INTENSITY²
Start here => What's your crime? Basic Discussion => Topic started by: RageBeoulve on April 16, 2013, 09:32:45 AM
-
For real yo. Both atheists and theists always begin foaming at the mouth whenever someone takes the agnostic stance in an argument, which is basically like saying "I don't know, and you probably don't either". Whats so terrible about admitting that you don't know if there is a creator? To me it seems the most reasonable current stance to take.
Check it out. We basically know next to nothing about the universe and how it really works. Every time we think we are on the verge of a big answer, that answer just turns out to be a whole bunch of new fucking questions. Considering how little the human race really knows about the universe it exists in, it would seem to be extremely close minded and unreasonable(lol) to state that without a doubt, one confirms or denies the existence of a supreme being.
I say to you, people who are so sure of yourselves. Wtf is the thinking there? Where is the proof either way? Thats like a toddler stating with absolute confidence that they completely understand what it means to be an adult, and whats more they know all about the trials of being a parent and a productive member of society.
Really, guys? Get over yourself and try to be a bit more openminded. You don't really know, and you might never know. Is that so hard to admit?
-
*waves agnostically at Rage* :cbc:
-
The weeble knows the real deal. Honesty is best, right Cbc?
-
Well, if I don't know, I don't know, that's why I say I am agnostic. But I don't care what others believe. :meditate:
-
Well, if I don't know, I don't know, that's why I say I am agnostic. But I don't care what others believe. :meditate:
I wouldn't really care either if it didn't become a problem just about every time I tried to have a discussion with someone about "life, the universe, and everything". You know, one of those conversations where two people bounce ideas off each other and are supposed to learn some things and walk away from it enriched and slightly more mature?
Almost never happens, and it usually boils down to EGO.
-
Well, if I don't know, I don't know, that's why I say I am agnostic. But I don't care what others believe. :meditate:
I wouldn't really care either if it didn't become a problem just about every time I tried to have a discussion with someone about "life, the universe, and everything". You know, one of those conversations where two people bounce ideas off each other and are supposed to learn some things and walk away from it enriched and slightly more mature?
Almost never happens, and it usually boils down to EGO.
A lot of people who call themselves Atheists do only because they think that saying Agnostic will make them sound wishy-washy. A lot of people like myself will not say i know for sure there is no god but only in the same way as i do not believe there are invisible faeries. Either is not a position that I credit or affects my life in any meaningful way
-
Well, if I don't know, I don't know, that's why I say I am agnostic. But I don't care what others believe. :meditate:
I wouldn't really care either if it didn't become a problem just about every time I tried to have a discussion with someone about "life, the universe, and everything". You know, one of those conversations where two people bounce ideas off each other and are supposed to learn some things and walk away from it enriched and slightly more mature?
Almost never happens, and it usually boils down to EGO.
A lot of people who call themselves Atheists do only because they think that saying Agnostic will make them sound wishy-washy. A lot of people like myself will not say i know for sure there is no god but only in the same way as i do not believe there are invisible faeries. Either is not a position that I credit or affects my life in any meaningful way
will make them sound wishy-washy
Exactly. "I don't want to sound like i'm <whatever>, so I will say something different than how I actually see things(evidence points to<whatever>"
Exactly, Al. Its all about the ego. Logically, there is not enough evidence to support either claim. Lets do the same thing with math.
X+Y=E
What is the numerical value of E?
Atheist: Oh its obviously 23. Everyone knows that jeez! *smugfaggotry*
Theist: Its god. *clasps hands in prayer* THANK YOU JEEZUS
Agnostic: ROFL I dunno dude. I need at least one numerical integer.
Atheist and theist: Omg you fag you are so wishy washy "I dunno" You sound like such a doofus lololol
Agnostic: :dunno: Whatever.
-
I do not promote my Atheism. I do find religion interesting and I will often be upfront in saying this is what I believe and go on from there. The only time i really judge anyone is if they are either trying to show their beliefs as somehow better or they are forcing their shit on me.
You can have really interesting conversations and learn if all parties are cool with just asking and answering questions instead of trying to prove things. If the position is taken that both parties belief this and will not change.
-
Occam's razor: scientifically it is more likely that there is no God than that there is one. But of course Occam's razor isn't always right. But I want to see proves that there is a God.
-
Don't consider myself an agnostic chap.. for I'm pretty certain that 'god' does not exist.. and ja, that man created god in his own image (back then.. in them moronic days.. full of superstition, fear and illnesses whereof they didn't have a clue what caused them).
A sceptic, I am.. (for sure :laugh: )
-
Don't considering myself an agnostic chap.. for I'm pretty certain that 'god' does not exist.. and ja, that man created god in his own image (back then.. in them moronic days.. full of superstition, fear and illnesses whereof they didn't have a clue what caused them).
A sceptic, I am.. (for sure :laugh: )
Et ego :agreed:
-
I pretty much agree with you guys, personally. Religion is chock full of holes, and its incredibly easy to shoot down most arguments in favor of it.
My problem is that there is no absolute evidence confirming either stance. You can't actually prove the existence of a creator, and you can't disprove it. Theres no solid cut and dry evidence, so I personally don't claim that I know without a doubt if a god exists or not.
(This aside, there probably isn't a god. ;))
-
(A)theism and (a)gnosticism aren't mutually exclusive labels; (A)theism is a matter of belief and (a)gnosticism is a matter of knowledge. If you believe in a god, but it's a matter of faith rather than knowledge (you don't meet your god for Sunday golf, can't spot it with a telescope, find traces of it in the geological record or construct a mathematical proof of it's existence), you're an agnostic theist; you believe in a god, thus you're a theist, but you don't know that your god exists, thus you're agnostic (lacking knowledge). If you believe in a god, and you know through personal experience that it exists (it talks back to you, you feel it's presence, the geological evidence for the biblical flood is overwhelming), then you're a gnostic theist.
I'm an agnostic atheist (a.k.a weak atheist) about most gods, since I lack a belief in them but I don't know that they don't exist, and I'm a gnostic atheist (a.k.a strong atheist) about certain gods, like the Judeo-Christian god, since I lack a belief in it and I know that it doesn't exist, at least in the form that's been put forth by the mainstream, since it's contradictory (the whole 'omnipotent/omnipresent/omnibenevolent: pick two' problem, or the square circle problem).
-
(A)theism and (a)gnosticism aren't mutually exclusive labels; (A)theism is a matter of belief and (a)gnosticism is a matter of knowledge. If you believe in a god, but it's a matter of faith rather than knowledge (you don't meet your god for Sunday golf, can't spot it with a telescope, find traces of it in the geological record or construct a mathematical proof of it's existence), you're an agnostic theist; you believe in a god, thus you're a theist, but you don't know that your god exists, thus you're agnostic (lacking knowledge). If you believe in a god, and you know through personal experience that it exists (it talks back to you, you feel it's presence, the geological evidence for the biblical flood is overwhelming), then you're a gnostic theist.
I'm an agnostic atheist (a.k.a weak atheist) about most gods, since I lack a belief in them but I don't know that they don't exist, and I'm a gnostic atheist (a.k.a strong atheist) about certain gods, like the Judeo-Christian god, since I lack a belief in it and I know that it doesn't exist, at least in the form that's been put forth by the mainstream, since it's contradictory (the whole 'omnipotent/omnipresent/omnibenevolent: pick two' problem, or the square circle problem).
agnostic atheist (a.k.a weak atheist)
(http://www.infobarrel.com/media/image/500_featured.jpg)
-
I cannot know if this discussion will get better, but I'd like to comment in it so that I may receive notifications.
-
I think it's unreasonable to be agnostic for the same reason it's unreasonable to be an aunicornist.
There's no good reason to belive that fairy tales MIGHT be true. We know all examples to be make-believe.
-
Okay maybe I haven't been clear enough. There is a difference between what you think, and fact. Example:
Some dude: "Lance, do you think there is a creator?"
Me: "No."
Some dude: "Lance, can you prove or disprove the existence of a creator""
Me: "No."
Do you see the difference here? I see atheists and theists ABOUND that claim you are a fucktard if you do not accept the "OBVIOUS FACT" that there is or isn't a supreme being.
I say to that, you are full of it. You don't know that for sure. Stop being such a smug piece of crap.
-
Atheist: I don't believe in God.
Agnostic: I don't know whether God exists or not.
Similar views between the two. The difference being that the agnostic won't state his belief (or lack of it).
-
Actually I state my belief all the time. I do not believe there is a supreme being. And I could spend hours slashing religious texts by pointing out their inconsistencies and hypocrisy. I will not state this as fact however, because it isn't. There is no proof. For either view.
Stating either view as fact immediately tells me a person just wants an endless argument, or they are dumb.
-
That makes you an atheist then, the typical atheist, not the strong atheist.
Most atheists I know agree that it can't be known that God absolutely does not exist.
-
That makes you an atheist then, the typical atheist, not the strong atheist.
Most atheists I know agree that it can't be known that God absolutely does not exist.
Well where do I find more like me then? Most atheists I've ever talked to began foaming at the mouth as soon as I said I didn't know something.
-
Okay maybe I haven't been clear enough. There is a difference between what you think, and fact. Example:
Some dude: "Lance, do you think there is a creator?"
Me: "No."
Some dude: "Lance, can you prove or disprove the existence of a creator""
Me: "No."
Do you see the difference here? I see atheists and theists ABOUND that claim you are a fucktard if you do not accept the "OBVIOUS FACT" that there is or isn't a supreme being.
I say to that, you are full of it. You don't know that for sure. Stop being such a smug piece of crap.
The mistake you're making here is that you've conflated theism and deism.
A theistic god is involved in human affairs. It cares what you do with your genitals and what kind of fabric you wear and what you eat. They also tinker with the laws of physics (magic, miracles, etc).
A deistic god is a mere universe creator. It doesn't seem to intervene in this world. It doesn't monkey with the laws of physics.
All theistic gods are man-made, therefore false. A deistic god can't be disproven because it's just the notion that an intelligent being made the universe we live in. It's indistinguishable from an extra-terrestrial alien.
I'm an aTheist but not an aDeist, I'm agnostic towards the idea of a universe creator since there's no indisputable evidence of what caused the big bang.
-
Okay maybe I haven't been clear enough. There is a difference between what you think, and fact. Example:
Some dude: "Lance, do you think there is a creator?"
Me: "No."
Some dude: "Lance, can you prove or disprove the existence of a creator""
Me: "No."
Do you see the difference here? I see atheists and theists ABOUND that claim you are a fucktard if you do not accept the "OBVIOUS FACT" that there is or isn't a supreme being.
I say to that, you are full of it. You don't know that for sure. Stop being such a smug piece of crap.
The mistake you're making here is that you've conflated theism and deism.
A theistic god is involved in human affairs. It cares what you do with your genitals and what kind of fabric you wear and what you eat. They also tinker with the laws of physics (magic, miracles, etc).
A deistic god is a mere universe creator. It doesn't seem to intervene in this world. It doesn't monkey with the laws of physics.
All theistic gods are man-made, therefore false. A deistic god can't be disproven because it's just the notion that an intelligent being made the universe we live in. It's indistinguishable from an extra-terrestrial alien.
I'm an aTheist but not an aDeist, I'm agnostic towards the idea of a universe creator since there's no indisputable evidence of what caused the big bang.
Lol I don't see the difference. A god is a god is a god. A magic faggoty god who sprinkled some nut crust on a soccer ball shaped magic thingy and farted the universe into being is just as stupid to me. This is what I personally believe, but I admit that I cannot prove this as fact.
Although I think its pretty likely that extraterrestrial life does exist. At lease some actual physical evidence exists to support a claim like that. (number of galaxies, number of solar systems, number of planets in a zone where it wouldn't be too hot or too cold, etc.) With some math you could come up with a reasonable theory on how likely it is that life on other planets exists.
With god, there is no evidence other than how people "feel" in their "hearts". Fuck that shit, you niggers LOLOL. SUCK A COCK.
-
I don't know, I don't pretend to know, and I don't care if anyone else is a believer or not I'm not out to prove you wrong or right, whatever gets you through the day.
I can respect someone else's beliefs as long as they can respect my desire to be left alone about the subject.
It's only when someone starts thumping their bible and telling me what I should be doing... and how I should be living my life according to what and who they believe in... that makes me go from 0 to BITCH in record time.
-
I don't know, I don't pretend to know, and I don't care if anyone else is a believer or not I'm not out to prove you wrong or right, whatever gets you through the day.
I can respect someone else's beliefs as long as they can respect my desire to be left alone about the subject.
It's only when someone starts thumping their bible and telling me what I should be doing... and how I should be living my life according to what and who they believe in... that makes me go from 0 to BITCH in record time.
Well in that case, i'm afraid i'll have to be ramming these pamphlets about the sacrifice of jesus Christ our saviorahmmennn down your throat. Sorry about this.
*rolls up sleeves, puts on his close minded shoes*
-
Most agnostics are reformed zealots. They just cannot quite make the commitment and deny all their indictrinations.
-
Most agnostics are reformed zealots. They just cannot quite make the commitment and deny all their indictrinations.
I was never religious myself. I just can't dismiss the logical possibility of a creator without solid proof. Indeed. It may even be true that a creator may both exist and not exist at the same time till proven otherwise!
Itt: All this shit is people speculating about thousands of years of speculations, and when I call it that, people get really pissed off at me.
-
Most agnostics are reformed zealots. They just cannot quite make the commitment and deny all their indictrinations.
I was never religious myself. I just can't dismiss the logical possibility of a creator without solid proof. Indeed. It may even be true that a creator may both exist and not exist at the same time till proven otherwise!
Itt: All this shit is people speculating about thousands of years of speculations, and when I call it that, people get really pissed off at me.
Which makes me even angrier than them, I might add. Which makes them dislike me.
-
It's just considered wishy washy; that seems to be the biggest complaint. Of course no one really knows, so it's kind of stupid. For a black and white thinker, am still quite stupid that way.
-
It's just considered wishy washy; that seems to be the biggest complaint. Of course no one really knows, so it's kind of stupid. For a black and white thinker, am still quite stupid that way.
Of course no one really knows, so it's kind of stupid
Mhm. :eyelash:
-
Hoping that's not you misunderstanding me; am agnostic but still willing to admit agnosticism is kind of stupid, fence sitting, however annoying to the 'believers'. To neither believe nor disbelieve; know it illogical but still claim to do it. Would much rather simply claim to be an apatheist, but knowing either way would be something I would care, so that claim wouldn't be true.
-
Hoping that's not you misunderstanding me; am agnostic but still willing to admit agnosticism is kind of stupid, fence sitting, however annoying to the 'believers'. To neither believe nor disbelieve; know it illogical but still claim to do it. Would much rather simply claim to be an apatheist, but knowing either way would be something I would care, so that claim wouldn't be true.
Well I don't really think there is a god, but i'm not willing to say that I believe this, because its not a fact. If something cannot be proven, its speculation. Stating bullshit as fact, is a lie.
So to me, these theists or atheists stating that they believe with the whole of their being one way or another, arguing and speculating about thousands of years of speculating is VERY stupid looking to me. A bunch of liars lying to each other over and over again, forever. Point at them. Point at them and laugh. They believe in speculation, and to me that's wishy washy.
-
Lol I don't see the difference. A god is a god is a god.
And that, young Skywalker, is why you fail.
:yoda:
All theistic gods claim magical abilities that violate the laws of the known universe. Therefore if we don't observe the laws of the universe being monkeyed with, we can discount those claims. The claim of Deists, is simply a universe creator that always operates within the bounds of physics. We never observe the laws of pysics being violated, therefore the claim of Deists in unfalsifiable.
-
Lol I don't see the difference. A god is a god is a god.
And that, young Skywalker, is why you fail.
:yoda:
All theistic gods claim magical abilities that violate the laws of the known universe. Therefore if we don't observe the laws of the universe being monkeyed with, we can discount those claims. The claim of Deists, is simply a universe creator that always operates within the bounds of physics. We never observe the laws of pysics being violated, therefore the claim of Deists in unfalsifiable.
Deists still believe a magical thingy used some magic to spark a magical big bang.
Latest in string theory is that the universe is like a soccer ball shaped bubble, and all matter and antimatter in the bubble is just an explosion. (simplified)
So deists believe this is possible because some creature farted or something? I don't get it. This shit just "happened" until we find out what caused it. Theres no proof at all that something is responsible for it or isn't. NONE. Until you discover something, its a completely irrelevant unknown.
-
Rage, to me there are two sides to this
Inwardly, I like to know. I like to sortof make my mind up: Could there be a god or a power or something, to me, in my mind, in my own personal secret? I decide what I know. I weigh the options, and settle on what I consider most likely.
So, if you argue about what I know, for me, then I will be quite stubborn. I know what I know.
If we, however, talk more "outwardly", we discuss life and philosophy in general, I'm not gonna go out of my way to crash what you believe to be true, and I always try to remember that agnostics, or even moderate religious folk are a 'good compromise', to put it that way.
But for me, privately, I do insist/pretend to know my own truth.
-
So its normal to state speculation as fact then? I don't like that.
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ktuyglB7ND1qzma4ho1_500.jpg)
-
Until the answer to a question is solved, the answer is "I DON'T KNOW". Right? I mean that's the only way things make any sense at all.
2x+4=10
Without solving and finding x to be x=3, the answer to what is the value of x is "I don't know". After finding that x=3, the answer is x=3.
Wtf is wrong with that undeniable logic, dammit?
-
Rage, put it like this:
When talking to others, I need to back facts up before stating them as facts.
When talking to myself, I don't need to. I rely on my memory, my own experiences, what I have seen and learned about life.
If we were discussing theology, I would have to back up.
If we discussed what I felt to be true, I would need to back nothing up.
-
Ahh so bullshit is fine for people's "feels".
-
Deists still believe a magical thingy used some magic to spark a magical big bang.
No they do not.
The god of the Deists could very well be an alien super scientist from another dimension.
Since deists make no claim other than a universe creator, no supernatural magic needs to be invoked.
-
So its normal to state speculation as fact then? I don't like that.
For some. Is it necessary for people to say, 'I think' or 'in my opinion', when expressing every unquantifiable thought?
-
Ahh so bullshit is fine for people's "feels".
Sometimes, depends on the situation.
The other day I was being extremely stubborn, because the debate begun to veer into what I know, it came into the realm of "but you cannot possibly know".
It depends on situation, statement and weight.
I can get very unforgiving if someone tries to use misunderstood science to back spiritualism up.
That is the danger of being so informed, is that there are fewer and fewer compromises to do - for the sake of keeping the peace, when theistic discussion is up.
I have an explanation even as to why peoples brains came up with spiritualist notions in the first place, so I'm gonna be impossible to convince that a biproduct of this reaction has any foundation in reality:
1) A biological error makes us make up "gods"
2) Knowing 1) I am supposed to believe a particular one of these gods is real, despite all. <--- this makes me difficult to debate theology with :D
Agnostics are a better alternative, cus compromises are reached more easily.
-
Ahh so bullshit is fine for people's "feels".
Sometimes, depends on the situation.
The other day I was being extremely stubborn, because the debate begun to veer into what I know, it came into the realm of "but you cannot possibly know".
It depends on situation, statement and weight.
I can get very unforgiving if someone tries to use misunderstood science to back spiritualism up.
That is the danger of being so informed, is that there are fewer and fewer compromises to do - for the sake of keeping the peace, when theistic discussion is up.
I have an explanation even as to why peoples brains came up with spiritualist notions in the first place, so I'm gonna be impossible to convince that a biproduct of this reaction has any foundation in reality:
1) A biological error makes us make up "gods"
2) Knowing 1) I am supposed to believe a particular one of these gods is real, despite all. <--- this makes me difficult to debate theology with :D
Agnostics are a better alternative, cus compromises are reached more easily.
Indeed. I like my "dude I don't fucking know till I find out" way of looking at it. Yours is pretty complicated, Zegh. :zoinks:
Anyway, the reason this amuses me can be explained like this. Imagine its the first time you checked out the "ancient aliens" series, and you hear all these neato theories and shit, and its entertaining you. All of the sudden the screen cuts to Giorgio, and he presents some bullshit piece of evidence like some cave paintings that look like humans, then he claims they're aliens, and makes that smug face like he's privy to some huge secret nobody else knows about, and he's some kind of a brilliant scientist. Doesn't that make you either laugh heartily, or feel like knocking his head off, depending on your mood?
-
So its normal to state speculation as fact then? I don't like that.
For some. Is it necessary for people to say, 'I think' or 'in my opinion', when expressing every unquantifiable thought?
Yep. When talking about science it is. ;)
Deists still believe a magical thingy used some magic to spark a magical big bang.
No they do not.
The god of the Deists could very well be an alien super scientist from another dimension.
Since deists make no claim other than a universe creator, no supernatural magic needs to be invoked.
could very well be
That's right. It COULD. I think you get what I mean, dude.
-
Yep. When talking about science it is. ;)
This thread is a discussion of theology, not science.
-
Actually I was just asking about that attitude, really.
-
Its not unreasonable....
Sometimes I feel like I am on the same boat, because honestly I don't know if there is a intelligent designer that listens to my thoughts and sees my everyone move.
Honestly I don't.
I grew up in a religious household, yet I still question it.
Mom always says don't look at it as a religion, yet more of a relationship with God.
-
Anyway, the reason this amuses me can be explained like this. Imagine its the first time you checked out the "ancient aliens" series, and you hear all these neato theories and shit, and its entertaining you. All of the sudden the screen cuts to Giorgio, and he presents some bullshit piece of evidence like some cave paintings that look like humans, then he claims they're aliens, and makes that smug face like he's privy to some huge secret nobody else knows about, and he's some kind of a brilliant scientist. Doesn't that make you either laugh heartily, or feel like knocking his head off, depending on your mood?
You could use that smug smile of his to make me do assasinations. It enfuriates me that much.
-
Anyway, the reason this amuses me can be explained like this. Imagine its the first time you checked out the "ancient aliens" series, and you hear all these neato theories and shit, and its entertaining you. All of the sudden the screen cuts to Giorgio, and he presents some bullshit piece of evidence like some cave paintings that look like humans, then he claims they're aliens, and makes that smug face like he's privy to some huge secret nobody else knows about, and he's some kind of a brilliant scientist. Doesn't that make you either laugh heartily, or feel like knocking his head off, depending on your mood?
You could use that smug smile of his to make me do assasinations. It enfuriates me that much.
Indeed. That's what this kind of stuff looks like to me. I mostly just think its funny, though.
-
Deists still believe a magical thingy used some magic to spark a magical big bang.
No they do not.
The god of the Deists could very well be an alien super scientist from another dimension.
Since deists make no claim other than a universe creator, no supernatural magic needs to be invoked.
Except a deity triggering the beginning of creation would be considered a supernatural move.
-
Deists still believe a magical thingy used some magic to spark a magical big bang.
No they do not.
The god of the Deists could very well be an alien super scientist from another dimension.
Since deists make no claim other than a universe creator, no supernatural magic needs to be invoked.
Except a deity triggering the beginning of creation would be considered a supernatural move.
No, simply a science that we do not yet understand. :M
-
Deists still believe a magical thingy used some magic to spark a magical big bang.
No they do not.
The god of the Deists could very well be an alien super scientist from another dimension.
Since deists make no claim other than a universe creator, no supernatural magic needs to be invoked.
Except a deity triggering the beginning of creation would be considered a supernatural move.
No, simply a science that we do not yet understand. :M
Which makes it supernatural untill we do :I
-
The exact moment that god can be known then we are no longer dealing with god. We are dealing with our peer.
-
Deists still believe a magical thingy used some magic to spark a magical big bang.
No they do not.
The god of the Deists could very well be an alien super scientist from another dimension.
Since deists make no claim other than a universe creator, no supernatural magic needs to be invoked.
Except a deity triggering the beginning of creation would be considered a supernatural move.
No, simply a science that we do not yet understand. :M
Which makes it supernatural untill we do :I
YES. :zoinks:
-
Ahh so bullshit is fine for people's "feels".
If one's personal feels can't be bullshit, what can? :autism: Anyway, I see the point ZEGH is making.
-
The exact moment that god can be known then we are no longer dealing with god. We are dealing with our peer.
Interesting comment, but I know a lot of mere mortals, and I don't necessarily consider myself their peer. :tard:
-
The exact moment that god can be known then we are no longer dealing with god. We are dealing with our peer.
Interesting comment, but I know a lot of mere mortals, and I don't necessarily consider myself their peer. :tard:
all mortals poop. They are no different in that regard. Poop is what unites us. God is poop.
-
The exact moment that god can be known then we are no longer dealing with god. We are dealing with our peer.
Interesting comment, but I know a lot of mere mortals, and I don't necessarily consider myself their peer. :tard:
all mortals poop. They are no different in that regard. Poop is what unites us. God is poop.
(http://www.previewsworld.com/catalogimages/STK_IMAGES/STK460001-480000/STK473213.jpg)
-
I was being philosophical.
-
So was I. :orly:
-
From poop comes all life.
-
Southpark - Circle of poo (better version) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HjGbjbsrP0#)
-
god is simply the #1 number 2,