this commentthread)
User avatar
#25 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
You can learn virtually everything through google - and by that, yes, I would mean that is a sufficient source for education.

But yea, I never really got the "Atheists are such rebels"-attitude that atheists have. I'm from a secular society (living in Denmark) and here it's just normal that wether people are atheist or theist nobody really gives two shits.
User avatar
#27 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
It seems like a lot of the internet is dominated by anti-theists calling themselves atheists, who just make sarcastic jokes about religion (specifically Christianity) and don't really know much about either viewpoint. While you may be able to learn a lot on Google, it'd be very time consuming and difficult to acquire a cohesive education through random internet searches and forums instead of just a large amount of knowledge.
User avatar
#29 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
True. But while a 'proper education' is best for giving you the basic understanding, google can be really helpful if you want to succeed in one specific subject.

This "classroom" could be elementary school as well as college (where you would have a basic understanding and the know-how to educate yourself online).
User avatar
#31 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
True. You do have a point on alternative education at the college or maybe even high school level. But in the context of this post, I'm not sure if it applies to the target community of Funnyjunk.
User avatar
#34 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
But I mean in this thought experience - lets consider there is no outer sources (ie. no internet, only the books) - the atheists would be the one who disregarded the books to look around the world and see if they could figure everything out on there own. And sure, it would take a lot of more time than reading the books, but the books may be wrong whereas their theories have been tested and proven by themselves.

(a little side-track, just trying to answar your first question without the possibility of the internet).

But idk - really i couldn't care less if you beleive in god, Allah, or the flying spaghetti monster. As long as you don't shut yourself away from information we as a society gather through times. I mean, that's just retarded really.
User avatar
#37 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I don't think that the internet would apply to this, since the entirety of the world is inside of the classroom, so it be more like somebody who merely rejects the books. Sure, atheists are as varied as any other group, but on Funnyjunk most atheists are like the whiny kid in the hoddie who thinks he's cool just because he doesn't read the textbooks. That's why I used my example instead. If the metaphor had been more expansive, or the target demographic more diverse, then maybe I could see your internet example as being more valid, but given the circumstances...I'm gonna stick by my original statement.
User avatar
#38 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
Reminds me of one time I was in USA and saw a guy with the T-shirt that said "I'm an atheist - debate me" and all I could think of was "If this guy's ego had mass, we'd all be looking at a black hole."

But meh, that's what social supression does to you (in america atleast). So I guess the attitude is inevitable when atheists are being social outcasts by beleiving what they think is right. (Although I must admit I don't really know that much about American history, so if I'm wrong on my assumptions please correct me.)
User avatar
#41 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
They were traditionally scorned, but less so in modern popular culture (despite the fact that the majority of Americans believe in God, evolution and by extension atheism, has rapidly become more socially acceptable). The problem is that we aren't handling that with much grace, humility, of profundity.
User avatar
#42 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
I think the real problem is that science tries to explain HOW we got here, whereas religion tries to explain (or atleast give suggestions to) WHY we are here.

When people uses science to explain why, or religion to how, we got here people tend to disagree on every aspect. When people learn stuff like "the earth was founded 6000 years ago" really means it was created a really, really long time ago and stop taking the bible (if we're taking christianity for example) litteraly people will start get along.
User avatar
#43 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
I agree. I think it's a problem of extremes, with neither side bothering to look at the logical motivations for their viewpoint, and devoting their faith to something instead of thinking about the shortcomings of both.
User avatar
#65 - scio (02/27/2013) [-]
It's funny. You're getting thumbed down from people for having a different viewpoint and arguing from your point of view. Yet said people can't see why they get bashed for being atheists who have different viewpoints.

The hypocrisy is astonishing. Well, nice debating to you. I will find you in the sea of red thumbs!
User avatar
#69 - arrisarrad (02/27/2013) [-]
Haha, thanks for the observation. I actually don't mind it since I got enough thumbs on an earlier comment from today to make up for this and it merely supports my position on the Funnyjunk community when it comes to logical reasoning and the issue of religion vs. evolution. It was nice talking with you as well.
#44 - anon (02/27/2013) [-]
horribad trull, og klil yrslf!
#19 - On another note (sorry for my ranting) the Norse believed that…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/23/2013 on atheist bitchslap 0
User avatar
#20 - Vandeekree (02/23/2013) [-]
Evidence has little to do wit whether a fact is indeed a fact or not. evidence is for someone who doesn't know. We do not know if there are Bigfoot living in the wild, but we do have evidence of them. People saying they saw them is evidence, blurry photos are evidence, and the fact that there are primates of that size that once lived is all evidence for Bigfoot. Does that mean there is a Bigfoot? No.
So there is evidence for God in the bible sense people claim to have been contacted and even the modern day claims of divine encounters can be offered as evidence. Once you accept it then it turns to proof because the evidence was pushing enough in one direction to make you take it as fact. This still doesn't necessarily make it absolute truth, only an accepted truth.
There is evidence, there is even proof, but it's up to you to choose what you believe about his world. So perhaps you do make up something about a planet 500 light years away, you have no proof, but the fact you said it is evidence in an argument for it.
To summarize, there is evidence for religions and faith is based on that evidence, just as you take it on faith that the things a scientist is says, things you've neither experienced nor fully understand, are true.
#18 - Wether or not it can be disproven (as of now) doesn't come int…  [+] (2 new replies) 02/23/2013 on atheist bitchslap 0
User avatar
#19 - scio (02/23/2013) [-]
On another note (sorry for my ranting) the Norse believed that the god Thor, with his hammer, caused thunder. The Arse-belief was a faith and religion. It didn't stop us from discovering how lightning was made, though.

QED
User avatar
#20 - Vandeekree (02/23/2013) [-]
Evidence has little to do wit whether a fact is indeed a fact or not. evidence is for someone who doesn't know. We do not know if there are Bigfoot living in the wild, but we do have evidence of them. People saying they saw them is evidence, blurry photos are evidence, and the fact that there are primates of that size that once lived is all evidence for Bigfoot. Does that mean there is a Bigfoot? No.
So there is evidence for God in the bible sense people claim to have been contacted and even the modern day claims of divine encounters can be offered as evidence. Once you accept it then it turns to proof because the evidence was pushing enough in one direction to make you take it as fact. This still doesn't necessarily make it absolute truth, only an accepted truth.
There is evidence, there is even proof, but it's up to you to choose what you believe about his world. So perhaps you do make up something about a planet 500 light years away, you have no proof, but the fact you said it is evidence in an argument for it.
To summarize, there is evidence for religions and faith is based on that evidence, just as you take it on faith that the things a scientist is says, things you've neither experienced nor fully understand, are true.
#17 - Faith is believing in something there is no evidence for. Weth…  [+] (3 new replies) 02/23/2013 on atheist bitchslap 0
User avatar
#18 - scio (02/23/2013) [-]
Wether or not it can be disproven (as of now) doesn't come into count

sry
User avatar
#19 - scio (02/23/2013) [-]
On another note (sorry for my ranting) the Norse believed that the god Thor, with his hammer, caused thunder. The Arse-belief was a faith and religion. It didn't stop us from discovering how lightning was made, though.

QED
User avatar
#20 - Vandeekree (02/23/2013) [-]
Evidence has little to do wit whether a fact is indeed a fact or not. evidence is for someone who doesn't know. We do not know if there are Bigfoot living in the wild, but we do have evidence of them. People saying they saw them is evidence, blurry photos are evidence, and the fact that there are primates of that size that once lived is all evidence for Bigfoot. Does that mean there is a Bigfoot? No.
So there is evidence for God in the bible sense people claim to have been contacted and even the modern day claims of divine encounters can be offered as evidence. Once you accept it then it turns to proof because the evidence was pushing enough in one direction to make you take it as fact. This still doesn't necessarily make it absolute truth, only an accepted truth.
There is evidence, there is even proof, but it's up to you to choose what you believe about his world. So perhaps you do make up something about a planet 500 light years away, you have no proof, but the fact you said it is evidence in an argument for it.
To summarize, there is evidence for religions and faith is based on that evidence, just as you take it on faith that the things a scientist is says, things you've neither experienced nor fully understand, are true.
#38 - Blue Oyster Cult, **** yea! 02/18/2013 on birthday +1
#344 - **scio rolled user nillabonbongifts ** you sir, have been … 02/18/2013 on Use your imagination +1
#10 - >november 3, 1962 >1 9 6 2 >1 + 2 = 3 …  [+] (2 new replies) 02/17/2013 on Half Life 3 Conformed! +56
User avatar
#81 - jetpistol (02/17/2013) [-]
>1962
>1 x 9 =9
>9/6 = 1,5
>1,5 x 2 = 3
HALF-LIFE 3 CONFIRMED
User avatar
#157 - elboludo (02/17/2013) [-]
11 (nov) - 6-2= 3
#131 - *sigh* http://www.redicecreations.com/article.ph…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/16/2013 on Fact of the Day #4 +1
User avatar
#177 - rawyouth (02/16/2013) [-]
yeah sure
#42 - That being the case or not, to my understanding, they are argu… 02/16/2013 on Some People Won't Get It 0
#108 - Picture  [+] (5 new replies) 02/16/2013 on Fact of the Day #4 +1
User avatar
#113 - rawyouth (02/16/2013) [-]
WOAH its on wikipedia?

must be true
User avatar
#177 - rawyouth (02/16/2013) [-]
yeah sure
User avatar
#121 - andalitemadness (02/16/2013) [-]
Then look it up fucking somewhere else; check the bibliography. They don't just allow anything on Wikipedia you know. They're pretty good about keeping untrue stuff off as they have a massive amount of mods and editors.
User avatar
#110 - WitchKingTroll (02/16/2013) [-]
I understand the similarities, I just don't think they were actually that accurate.
#14 - I, too, would like the source. I've seen every WCF fr… 01/31/2013 on Paradox of my life 0
#12 - I didn't say anything regarding that. I just explained the mea…  [+] (1 new reply) 01/25/2013 on Totls 0
#13 - chixla (01/26/2013) [-]
sorry my bad , i thought you were the person i replyed to. i didnt really pay attention to names, my bad
#10 - "it's" = it is "its" = possesion,…  [+] (3 new replies) 01/24/2013 on Totls +1
#11 - chixla (01/25/2013) [-]
so you are saying that you cant possibly see what person writing wanted to say if he used "its" without Apostrophe?considering the fact that it cant possibly "confuse" person like There, Their and They're
User avatar
#12 - scio (01/25/2013) [-]
I didn't say anything regarding that. I just explained the meaning of the words.
#13 - chixla (01/26/2013) [-]
sorry my bad , i thought you were the person i replyed to. i didnt really pay attention to names, my bad
#829 - Comment deleted 01/08/2013 on Beliebers -1
#113 - Picture 01/02/2013 on Welcome +1
#14 - and you could look at it as 40-40/0-1 But since it is… 01/02/2013 on The Ignorance of Facebook 0
#110 - He's still presenting him to be himself. He just pretends to b…  [+] (2 new replies) 01/01/2013 on Welcome +1
#111 - Theyneverknow (01/01/2013) [-]
Good point.
Have my favourite derpy pic
#113 - scio (01/02/2013) [-]
#19 - >Implying the average would still be 100 after the people u…  [+] (1 new reply) 12/31/2012 on Gun laws... 0
#25 - thedonkeykong (12/31/2012) [-]
>not knowing 100 is alyways the average IQ, its how you measure it. if you add the IQ of all people of the world and divide it by the number of people, you will get 100, doesnt matter if there are only smart or only dumb people left
#6 - "2 seconds ago" .... this guy wrote it quick and the… 12/23/2012 on The whales are coming! 0
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (10)
Anonymous comments allowed.
8 comments displayed.
#12 - endorphinsrage ONLINE (08/07/2015) [-]
Take a look at the history.
#9 to #8 - scio (06/22/2013) [-]
Dude, that **** was awesome. Too bad it didn't reach a higher vote-count, probably bad timing made it got lost in newest upload. But hey, kudos to you for making OC!
#10 to #9 - mudkipfucker (06/22/2013) [-]
Thanks. Whenever I post in the morning, its usually doesn't do well. Might give it a month and repost it at a better time
#11 to #10 - scio (06/22/2013) [-]
Hard core mode: Put the full OC as the picture inside the panels when reposting it again
#1 - SlApMyBiScUiTs (05/30/2012) [-]
127 trys i did and im still here
#2 to #1 - scio (05/30/2012) [-]
You have seen the face of war and returned home to tell the tale!

But rolling for trips is a 1% success-rate so you really got lucky there :b

has anyone rolled trips yet?
#3 to #2 - SlApMyBiScUiTs (06/13/2012) [-]
i know right
i know right