} has a nipple.
] has no nipple.
Ergo, } is greater than ].
That's my ontological argument for Go}'s existence.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
edited October 2007
Go all-star, and get down for yours
To the ladies in the house, be proud of yours
You got the, Roots crew with the sound of course
High, lift 'em up high, okaysssss
Posts
imf so confused
Fuck you uptight motherfuckers whinging about your philisophical bullshit, this thread is for drunken revelry.
YESS
FUCK PHILOSOPHY
LA VIE BROEHM OR SOMETHING
For the drunk, yes?
This seems to be a regular occurrence.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
] has no nipple.
Ergo, } is greater than ].
That's my ontological argument for Go}'s existence.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
To the ladies in the house, be proud of yours
You got the, Roots crew with the sound of course
High, lift 'em up high, okaysssss
Rooots!