he is dumb as apost but he loves me

my tuxedo is cuter

3

sleepy kitties are the cutest

i dont have any dogs 😦 I've always wanted one

they are awesome

none of you own a dog that wears a hat, get BTFO

i have 2 and i start fostering cats soon

>swag

this isnt

2010

she is actaully smaller then the other one

woah dont be fatphobic

triggered

i never said u

lol

oops

@REDNECK-(UK) Bangkok-N-Fortgay oh yea that reminds me my cat looks kinda similar to the ones you just posted

except skinnier

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

lol

tbh I would love it if the cat was super fat

that way one nice cold winter night he would snuggle up to me and purr as I patt his fat

:3

:3

wot

ohhhh

kk

*accepts fame in exchange for sex*
I was assaulted D:

-reese witherspoon

tfw shitpost turns into petpost <:forsenThink:330046985061007371>

Dogshit post

who can blame her for not wanting to downggrade....

Bumbumbum

Isn't wanting your kids to look like you instinctual? Is that why blacks have such a high abortion rate?

yes it is @Shmola

we have it from when we are born, to look towards our own people

its a safety mechanism to stop us trying to live with dangerous animals etc

its been observed in babies in testing etc, its very strong

zootopia is real

takes a lot of talmudvision and attention whoring to break from it....

except it is biology not crack or w.e they used

even rates of birth defects n shit are higher when you race mix, its brilliant

even nature hates coalburners

Yeah i heard there were recent medical issues with mixed kids getting transplants that work

Makes sense lol

if we evolved to the point we can still breed together, but not compatibly

mind you.... not that you ever see that reported anywhere... only when you search hard for the info caus its hidden

yahoo can find "conservative sources"

just being able to breed together does not make something the same species

yeah it'd be like a bunny mixing with a fox

A funny box.

horse and donkey can still produce fertile offspring (tho rare)

oh, that's awful, what's the survival rate of 2 fertile mules lol

To be fair, you have to have a very high midi chlorian count to understand The Prequels. The humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of the force, most of the jokes will go over a typical viewers head. There's also Anakin's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Sith legends, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these jokes, to realise that they're not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike The Prequels truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in Anakin's existential catchphrase "I hate sand, It's course, rough, irritating. And it gets in everywhere," which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenevs Russian epic Fathers and Sons. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as George Lucas's genius wit unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools.. how I pity them. 😂

And yes, by the way, i DO have a Jar jar tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 midi chlorian points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.

http://images.slideplayer.com/17/5359142/slides/slide_10.jpg

wow amazing science
im biology

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/03/30/why-mixed-race-minorities-struggle-find-life-saving-transplant-matches

Well, we're not going to have a holocaust. We like blacks too much. How funny would it be though
"anyone with a white friend gets to live"

Stop using me as a token white friend racists.

why do you say that @Shmola ?

all we need is a single place where whites arent forced to live with niggers

it will thrive, as they always do

and more and more people will want into it and it will expand

much like israel does.....

I can't even post in shitpost are you kidding me

@ϟϟ✠Dan✠The✠Oracle✠ϟϟ Except Israel sucks. But I visited before it got all shitty. It's worse now, the Jordan river is polluted af.

@Shmola its run by degenerate kikes who are nothing but parasites, what did you expect?

Yeah.. I was really little when I went though so it's hard to remember. The society was garbage, but their art was beautiful. I remember a cave with tons of ancient tile art. And streets full of poor beggers and merchants. It was cool. I was baptised in the Jordan river lmao.

trash river

i blame the palastinians

i blame hitler for not really killing jews....

this time we will tho

he didn't exist doe

that was Rameses who fucked up

the cave art wouldnt have been by jews, they never lived there until 1947

in fact it was probably by "europeans" as they used to exist there

Why did god save jews from egypt

jews have bigger victim complexes than blacks lmao

@Shmola god dosnt exist....

but the original inhabitants in the middle east shared european dna

proving white flight has been happening for thousands of years

@ϟϟ✠Dan✠The✠Oracle✠ϟϟ Saying definitiely god doesn't exist means that you don't base your worldview in facts.

Atheists are fucking retarded. Try agnosticism.

im neither atheist nor agnostic

"god doesn't exit" - "i'm not an atheist"

ok sempai

most religious people are atheist tho, they deny every other god but their own

google.com

define: atheist

a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods:

yes, that sums up all christians, muslims, jews etc

they deny every other god but their own

are you retarded?

or, as you put it, lack belief of the existence of those gods they do not believe in

I understand what you are saying

and that doesnt make any logical sense at all

So unless someone believes in every emalgamation of god they're an atheist

well, i take it you are religious thus you arent too bright in the first place

nice assumption

and no

wtf do they have word filters in here?

just because someone is retarded, it doesnt mean they have al alterior motive

which just goes to show how retarded you really are

Reidoon the Spoon - Today at 2:01 PM
google.com
define: atheist
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods:

christians deny thor was a god, thus are athiest

because htey lack the belief of that god

agnostics believe that there COULD be those other gods

i am neither of those religious terms

right im going to try and break this down for you

a-the-ist means not-god-believer

believing in one god and not any others makes you not an atheist

if someone is il-legal

LOL

that does not mean they can only committ a crime if they committ ALL crimes

you dumbass

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor

dont beleive in thor? you dont believe in a god

yeah, that does not make you an atheist

thus are athiestic toewards it

its in the very fucking description of the word....

ffs

you can be atheistic towards individual gods

but not an atheist

you dumbass

LOL

atheist is a definitive statement

>no real scotsman

nice

thats not what that means

you do not know what that means

"you can be an athiest but not a atheist" - @AutumnFire , current year

atheistic

but not an atheist

./me slow claps

LOL

its a really basic concept and im actually shocked you do not understand

>you can be run over by a train and killed, but not be dead - @AutumnFire , current year

so there are many gods, and you can chose to believe any number of them. atheist is a term meaning that you have no god at all. just because you dont believe in all gods does not make you an atheist, because belief in one god makes you a theist

that is called hte dunning kruger effect my friend, and you just won the award

the·ism
[ˈTHēˌizəm]
NOUN
belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures. Compare with deism.

if you have a belief in a god

any individual god

you are a theist

and therefore not an atheist

theist is a difinative statement

meaning that you hold a belief

you do not have to hold ALL beliefs in order to have a belief

you cannot believe in thor, and believe in jesus, and still be a theist

you're saying that in particular context someone is an atheist in the frame of a particular god

but it does not remove their belief in a different god

also, no real scottsman means that the qualifiers for something in particular qualify what the person is

so saying that someone is only a theist if they believe in a particular god is a no true scotssman

you need more hitchens and dawkins in your life

Ive read books from both of them

dawkins is a bit retarded for his rejection of group altruism as a role in society as a positive effect

which pretty much every evolutionary biologist accepts

but

the difference is that I actually understand concepts on a level where i can actually criticize them by synthesizing information

you just take it as doctrine

try reading some books that don't just serve as a confirmation bias for you

LOL

do you even understand dunning kruger?

you like little baby.....

its funny because thats such a basical psychological / philosophical point that is usually used by people who have no understanding of dunning-kruger

please

explain menlos slave

and explain how you are actually that same person

meno's slave

&

try and see how you are basically the same thing

You are basically like a greek slave who thinks he understands a concept, but doesnt really

thats the tl;dr version because i know you probably arent going to be able to conprehend the texts

yes was just resading it now, philosophy is cancer tbh... but if i understand what i just quickly browsed through tis bascially that people can be led to the correct answer, and that somehow proves they had the right answer all along?

The problem is that you don't have the logical foundation to understand a lot of these concepts. Like dunning-kruger, which is a psychological concept used by people in arguments who really don't want to be troubled with having to logically explain their argument, so they just point out that there exists something in where people have a cognitive bias, with a massive lack of proof. It's the "I am very smart" version of calling someone a Nazi.

On your original point

Atheist

on the contrary, it seems that i understand this issue far better than you but you cant not understand that because you have yet to learn aobut it, once you do you may then realise my point

Theist means belief in a god or gods. That is the only qualifer. You are saying that someone who has a god they do not believe in makes them atheist (which, at least to make a coherent argument i'm going to assume you meant towards a particular god). But in order to be atheist in a particular situation, obviously they could not be theist at the same time. So does theist dissolve when confronted in a particular scenario? Obviously not, because the belief in a god does not dissapear even in reference to another god. So belief in a god is A, another is B, etc. Atheist = any letter. This does not mean ALL letters.

also

I understand that you just stole this concept from someone else, but like you this person was also proven wrong

You need to develop your ability to think for yourself instead of just reciting from (ironically) better men

lol

Theism is a definitive statment; meaning that if someone had "allergies", just because they are not allergic to all things does not make them have "allergies"

does not mean they do not have*

what you are failing to grasp is that athiest is just another religious position

I do understand that

but that doesnt make sense

because

theism and atheism is just 2 sides of the same coin

and i reject that whole coin

so put it in simple terms you may grasp

If you are allergic (theist) to things (gods) in particular, it does not mean that you do not have allergies (belief in a god) when confronting things you are not allergic to (other gods).

do you not understand?

Show me where those two are not the same thing please.

okj

using yourt logic

and allergic

asumming that theism is the state of having allergies

to one or more things in particular

if you are allergic to say penicillin you can also be not allergic to cat hair

sure

so it makes you both allergic (theist) and a-alergic (atheist)

however

the state of having allergies does not change

just because you beleive in one god or gods does not stop you from disbelieving in a god or gods

and not having allergies to a particular thing does not make you a-alergic

you are making false equivelencies

thats exactly my point... but in this case "allergies" is (religion)

you dont understand the difference between being an allergic to a particular thing and having allergies

those are two different things

I understand your argument it is just wrong because you are conflating non-sequitors

You STILL have allergies if you are not allergic to cat hair

because if you are allergic to anything, you have allergies

you dont just

no longer have allergies around cat hair

yes, but the equivalence here is religion

yeah but you would have to prove that someone has faith in NO gods to be atheist

theism if you like

not-theist

if you have a theist