This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - clum clum
Pages: 1 ... 113114115 116117 ... 382
3421
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:50:50 PM »
Toys are srs bsns
It might seem stupid from an outside perspective, but it's a hobby.
And a lot of them aren't even toys you can play with - they are more like ornaments for you to look at and appreciate. Learned that lesson with my Gundams.
get that storm trooper out of your butt
I didn't intend my post to come across as pretentious - if that's what you're implying. Just take stamp collecting, for example (though stamp collecting objectively sucks).
Literally all of my posts out of Serious aren't serious
oh
3422
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:47:25 PM »
Toys are srs bsns
It might seem stupid from an outside perspective, but it's a hobby.
And a lot of them aren't even toys you can play with - they are more like ornaments for you to look at and appreciate. Learned that lesson with my Gundams.
get that storm trooper out of your butt
I didn't intend my post to come across as pretentious - if that's what you're implying. Just take stamp collecting, for example (though stamp collecting objectively sucks).
3423
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:43:41 PM »
Toys are srs bsns
It might seem stupid from an outside perspective, but it's a hobby.
And a lot of them aren't even toys you can play with - they are more like ornaments for you to look at and appreciate. Learned that lesson with my Gundams.
Modelers are weirdos. Get over it.
Can confirm.
3424
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:42:29 PM »
CRASHING THIS PLANE
WITH NO SURVIVORS
LuCIAn
>1.93m height - BIG GUY
LOL IT CAN'T BE A COINCIDENCE 
3425
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:40:35 PM »
Toys are srs bsns
It might seem stupid from an outside perspective, but it's a hobby. And a lot of them aren't even toys you can play with - they are more like ornaments for you to look at and appreciate. Learned that lesson with my Gundams.
3426
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:38:03 PM »
CRASHING THIS PLANE
WITH NO SURVIVORS
LuCIAn >1.93m height - BIG GUY
3427
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:37:02 PM »
proves chally was there on 9/11
he must have jumped out or something
Live footage of him jumping
Why the fuck is the plane at a snowy mountain?
Because it's the plane crash that happened in the Alps.
3428
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:35:19 PM »
Jesus Christ, Revell looks like a McDonald's toy in comparison.
Yeah, and Bandai makes model figures too, like the sandtrooper in the beginning of the video. Bandai's model figures are 1/12 scale, just like Hasbro's Black Series. The difference is, The Black Series looks like crap in comparison:
Left is Bandai, right is Hasbro.
Wow. The asymmetry and mediocre paintjob makes Hasbro's rendition look like a mass-produced childrens toy, while Bandai's looks like a miniature replica of the Stormtrooper armour.
3429
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:21:07 PM »
Jesus Christ, Revell looks like a McDonald's toy in comparison.
3430
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:10:34 PM »
its actually very rare for fossils to stand the test of time.
It is rare. The vast majority have been long destroyed. The ones we find today just had some very fortunate circumstances.
Millions of species have been lost to time that we will never be able to discover.
Skim over this, it'll clue you in on just how lucky a dead prehistoric creature has to be to have its remains survive to this day;
http://www.fossilmuseum.net/fossilrecord/fossilization/fossilization.htm
We know it's rare. But it's not impossible. Not even close.
If there was an ancient and ADVANCED civilization (human or not) we'd find SOMETHING. Something far more durable than bones.
I didn't necessarily say advanced, I said intelligent. Maybe they just never managed to get a civilization going.
Intelligent species that never got a civilization going with absolutely zero remnants?
Doubt it.
It's just pretty odd how nothing else with intelligence comparable to ours arose considering how old the Earth is. Maybe it could have been an insect species during the Carboniferous period? Insects were in their prime back then because of the extremely high levels of oxygen, and they don't leave much remains (if any).
3431
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:05:34 PM »
its actually very rare for fossils to stand the test of time.
It is rare. The vast majority have been long destroyed. The ones we find today just had some very fortunate circumstances.
Millions of species have been lost to time that we will never be able to discover.
Skim over this, it'll clue you in on just how lucky a dead prehistoric creature has to be to have its remains survive to this day;
http://www.fossilmuseum.net/fossilrecord/fossilization/fossilization.htm
We know it's rare. But it's not impossible. Not even close.
If there was an ancient and ADVANCED civilization (human or not) we'd find SOMETHING. Something far more durable than bones.
I didn't necessarily say advanced, I said intelligent. Maybe they just never managed to get a civilization going.
3432
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:03:54 PM »
there's no evidence of any intelligent life being present before us, but considering how old the Earth is and how relatively young our species is, it isn't too far-fetched of a possibility.
Precisely. Normally I'd just say that there was no reason for intelligent life because the Earth was so warm and the dinos had no reason to not be big, dumb, lazy, angry niggers. But who knows how many species have been lost to time.
3433
« on: September 10, 2015, 05:01:16 PM »
What if there were, but they were all wiped out from nuclear war, and we started over.
Yeah, or they could have mastered space travel and left Earth during a mass-extinction event, never to return.
3434
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:59:17 PM »
It's possible you're a fukkin faggot
at least I don't fuck my mom
3435
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:56:41 PM »
its actually very rare for fossils to stand the test of time.
It is rare. The vast majority have been long destroyed. The ones we find today just had some very fortunate circumstances. Millions of species have been lost to time that we will never be able to discover. Skim over this, it'll clue you in on just how lucky a dead prehistoric creature has to be to have its remains survive to this day; http://www.fossilmuseum.net/fossilrecord/fossilization/fossilization.htm
3436
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:54:54 PM »
proves chally was there on 9/11
he must have jumped out or something
Live footage of him jumping
>flight 4U 9525 >Le Bains >No survivors top kek
3437
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:49:46 PM »
Is it possible that there were intelligent civilizations before us? It would only take 20,000 years for all traces of humanity in its current state to vanish, after all. And before you say "what about the fossils", its actually very rare for fossils to stand the test of time.
Just some food for thought.
3438
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:30:44 PM »
They could have nuked key military bases but instead attacked cities.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were key military targets. Military bases aren't just isolated in the middle of nowhere; they have cities built around them.
Would it have not been a more humane idea to destroy the military bases specifically with missiles rather than nuking the shit out of it?
>missiles
>WWII
Why didn't they use smaller bombs, then? They did. They firebombed Tokyo to ash and it didn't work. The nukes were a display of force necessary to yield a surrender.
But Japan had no allies. Its navy was basically destroyed, its islands were under a naval blockade and as you said, they were already performing intense bombings across cities. Surely a surrender was coming.
Yeah, there are so many quotes from politicians saying Japan would've surrendered.
After the Dresden bombings, surely Japan would surrender.
After their allies Germany and Italy surrendered, surely Japan would surrender.
After the U.S. firebombed Tokyo and dozens of other cities, surely Japan was ready to surrender.
After the blockade and defeat of the Japanese navy, then Japan was obviously just about to surrender.
After the warnings of imminent destruction, Japan definitely was right on the brink of surrendering.
After the first nuclear weapon was used against them, Japan was literally days away from surrendering.
After the second nuke was used, it took Japan a week and a half to announce their surrender. Their culture was one that would have willingly died for no reason at all, if the emperor asked. The people begged the emperor to surrender because they feared for his life, not because they didn't want to die themselves.
Japan wanted to surrender. Hirohito was advised multiple times to surrender. The emperor was a delusional fool that refused to admit defeat. Without nukes, it was extremely likely for Japan to surrender before the invasion planned on November 1st.
3439
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:19:49 PM »
They could have nuked key military bases but instead attacked cities.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were key military targets. Military bases aren't just isolated in the middle of nowhere; they have cities built around them.
Would it have not been a more humane idea to destroy the military bases specifically with missiles rather than nuking the shit out of it?
>missiles
>WWII
Why didn't they use smaller bombs, then? They did. They firebombed Tokyo to ash and it didn't work. The nukes were a display of force necessary to yield a surrender.
But Japan had no allies. Its navy was basically destroyed, its islands were under a naval blockade and as you said, they were already performing intense bombings across cities. Surely a surrender was coming.
Japan's entire philosophy at the time was fighting to the last man. Fuck no, they wouldn't have surrendered.
On the other hand, it's hard to say if they would have surrendered after the first atom bomb fell. They only had three days to consider before Nagasaki happened.
Yeah, I know that they were planning to drop another plutonium implosion bomb if they didn't surrender after Nagasaki.
3440
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:16:54 PM »
They could have nuked key military bases but instead attacked cities.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were key military targets. Military bases aren't just isolated in the middle of nowhere; they have cities built around them.
Would it have not been a more humane idea to destroy the military bases specifically with missiles rather than nuking the shit out of it?
>missiles
>WWII
Why didn't they use smaller bombs, then? They did. They firebombed Tokyo to ash and it didn't work. The nukes were a display of force necessary to yield a surrender.
But Japan had no allies. Its navy was basically destroyed, its islands were under a naval blockade and as you said, they were already performing intense bombings across cities. Surely a surrender was coming.
LOL
So, did the Japs really have that batshit never giving up morale were they thought Americans were all cannibals? Because it is my understanding that they were already pretty deep in the shit.
3441
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:11:59 PM »
They could have nuked key military bases but instead attacked cities.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were key military targets. Military bases aren't just isolated in the middle of nowhere; they have cities built around them.
Would it have not been a more humane idea to destroy the military bases specifically with missiles rather than nuking the shit out of it?
>missiles
>WWII
Why didn't they use smaller bombs, then? They did. They firebombed Tokyo to ash and it didn't work. The nukes were a display of force necessary to yield a surrender.
But Japan had no allies. Its navy was basically destroyed, its islands were under a naval blockade and as you said, they were already performing intense bombings across cities. Surely a surrender was coming.
3442
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:09:03 PM »
3443
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:03:08 PM »
They could have nuked key military bases but instead attacked cities.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were key military targets. Military bases aren't just isolated in the middle of nowhere; they have cities built around them.
Would it have not been a more humane idea to destroy the military bases specifically with missiles rather than nuking the shit out of it?
>missiles
>WWII
Why didn't they use smaller bombs, then? They did. They firebombed Tokyo to ash and it didn't work. The nukes were a display of force necessary to yield a surrender.
Even if the nukes were a necessary evil, there was surely still some anticipation to see what it could do to people.
3444
« on: September 10, 2015, 03:58:06 PM »
They could have nuked key military bases but instead attacked cities.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were key military targets. Military bases aren't just isolated in the middle of nowhere; they have cities built around them.
Would it have not been a more humane idea to destroy the military bases specifically with missiles rather than nuking the shit out of it?
That wasn't the point. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were used to demonstrate what the United States' new wonder weapon was capable of.
Exactly.
3445
« on: September 10, 2015, 03:57:09 PM »
Fiber is a healthy part of a balanced diet
Protein is too!
3446
« on: September 10, 2015, 03:55:30 PM »
They could have nuked key military bases but instead attacked cities.
ut they were still eager to test those nukes on people. This is such fucking nonsense.
Sure, say "hurr durr ur rong" instead of presenting a reason on why it is "nonsense".
3447
« on: September 10, 2015, 03:54:15 PM »
They could have nuked key military bases but instead attacked cities.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were key military targets. Military bases aren't just isolated in the middle of nowhere; they have cities built around them.
Would it have not been a more humane idea to destroy the military bases specifically with missiles rather than nuking the shit out of it?
3448
« on: September 10, 2015, 03:42:35 PM »
america's excuse for war
It's like pearl harbour. They couldn't wait to test them nukes on live people.
Harbor*
The nukes killed far less people than an invasion would've.
"Harbor" is American-English. I'm not American, and I speak English, therefore I use "harbour". "Harbor" only exists because it was cheaper to print than "Harbour". I'm not discussing this further. Take your arrogant American meme elsewhere. You speak your version of English, I speak mine. Done. And yeah, I'm aware that an invasion would result in more casualties, but they were still eager to test those nukes on people. They could have nuked key military bases but instead attacked cities.
3449
« on: September 10, 2015, 03:37:04 PM »
Also I would just like to remind you all that my stance on 9/11 is neutral - I'm just presenting arguments so they can be hopefully explained and discussed.
This is like, the most spineless position you could take in a discussion.
That's because I'm the OP and I'm trying to generate it. And also partly due to the fact that I stand neutral on the subject. I'm not sure being spineless is defined as appreciating both sides of the argument.
Let's get this straight: for most of the thread you were propagating the theory that thermite was used on 9/11. It wasn't, and there's no evidence it was. The notion that the U.S. government murdered 3000 citizens for some dubious reason is significant, and it's pretty contemptible to start and defend the argument and then back out by pretending you're just playing devil's advocate.
But I was playing devil's advocate. I posted this originally, thinking most people here were in the conspiracy crowd; People say 9/11 was an inside job and the way the buildings fell were incredibly suspicious. But, has there been any other incidents like 9/11 in history? Maybe that is how buildings react to planes. Maybe the buildings weren't as strong as believed to be. That one didn't really take off discussion wise, so I decided I'd try the thermite theory because I know a little about thermite reactions.
3450
« on: September 10, 2015, 03:26:59 PM »
america's excuse for war
It's like pearl harbour. They couldn't wait to test them nukes on live people.
Pages: 1 ... 113114115 116117 ... 382
|
Show Posts
