Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   Richard Dawkins: well, okay...maybe   (telegraph.co.uk ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Professor Richard Dawkins, can't be sure, human languages, origin of life, Archbishop of Canterbury, image of God, god, party chairman  
•       •       •

21237 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Feb 2012 at 10:23 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



433 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-25 11:33:43 PM  

mbillips: Up until recently, I thought Richard Dawkins the famous atheist was this guy. True story.

[www.richarddawsonlives.com image 300x225]


I find nothing wrong with this. At all.
 
2012-02-25 11:33:43 PM  

s2s2s2: I'm starting to see your problem.


Really? Can you tell me what it is, or are you going to continue to be cryptic?
 
2012-02-25 11:33:51 PM  
It's a matter of logic. You can't prove that invisible sky men don't exist.
 
2012-02-25 11:33:59 PM  
Myah Atheists, where's your messiah now?

/I keed
// Sort of. His 1.4% chance of God is BS and is as sloppy as a lot of the rest of his thinking. How do you properly define the problem enough to get any sort of probability? Anyway, glad to see him come to his senses and acknowledge that no one really no knows the answer to an problem with no boundry conditions.
 
2012-02-25 11:34:41 PM  
Belief is something that has been with our species for a long time. Scientists hypothesize there is a structure in the brain for belief. Being an inherent trait, something which does not have to be taught or learned, we (most of us) are born to believe. Man, with his consciousness, took this structure and created religion. He used belief to create religion in order to allow clans to live together with rules arbitrated by a supernatural being who could not be doubted. Religions should enhance survival, or the believers die out like the Shakers. They should protect their beliefs and the culture that is created from it.
A person's belief quotient (my personal meter) is based on how much a person's beliefs affect their actions, how "real" they treat their beliefs. A BQ can be high or low, depending on the "belief structure" in their brain, and depending on the environment in which they were raised.
The conclusion I have reached from this is that belief is like homosexuality. You are born with it, and it is enhanced or suppressed by the environment you are raised in.

As for Dawkins, I loved his books on evolution. It is sad that he went all militant with his atheism. By militant I mean he attacks this natural phenomenon with scorn, as if religious people "chose" this lifestyle rather than be born and raised in it.

/not trolling
/also drinking
 
2012-02-25 11:34:49 PM  

superdude72: Atheism is the absence of belief in gods, not the positive assertion that there are no gods. I'm not aware of any atheist who claims he can prove the nonexistence of gods.

The hypothetical atheist who believes he can prove the nonexistence of gods is largely a strawman conjured up by religious folks so they can tell their followers: "See? His position depends on faith just as much as ours!" But this is not the case.

I'm not sure why someone as smart as Dawkins would fall in this trap, except that maybe he wanted to strike a conciliatory tone by setting himself apart from those horrible, horrible atheists who in reality believe just the same as he does.


No, he probably wanted to set himself apart from those "atheists"--and some of them are right here on Fark--who REALLY DO say "we know there is no god!" and who screw the rational atheist position by making themselves into as much of militant theologists (atheologists?) as the people they oppose. Madalyn Murray O'Hair was one of those types.
 
2012-02-25 11:34:57 PM  

whatshisname: s2s2s2: whatshisname: How do you "know"?

The same way you do.

Can you be a little more precise? Or are vague answers about a vague idea all that I can expect?


www.peopleandpossibilities.com

"You need to understand that you are the god twirling, twirling inside you. Everything you are, is. Everything that is, are you. The world is the world that you would dream if you dreamt the world. Ev-errrr-y-one is vibrations that is vibrating on a vibration that vibrates on a vibrating ribbon of twirling light. When you say, 'bless you', you are really saying, 'bless me.'"
 
2012-02-25 11:36:32 PM  

stonent: [myweb.tiscali.co.uk image 640x480]

How can Dawkins say there is no God when he gets to bang the vanilla Romana every night?

(As opposed to the chocolate Romana)


because he's learned that timelords are relative
 
2012-02-25 11:37:03 PM  

Cpl.D:

I hear the scientific method is great for sorting that kind of thing out.


It's too bad only 30% of Scientists identify themselves as "not believing in a god."

Source: Ecklund, E. H. and C. P. Scheitle. 2007. Religion among Academic Scientists: Distinctions, Disciplines, and Demographics. Social Problems 54: 289-307.

/because they always ask for a citation.
 
2012-02-25 11:37:14 PM  

Ford Perfect: Belief is something that has been with our species for a long time. Scientists hypothesize there is a structure in the brain for belief. Being an inherent trait, something which does not have to be taught or learned, we (most of us) are born to believe. Man, with his consciousness, took this structure and created religion. He used belief to create religion in order to allow clans to live together with rules arbitrated by a supernatural being who could not be doubted. Religions should enhance survival, or the believers die out like the Shakers. They should protect their beliefs and the culture that is created from it.
A person's belief quotient (my personal meter) is based on how much a person's beliefs affect their actions, how "real" they treat their beliefs. A BQ can be high or low, depending on the "belief structure" in their brain, and depending on the environment in which they were raised.
The conclusion I have reached from this is that belief is like homosexuality. You are born with it, and it is enhanced or suppressed by the environment you are raised in.

As for Dawkins, I loved his books on evolution. It is sad that he went all militant with his atheism. By militant I mean he attacks this natural phenomenon with scorn, as if religious people "chose" this lifestyle rather than be born and raised in it.

/not trolling
/also drinking


He attacks religion with scorn because it is trying to dismantle Western civilization.

Why aren't you deriding a force that is trying to dismantle Western civilization?
 
2012-02-25 11:38:09 PM  

whatshisname: s2s2s2: I'm starting to see your problem.

Really? Can you tell me what it is, or are you going to continue to be cryptic?


What do you honestly expect him to say? Do you think this random Farker has some type of evidence/rationale/reason for the existence of a deity that countless religious scholars, philosophers, scientists, etc... somehow missed? Come on man, asking a religious person for a specific reason why they believe in god is like asking a Truther why they don't accept Obama's birth certificate.
 
2012-02-25 11:41:52 PM  

trotsky: trotsky: mamoru: trotsky: I was an atheist long before Richard Dawkins.

Are you older than he is?

Yes. But I did not begin to be aware of him until 2005.

Let me clarify: I decided what I did based on personal feelings and shiat I read on the internet. Yes. The 1996 internet; it was liberating to see other people feel the same way I did. Dawkins helped me put all this into a more academic view, but I was invested long before knowing him.


But saying you were an atheist long before Dawkins only makes sense if you are older than he is and have lacked a belief in deities for longer. Now, I don't know him well enough to know if he has never believed in any deities in his whole life or if he was raised to believe and then lost his belief, but his lack of belief is clear at least as far back as 1976 when he wrote the Selfish Gene (no, it's not a book about atheism, but his lack of belief is clear in it).

Just sayin'... "I was an atheist long before Dawkins" is an awkward way of putting it, since you seemed to mean "I was an atheist long before I was aware of Dawkins".

So...what? I mean, so was I. I wasn't aware that knowledge of Dawkins was needed to play a role in one's atheism. I've never even read "The God Delusion". Nor do I care to. I much prefer his stuff purely about biology ("The Extended Phenotype" is one of my favorite books of all time). Because, aside from Fark flame wars, when you really come down to it, the whole Theist/atheist debate is pretty boring, especially when you allow yourself to live in countries where no one really cares.

/been an atheist in the sense of finally realizing that I don't believe in deities since ~1993
//in hindsight, pretty sure I never had any faith in the existence of a god, and only believed in in a "believe what the grown-ups tell me" sort of way
///probably had stronger faith in the existence of Santa, because at least there were presents from him on Christmas
 
2012-02-25 11:42:42 PM  

Slaxl: Hoban Washburne: Actually, he explained himself well. He doesn't know if there is a god (agnostic), and he doesn't believe that there is one (atheist). This is the way the vast majority of atheists and people that call themselves "agnostic" feel.

Don't be absurd, clearly this means not only is god real, for if there is the slightest possibility then that must mean he's real, and that he's a he, and that everything in the bible is true, except the bits the preachers don't like, but also it means that all atheists are drug addled hipsters who just want to piss off their parents. Jeez, you kids...

In all seriousness now, I'm fed up of living in a world where we atheists need to be seen as unmilitant, because anyone militant is bad, and any atheist that says "there's no god" is immediately classed as "militant", and put in the same category as Bin Laden. It's bullshiat, let's be clear, there are no gods, but i'm not going to blow anyone up to prove that point, i'll just sit back and continue drinking, making the occasional fark post.

Baroness Warsi the biatchwhore thinks that by warning of a rise in militant atheism she can make it appear to be something to be feared, because otherwise rationality will rise up and overtake her stone age beliefs and then she won't know what to do, because she'll have spent her life in service to an obviously false premise.

Also there seems to be a desire to stem atheism and secularism by making religion to be the de facto state of normality, and thus any challenge to it is instantly extremist. It's bullshiat, we are already a secular society, we should be spitting on the faces of religious people who try to change that, rather than welcoming them in under the umbrella of religious tolerance.

Anyone that seeks to regress civilisation by provoking an advancement of religion by stoking primal fears of the unknown does need to be kept away from civilised people.


Perhaps she fears the rise of militant atheism because no one wants to be subjected to complete miscreant pricks, such as yourself, who write things like "we should be spitting on the faces of religious people."
 
2012-02-25 11:43:57 PM  
I think that if a creator does exist, then the chance that he would be the type of vengeful, nitpicking, anal-retentive being who is impressed by:

Not using birth control,a sex toy or even where you stick your dick
Wearing a silly hat
Going to a ornate building on a certain day to join others telling him what a wonderful being he is
Obeying the wishes of corrupt, rich old men
Meddling in politics
Thinking the human body is a piece of filth
Wrapping your women up in dark bedsheets
Claiming that abstaining from certain kinds of food offends the great and wise sky wizard
Spreading your version of 'morality' around the world, by genocide
Raping kids and providing safe harbor to the perpetrators
Telling others (especially children!) who aren't even a member of your nasty little group that you are 'going to hell'
Stealing others money in his name
Wearing special clothing i.e. magic underwear'.
Sticking your nose into government to pass laws to make it easy for you to harass people with your silly religious rules
Claiming to be for the sanctity of life when it comes to controlling women's sex lives, then supporting wars and the death penalty
Promoting bigotry, hatred and discrimination to anyone who is different or does not fit your ideal
Encouraging ignorance of science fact by teaching silly, improbable bronze-age fables as the truth, and promoting books that encourages slavery, war, torture and genocide as somehow being "moral" and "holy"
Denying your child lifesaving medicine so **YOU** can get to heaven (you selfish bastard)

has pretty much impossible odds,
 
2012-02-25 11:45:45 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: asking a religious person


Ew. No.

whatshisname: Really? Can you tell me what it is?


I already have.

gimmegimme: When you say, 'bless you', you are really saying, 'bless me.'"


A-choo.
 
2012-02-25 11:46:14 PM  

Hoban Washburne: StoneColdAtheist: The simple truth is that our atheism is NOT driven by logic. We simply don't believe the stories told about the existence of god(s), no matter how elaborate or long standing.

Because there's no evidence, right? Sounds like logic to me. Basic logic, maybe, but it seems to escape a lot of people. Not trying to pick a fight, but to me the opposite of a person of faith is a person that asks for evidence.


I'm not trying to pick a fight either...besides, I didn't get dressed up. ;)

J/k, but is strikes me that you're creating a distinction without a difference. For instance, I almost never argue with people about the existence of God. Any more than I argue about the existence of Santa Claus or unicorns. To me it isn't question of logic...I simply don't believe in them and won't argue the point. Maybe that's intellectually lazy, but it's how I roll.

I sometimes conclude the belief or the lack thereof is primarily a matter of culture. If you are raised and indoctrinated in it, as we are in English and American culture, it is very difficult, bordering on impossible, to change it. In my case I was raised without religious indoctrination, so don't believe it, and more than I believe in Buddhism or can assume a convincing impersonation of a native Arabic speaking Muslim.

Other English speaking Americans ARE raised and indoctrinated in that tradition, and the vast majority of them profess some level of belief in it. Less and less as time goes by, but still a clear majority. Moreover, most can no more dismiss the basics of their religious indoctrination than they can reject their mother tongue or their essential American outlook.
 
2012-02-25 11:47:39 PM  

s2s2s2: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: asking a religious person

Ew. No.whatshisname: Really? Can you tell me what it is?

I already have.

gimmegimme: When you say, 'bless you', you are really saying, 'bless me.'"

A-choo.


I wasn't referring to you specifically, just anyone who believes in a supernatural progenitor.
 
2012-02-25 11:48:16 PM  

Day_Old_Dutchie: impossible odds


Now we are getting somewhere.

No one should need a map to get to their own, current location.
 
2012-02-25 11:49:07 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I wasn't referring to you specifically


I know, it was kind of a pun. "A-choo" "At you".
 
2012-02-25 11:49:36 PM  

s2s2s2: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: asking a religious person

Ew. No.whatshisname: Really? Can you tell me what it is?

I already have.

gimmegimme: When you say, 'bless you', you are really saying, 'bless me.'"

A-choo.


It's time for everyone's favorite new game show: Fark Troll or New Age Guru!
 
2012-02-25 11:50:52 PM  

Cpl.D: romasnavandar: It's too bad only 30% of Scientists identify themselves as "not believing in a god.".

Who cares? Does that suddenly make science not work? Scientists are human like everyone else. They're equally capable of stupidity. Then again, it could also be a matter of form. When I was in Iraq, most of the people in my AO were "muslim" in the same way people back home were "christian". They didn't buy into the bollocks, but it was the mask they wore in public to get along with their neighbors. I knew very little Iraqis that didn't have booze in their house and porn on their cell phones.


I was merely pointing out, for the benefit of the intellectually elite on here, that "reason" and "intelligence" and "logic," the very cornerstones of the principles most scientists rely on, have little bearing on matters of faith. When over 50% of the U.S. top scientists identify themselves as religious, it makes it much harder to make the argument "only idiots believe." Yours happened to be the post to springboard that link, I'm sorry.

As to your friends in Iraq, I hope they made it.
 
2012-02-25 11:53:07 PM  

gimmegimme: It's time for everyone's favorite new game show: Fark Troll or New Age Guru!


I'm going with your first guess.
 
2012-02-25 11:53:11 PM  

gimmegimme: It's time for everyone's favorite new game show:

Is it Black, or is it White?
 
2012-02-25 11:53:42 PM  
Days like this, I remember I'm actually pretty proud to be an Episcopalian.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is like our pope (kinda), and he's a really cool guy if he can just sit and chat with Dawkins and actually have an intelligent conversation with him.

That's the episcopal church for you, which is why I love it.
 
2012-02-25 11:54:57 PM  

Cpl.D: your god

 
2012-02-25 11:55:11 PM  

s2s2s2: gimmegimme: It's time for everyone's favorite new game show: Is it Black, or is it White?


Wow. You're saying religion is a racial thing?
 
2012-02-25 11:55:55 PM  

s2s2s2: Cpl.D: your god


Tries again:
www.threadbombing.com
 
2012-02-25 11:57:02 PM  

s2s2s2: s2s2s2: Cpl.D: your god

Tries again:
[www.threadbombing.com image 440x413]


Dude/Dudette: you're the one who refuses to actually define what you believe in a coherent manner. We're being nice to you/patronizing you in the same manner we converse with that crazy guy who lives at the bus station.
 
2012-02-25 11:57:18 PM  

gimmegimme: You're saying religion is a racial thing?


Religion tends to be. God hates religion, don't we?
 
2012-02-25 11:57:39 PM  

gimmegimme: Ford Perfect: Belief is something that has been with our species for a long time. Scientists hypothesize there is a structure in the brain for belief. Being an inherent trait, something which does not have to be taught or learned, we (most of us) are born to believe. Man, with his consciousness, took this structure and created religion. He used belief to create religion in order to allow clans to live together with rules arbitrated by a supernatural being who could not be doubted. Religions should enhance survival, or the believers die out like the Shakers. They should protect their beliefs and the culture that is created from it.
A person's belief quotient (my personal meter) is based on how much a person's beliefs affect their actions, how "real" they treat their beliefs. A BQ can be high or low, depending on the "belief structure" in their brain, and depending on the environment in which they were raised.
The conclusion I have reached from this is that belief is like homosexuality. You are born with it, and it is enhanced or suppressed by the environment you are raised in.

As for Dawkins, I loved his books on evolution. It is sad that he went all militant with his atheism. By militant I mean he attacks this natural phenomenon with scorn, as if religious people "chose" this lifestyle rather than be born and raised in it.

/not trolling
/also drinking

He attacks religion with scorn because it is trying to dismantle Western civilization.

Why aren't you deriding a force that is trying to dismantle Western civilization?


Because just fighting it is stupid. Banning it is as stupid as banning gay marriage, or our liquor laws, or any other laws that are religious in nature. We have to understand it and work with it, because there are a lot more of them than there are of us. We know we cannot use logic on believers; if that worked there would be no believers. This is inherent in our species. We need to have a bit more tolerance. Not too much, just a bit. We need to quit riling them up with these stupid "get rid of that town seal because there is a cross on it" BS. Sure, fight where there is a real conflict, but leave this petty BS alone. I have seen alot of these kinds of stories on right wing blogs and it just makes them mad because it seems to threaten their culture. Yes we need to keep them from creating a theocratic state; no we dont need to attack traditions that no one thinks about until you try to ban it or make a federal case out of it.
We need to understand them, and they us, and draw a line that we both don't cross.
 
2012-02-25 11:58:04 PM  

gimmegimme: that crazy guy who lives at the bus station.


So you've met God and you still question our existence?
 
2012-02-25 11:58:11 PM  

iaazathot: Any atheist who is honest, or observant of scientific methodology is a weak atheist.


At least by my own definition of these terms, I would place someone who says "I actively believe there is no God" in the strong atheist camp even if they follow up with "but hypothetically I could be wrong".

However, if you ask 5 people for what atheism, agnosticism, strong atheism, and weak atheism, it seems to me you'll get 10 different answers for each, so I can't exactly claim my answer is definitive.
 
2012-02-25 11:59:51 PM  

evaned: ...if you ask 5 people for what atheism, agnosticism, strong atheism, and weak atheism, it seems to me you'll get 10 different answers for each...


So vague, incoherent?
 
2012-02-26 12:02:28 AM  

s2s2s2: evaned: ...if you ask 5 people for what atheism, agnosticism, strong atheism, and weak atheism, it seems to me you'll get 10 different answers for each...

So vague, incoherent?


And this is why I'm ignostic.
 
2012-02-26 12:03:45 AM  

FormlessOne: ignostic


Clever, or inadvertently clever?
 
2012-02-26 12:05:12 AM  

Ford Perfect:

Because just fighting it is stupid. Banning it is as stupid as banning gay marriage, or our liquor laws, or any other laws that are religious in nature. We have to understand it and work with it, because there are a lot more of them than there are of us. We know we cannot use logic on believers; if that worked there would be no believers. This is inherent in our species. We need to have a bit more tolerance. Not too much, just a bit. We need to quit riling them up with these stupid "get rid of that town seal because there is a cross on it" BS. Sure, fight where there is a real conflict, but leave this petty BS alone. I have seen alot of these kinds of stories on right wing blogs and it just makes them mad because it seems to threaten their culture. Yes we need to keep them from creating a theocratic state; no we dont need to attack traditions that no one thinks about until you try to ban it or make a federal case out of it.
We need to understand them, and they us, and draw a line that we both don't cross.


I do love your thoughtful comment, but the line has already been crossed (sometimes hundreds of years ago). You mention liquor laws. Well, religious blue laws determine who can buy what liquor and when and where. Most atheists would rather magically undo the religiously motivated Iraq War than the Pledge challenges, given a choice. The Republican candidates are trying to force America into a war with Iran to fulfill their Doomsday theology.

Attacking all of the works of the theocrats helps to prevent a theocracy.

The "line that we both don't cross" was tried in the First Amendment. Umm....it didn't work. If you didn't know that, dig into your pocket and look at some of your money.
 
2012-02-26 12:05:54 AM  

gimmegimme: This really isn't news. (Though I'm sure we'll have a fun discussion.)

The problem is that you can't prove a negative. There may be an invisible Russian unicorn in my girlfriend's basement, but the likelihood is so remote that it's not worth exploring. (Not to mention the fact that no two people describe the Russian unicorn in the same way.) No one can ever be sure that the Russian unicorn doesn't exist, but only a moron believes in it without proof and dedicates their life to pleasing the invisible Russian unicorn.


Y'know, I seen me a mermaid once. I even seen me a shark eat an octopus. But I ain't never seen no phantom Russian unicorn.
 
JMT
2012-02-26 12:07:46 AM  
God, if he or she exists, is so unlikely to be represented factually by any religion of man that is a better wager to live an atheistic life based on reason, logic, and commonsense morality (traits which an all knowing and powerful god is likely to possess) than to risk suffering his or her wrath by subscribing to, what is in all likelihood, a false belief in a manmade deity.
 
2012-02-26 12:08:50 AM  
Either you believe or you don't.

Everything else is just name calling.
 
2012-02-26 12:08:51 AM  
I just tell people that I don't believe in the gods of men because more than likely, men created them.
As for any other, I dunno.
 
2012-02-26 12:10:11 AM  

Cpl.D: Just ignore s2s2s2. It's fairly obvious at this point he's just trolling.


An atheism thread is original thought, to be sure.
 
2012-02-26 12:10:30 AM  

CyberDave:
Y'know, I seen me a mermaid once. I even seen me a shark eat an octopus. But I ain't never seen no phantom Russian unicorn.


www.filmsite.org Approves.
 
2012-02-26 12:10:53 AM  

CyberDave: gimmegimme: This really isn't news. (Though I'm sure we'll have a fun discussion.)

The problem is that you can't prove a negative. There may be an invisible Russian unicorn in my girlfriend's basement, but the likelihood is so remote that it's not worth exploring. (Not to mention the fact that no two people describe the Russian unicorn in the same way.) No one can ever be sure that the Russian unicorn doesn't exist, but only a moron believes in it without proof and dedicates their life to pleasing the invisible Russian unicorn.

Y'know, I seen me a mermaid once. I even seen me a shark eat an octopus. But I ain't never seen no phantom Russian unicorn.


Why are you a militant anti-invisible Russian unicornist? Don't you realize that people have beliefs?
 
2012-02-26 12:11:03 AM  
So Dawkins admits that his position is the same as 99.9% of atheists and the religious somehow consider this a victory.

How can you argue with people who have such a feeble grasp on logic and reason?
 
2012-02-26 12:11:36 AM  

Ford Perfect: I just tell people that I don't believe in the gods of men because more than likely, men created them.
As for any other, I dunno.


Man created the idea that God is something separate to alleviate responsibility.
 
2012-02-26 12:13:38 AM  

Farking Canuck: How can you argue with people who have such a feeble grasp on logic and reason?


It's as impossible as arguing with people that cling to logic and reason.

Epicurus: If the world is logical and reasonable...
 
2012-02-26 12:13:54 AM  

Farking Canuck: How can you argue with people who have such a feeble grasp on logic and reason?


Why should we?
 
2012-02-26 12:14:19 AM  
Why would an atheist need to be 100% certain that a god doesn't exist? Most atheists I know are atheist because there is no proof of the existence of a god, but there is also no proof that it doesn't exist. Among atheists there are differing opinions as to the likelihood of a god existing.
 
2012-02-26 12:14:24 AM  

gimmegimme: The problem is that you can't prove a negative. There may be an invisible Russian unicorn in my girlfriend's basement, but the likelihood is so remote that it's not worth exploring. (Not to mention the fact that no two people describe the Russian unicorn in the same way.) No one can ever be sure that the Russian unicorn doesn't exist, but only a moron believes in it without proof and dedicates their life to pleasing the invisible Russian unicorn.


Are you American gimmegimme? Because, if you are, that unicorn is far more likely to be Mexican!

/unless you live in Alaska ... then it is definitely Russian
 
2012-02-26 12:15:15 AM  

Cpl.D: Try harder, tryhard.


Who's trying? I'm just pointing to the obvious. Know you know what the natives that couldn't see the ships feel like.
 
Displayed 50 of 433 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report