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.

(Some Guy)   "Why am I against fluoridated water? Because I don't know what I'm talking about"   (ericdsnider.com ) divider line
    More: Amusing, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, American Public Health Association, Veterans Committee, health association, American Dental Association, fluoridation  
•       •       •

4070 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 May 2013 at 6:11 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-03 12:11:02 PM  

Cretony38: The fact remains Fluoride is a toxic compound, an industrial by product that is to toxic to be dumped into a landfill. And was used in pest control. So are these facts incorrect?


"Fluoride" is "a compound" = false

You're already not off to a good start there.
 
2013-05-03 12:11:25 PM  

pmdgrwr: It is amazing how many people want fluoride in their water,


It is also amazing how many folks want an intake of minerals as well - things like the cobalt, zinc, iron, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, etc.  It is kind of weird that we would want stuff like that in our bodies isn't it?
 
2013-05-03 12:16:30 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: But it must be the fluoride!!! derp!!!


coorelation is not causation.  There is may items which can impact tooth decay beyond fluoride in drinking water.  Thinks like brushing and flossing habits, type of food, education, and general health can all have a huge impact on these numbers and trends.  Also don't forget that fluoride is also a naturally occuring mineral that is in pretty high concentrations in some water sources.
 
2013-05-03 12:17:37 PM  

spickus: I beat big chlorine by installing a hypochlorite generator but now I'm beholden to Morton.


Big Salt got you down?
 
2013-05-03 12:19:33 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: And here's a chart from the World Health Organization


I've posted that chart in the past myself. It wasn't well received.

/I'm off to add mind control juice fluoride to your water.
 
2013-05-03 12:20:17 PM  

CPennypacker: What, exactly, do you think your chart proves, of anything?

Why are you wrong in every thread? I can predict your position on any issue by imagining the stupidest possible interpretation of what is being discussed.


So your response is to pretend you're even dumber than usual and resort to the usual projection shtick?

Looks to me like fluoride is irrelevant in terms of the decrease in tooth decay.  What are your mental gymnastics telling you?

sdsdw.org
 
2013-05-03 12:21:06 PM  

HeadLever: spickus: I beat big chlorine by installing a hypochlorite generator but now I'm beholden to Morton.

Big Salt got you down?


Beats the RMP
 
2013-05-03 12:22:04 PM  

Muta: Skarekrough: Lady Indica: This type of derp is dangerous.

Dangerous?

Eh, maybe....maybe not.

Entertaining?

Hell yes!

It was satire you dolts!


Satire, yes, but there are enough mouth-breathing, tin-foil wearing, vaccine-avoiding crazies out there that wouldn't recognize satire if it shiat in their lap.  They'd lock onto the literal derp in the article as PROOF that they're right.
 
2013-05-03 12:22:29 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Looks to me like fluoride

(added to drinking water) is irrelevant in terms of the decrease in tooth decay.

FTFY
 
2013-05-03 12:22:38 PM  

spickus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: And here's a chart from the World Health Organization

I've posted that chart in the past myself. It wasn't well received.

/I'm off to add mind control juice fluoride to your water.


Big fluoride strikes again!!!
 
2013-05-03 12:22:59 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Looks to me like fluoride is irrelevant in terms of the decrease in tooth decay.


Probably because that graph is not telling the entire story.  Fluoride can still be very relevent in this regard, but still drowned out by other factors.  Again, you are confusing coorelation and causation.
 
2013-05-03 12:23:45 PM  

HeadLever: BraveNewCheneyWorld: But it must be the fluoride!!! derp!!!

coorelation is not causation.  There is may items which can impact tooth decay beyond fluoride in drinking water.  Thinks like brushing and flossing habits, type of food, education, and general health can all have a huge impact on these numbers and trends.  Also don't forget that fluoride is also a naturally occuring mineral that is in pretty high concentrations in some water sources.


Correlation is not causation?  You do know that I'm saying EXACTLY THAT, right?  There is no correlation between fluoridation and tooth decay as this chart shows.  Other factors are responsible, so if you believe fluoride is responsible, you better be able to prove it.. with data.
 
2013-05-03 12:25:39 PM  

spickus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Looks to me like fluoride (added to drinking water) is irrelevant in terms of the decrease in tooth decay.

FTFY


Yet more derp.. Are you actually arguing that the natural fluoride in water has been increasing, and thus resulting in countries that don't fluoridate, achieving drastic improvements?
 
2013-05-03 12:26:18 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: CPennypacker: What, exactly, do you think your chart proves, of anything?

Why are you wrong in every thread? I can predict your position on any issue by imagining the stupidest possible interpretation of what is being discussed.

So your response is to pretend you're even dumber than usual and resort to the usual projection shtick?

Looks to me like fluoride is irrelevant in terms of the decrease in tooth decay.  What are your mental gymnastics telling you?

[sdsdw.org image 596x433]


My mental gymnastics are telling me that you read that chart and it tells you fluoride makes no difference, when it should be telling you nothing because all it shows is the individual changes of the DMF index per country, and each country has different health care, differnet healthcare coverage, dental care, teach different dental care and maintenance procedures to their citizens, have different food consumption habits, have different levels of naturally occuring minerals and chemicals, including fluoride, in their water, and as such says nothing, really, about the effect fluoride itself has on preventing tooth decay

But by all means, keep digging.

4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-05-03 12:28:08 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: HeadLever: BraveNewCheneyWorld: But it must be the fluoride!!! derp!!!

coorelation is not causation.  There is may items which can impact tooth decay beyond fluoride in drinking water.  Thinks like brushing and flossing habits, type of food, education, and general health can all have a huge impact on these numbers and trends.  Also don't forget that fluoride is also a naturally occuring mineral that is in pretty high concentrations in some water sources.

Correlation is not causation?  You do know that I'm saying EXACTLY THAT, right?  There is no correlation between fluoridation and tooth decay as this chart shows.  Other factors are responsible, so if you believe fluoride is responsible, you better be able to prove it.. with data.


What a peer reviewed study looks like vs. a "fluoridealert.org":

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3543717/
 
2013-05-03 12:30:50 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: There is no correlation between fluoridation and tooth decay as this chart shows


No it does not.  In order for the chart to show that, you first must prove that graph is free from any other outside factors that can impact your conclusion.  So far, you have not done that.
 
2013-05-03 12:33:41 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: spickus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Looks to me like fluoride (added to drinking water) is irrelevant in terms of the decrease in tooth decay.

FTFY

Yet more derp.. Are you actually arguing that the natural fluoride in water has been increasing, and thus resulting in countries that don't fluoridate, achieving drastic improvements?


Another study:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3082236/
 
2013-05-03 12:34:37 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: spickus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Looks to me like fluoride (added to drinking water) is irrelevant in terms of the decrease in tooth decay.

FTFY

Yet more derp.. Are you actually arguing that the natural fluoride in water has been increasing, and thus resulting in countries that don't fluoridate, achieving drastic improvements?


No, I was agreeing with you farktard. According to this study, adding fluoride to drinking water is of dubious benefit. According to a brazillion other studies. topical application of fluoride to teeth (along with vastly improved dental hygiene) is quite beneficial.

/Derp indeed
 
2013-05-03 12:35:28 PM  

HeadLever: BraveNewCheneyWorld: There is no correlation between fluoridation and tooth decay as this chart shows

No it does not.  In order for the chart to show that, you first must prove that graph is free from any other outside factors that can impact your conclusion.  So far, you have not done that.


But he has tens of blogs yet left uncited. Watch out!
 
2013-05-03 12:36:07 PM  

CPennypacker: My mental gymnastics are telling me that you read that chart and it tells you fluoride makes no difference, when it should be telling you nothing because all it shows is the individual changes of the DMF index per country, and each country has different health care, differnet healthcare coverage, dental care, teach different dental care and maintenance procedures to their citizens, have different food consumption habits, have different levels of naturally occuring minerals and chemicals, including fluoride, in their water, and as such says nothing, really, about the effect fluoride itself has on preventing tooth decay

But by all means, keep digging.


You're still providing nothing to prove your claim or refute the chart.  And your argument has basically devolved to "hey, what the fark does the WHO know about studying health, they're a bunch of jackwads, and I know better, but I won't cite my super secret data"

Look, the fact is that all countries, regardless of fluoridation are approaching the same rate, so fluoridation cannot be a significant factor.  Obviously, you fail to understand this.   Do you act this stupid in front of live people, or just on the internet?
 
2013-05-03 12:36:40 PM  
did they close another toxic waste dump this week? what with all the pro-fluoride articles today.

/Off to drink some roundup since theres not quite enough on my food.
 
2013-05-03 12:38:27 PM  

HeadLever: Wayne 985: What else can we add to water to make Americans healthier then? There have to be other interest groups who stand to make profits.

Chlorine?  I mean why just have 'Big Fluoride' when we can have "Big Halogen'?  The more the merrier, right?


Chlorine I get. That's a matter of stopping the spread of serious disease. Making prettier teeth should not really be a top priority for the government.
 
2013-05-03 12:40:10 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Yet more derp.. Are you actually arguing that the natural fluoride in water has been increasing, and thus resulting in countries that don't fluoridate, achieving drastic improvements?


No, he is aguing that your graph does not make the claim that fluoride is irrlelvent as you did.  Again, you have not accounted for any outside factors such as flouride levels in natural water, education, brushing and flossing habits, or a number of other things.

It is very plausible that natural fluoride levels may be increasing if more municipal water is being pumped from groundwater wells.
 
2013-05-03 12:40:29 PM  

HeadLever: BraveNewCheneyWorld: There is no correlation between fluoridation and tooth decay as this chart shows

No it does not.  In order for the chart to show that, you first must prove that graph is free from any other outside factors that can impact your conclusion.  So far, you have not done that.


Actually, no, you're the one who has to prove that there were outside factors that impacted the results.
 
2013-05-03 12:44:13 PM  

HeadLever: No, he is aguing that your graph does not make the claim that fluoride is irrlelvent as you did.  Again, you have not accounted for any outside factors such as flouride levels in natural water, education, brushing and flossing habits, or a number of other things.


I don't have to prove that there aren't any outside factors. You have to prove that there are.  I shouldn't have to explain something so basic.  You can't ask me to prove a negative.

My claim- there is no teakettle on mars
Your claim- there is a teakettle on mars
Your demand-  Prove to me that their isn't, or I'm right.
 
2013-05-03 12:47:03 PM  

Wayne 985: Making prettier teeth should not really be a top priority for the government.


So it is about making teeth 'prettier' and not about tooth decay and the health issues (and cost) assoicated with that?  Now you are just grasping at straws.  Hey if you dont want to drink fluoridated water, go buy some bottled water (though you had better check first as fluoride can be found in bottled water as well) or buy a water purification system.

Or move to a place that doesn't have fluoride added or naturally.  That is your choice.  No one is making you drink it.
 
2013-05-03 12:51:05 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Actually, no, you're the one who has to prove that there were outside factors that impacted the results.


Your the one posting the graph.  It is yours.  How the hell am I supposed to know the background data behind it?  Besides, I am not the one confusing coorelation and causation.  That is your fallacy.  Not mine.  Until you can prove your coorlation in the graph does cause your stated result, I'll continue to call you out on that fallacy.
 
2013-05-03 12:51:34 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: I don't have to prove that there aren't any outside factors. You have to prove that there are.


It can readily assumed that there are factors other than drinking water fluoridation which may be factors in these countries' DMFT rates.  Otherwise we'd expect the numbers for every country in the fluoridated and non-fluoridated groups to be statistically identical across the entire chart.

Why play stupid?
 
2013-05-03 12:53:09 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: HeadLever: No, he is aguing that your graph does not make the claim that fluoride is irrlelvent as you did.  Again, you have not accounted for any outside factors such as flouride levels in natural water, education, brushing and flossing habits, or a number of other things.

I don't have to prove that there aren't any outside factors. You have to prove that there are.  I shouldn't have to explain something so basic.  You can't ask me to prove a negative.

My claim- there is no teakettle on mars
Your claim- there is a teakettle on mars
Your demand-  Prove to me that their isn't, or I'm right.


Read the two papers I listed.
 
2013-05-03 12:53:32 PM  

HeadLever: No, he is aguing that your graph does not make the claim that fluoride is irrlelvent as you did. Again, you have not accounted for any outside factors such as flouride levels in natural water, education, brushing and flossing habits, or a number of other things.


It should be also be noted the decline in DMFT also tends to correlate with the implementation of universal healthcare (and dental care) coverage in a lot of the countries listed in the chart.

The US is unique among developed nations in that not everyone has the resources for dental coverage. Thus, comparing the US with any other countries in this respect is just not useful or relevant.
 
2013-05-03 12:53:49 PM  

poot_rootbeer: BraveNewCheneyWorld: I don't have to prove that there aren't any outside factors. You have to prove that there are.

It can readily assumed that there are factors other than drinking water fluoridation which may be factors in these countries' DMFT rates.  Otherwise we'd expect the numbers for every country in the fluoridated and non-fluoridated groups to be statistically identical across the entire chart.

Why play stupid?


Lol "play"
 
2013-05-03 12:57:24 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: My claim- there is no teakettle on mars fewer pirates means higher global temperature
Your claim- there is a teakettle on mars you need to prove that is an accurate comparison as coorelation does not always equal causation
BNCW's rebuttal - you need to prove that it doesn't
Everyone else *facepalm*

 
2013-05-03 12:58:04 PM  

HeadLever: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Actually, no, you're the one who has to prove that there were outside factors that impacted the results.

Your the one posting the graph.  It is yours.  How the hell am I supposed to know the background data behind it?  Besides, I am not the one confusing coorelation and causation.  That is your fallacy.  Not mine.  Until you can prove your coorlation in the graph does cause your stated result, I'll continue to call you out on that fallacy.


You're making the claim that there is something wrong about the graph.  You're asking that I prove that there are not outside factors.  That's not how a debate works.   You must prove that there are outside factors, you cannot simply say there might be outside factors and request that I disprove every outside factor that could possibly exist.  Are you honestly this stupid?

poot_rootbeer: BraveNewCheneyWorld: I don't have to prove that there aren't any outside factors. You have to prove that there are.

It can readily assumed that there are factors other than drinking water fluoridation which may be factors in these countries' DMFT rates.  Otherwise we'd expect the numbers for every country in the fluoridated and non-fluoridated groups to be statistically identical across the entire chart.

Why play stupid?


You don't seem to understand the point.  They're arguing "sure, everything is getting better, but that doesn't mean fluoride isn't responsible too", when in fact, the chart shows just that.  If elves are magically appearing in everyone's room at night and performing fluoride treatments, they need to prove it.
 
2013-05-03 12:59:04 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Looks to me like fluoride is irrelevant in terms of the decrease in tooth decay. What are your mental gymnastics telling you?


It tells me that the US, which is the only country on that chart where not every citizen or resident has access to dental care, exhibited as steep a decline in DMFT as unfluoridated countries which had universal healthcare and dental care coverage for all citizens.
 
2013-05-03 12:59:48 PM  

HeadLever: Wayne 985: Making prettier teeth should not really be a top priority for the government.

So it is about making teeth 'prettier' and not about tooth decay and the health issues (and cost) assoicated with that?  Now you are just grasping at straws.  Hey if you dont want to drink fluoridated water, go buy some bottled water (though you had better check first as fluoride can be found in bottled water as well) or buy a water purification system.


It is not the government's job to wipe your ass, although maybe you'd like them to. Wouldn't want people getting diaper rash, after all. Its job is to do for people what they can't do for themselves.

Or move to a place that doesn't have fluoride added or naturally.  That is your choice.  No one is making you drink it.

That reminds me of the people who teach creationism in Louisiana public schools and then claim their pupils aren't being forced to learn it. Newsflash: government resources are nearly monopolies and telling people to move is stupid for any number of reasons I can begin listing.
 
2013-05-03 01:01:28 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: If elves are magically appearing in everyone's room at night and performing fluoride treatments, they need to prove it.


I didn't mean to imply that the elves are directly applying the fluoride but they do put it in my toothpaste.
 
2013-05-03 01:01:37 PM  

RexTalionis: It should be also be noted the decline in DMFT also tends to correlate with the implementation of universal healthcare (and dental care) coverage in a lot of the countries listed in the chart.


I am not sure that I would go that far, however, regular dental cleanings becoming more and more commonplace (free under many dental plans) is likely one huge cause of that downward trend.
 
2013-05-03 01:01:48 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: HeadLever: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Actually, no, you're the one who has to prove that there were outside factors that impacted the results.

Your the one posting the graph.  It is yours.  How the hell am I supposed to know the background data behind it?  Besides, I am not the one confusing coorelation and causation.  That is your fallacy.  Not mine.  Until you can prove your coorlation in the graph does cause your stated result, I'll continue to call you out on that fallacy.

You're making the claim that there is something wrong about the graph.  You're asking that I prove that there are not outside factors.  That's not how a debate works.   You must prove that there are outside factors, you cannot simply say there might be outside factors and request that I disprove every outside factor that could possibly exist.  Are you honestly this stupid?

poot_rootbeer: BraveNewCheneyWorld: I don't have to prove that there aren't any outside factors. You have to prove that there are.

It can readily assumed that there are factors other than drinking water fluoridation which may be factors in these countries' DMFT rates.  Otherwise we'd expect the numbers for every country in the fluoridated and non-fluoridated groups to be statistically identical across the entire chart.

Why play stupid?

You don't seem to understand the point.  They're arguing "sure, everything is getting better, but that doesn't mean fluoride isn't responsible too", when in fact, the chart shows just that.  If elves are magically appearing in everyone's room at night and performing fluoride treatments, they need to prove it.


Dude, seriously, check out the Nevada study. It teases out several factors that contribute to different DMTF rates in different populations. At this point it seems like you asked for data, data was provided and now you are concentrating in discussing semantics.
 
2013-05-03 01:03:27 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: You're making the claim that there is something wrong about the graph


No I am not.  I am saying that coorelation is not necessarily causation.  It may be that you assertion is spot on.  However, without the confidence as to eliminate other factors that may impact the coorelation, you can not say that A is a result of B
 
2013-05-03 01:05:02 PM  

jrodr018: Read the two papers I listed.


You can link the relevant sections if you'd like.  If you're too lazy to read your own link, then I'm not bothering with you.

HeadLever: BraveNewCheneyWorld: My claim- there is no teakettle on mars fewer pirates means higher global temperature
Your claim- there is a teakettle on mars you need to prove that is an accurate comparison as coorelation does not always equal causation
BNCW's rebuttal - you need to prove that it doesn't
Everyone else *facepalm*

You're

the one asking to prove the negative, not me.  Are you honestly this stupid, or just trolling?
 
2013-05-03 01:06:13 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: jrodr018: Read the two papers I listed.

You can link the relevant sections if you'd like.  If you're too lazy to read your own link, then I'm not bothering with you.

HeadLever: BraveNewCheneyWorld: My claim- there is no teakettle on mars fewer pirates means higher global temperature
Your claim- there is a teakettle on mars you need to prove that is an accurate comparison as coorelation does not always equal causation
BNCW's rebuttal - you need to prove that it doesn't
Everyone else *facepalm*

You're the one asking to prove the negative, not me.  Are you honestly this stupid, or just trolling?


Well no wonder you are uninformed. Sorry did not realize you are just stupid.
 
2013-05-03 01:10:27 PM  

Wayne 985: Its job is to do for people what they can't do for themselves.


I don't look at it that way.  If the people (goverment) want flouride in thier drinking water, fine. If you don't, that doesn't bother me either.  However, I'll correct you all day when you want to concoct some cocamamy story as to why it is going to kill us all and ignore the science on the issue.

I tend to support it just because the societal benifit is typically greater than the cost, not that I think that you 'need' it.
 
2013-05-03 01:10:47 PM  

jrodr018: BraveNewCheneyWorld: jrodr018: Read the two papers I listed.

You can link the relevant sections if you'd like.  If you're too lazy to read your own link, then I'm not bothering with you.

HeadLever: BraveNewCheneyWorld: My claim- there is no teakettle on mars fewer pirates means higher global temperature
Your claim- there is a teakettle on mars you need to prove that is an accurate comparison as coorelation does not always equal causation
BNCW's rebuttal - you need to prove that it doesn't
Everyone else *facepalm*

You're the one asking to prove the negative, not me.  Are you honestly this stupid, or just trolling?

Well no wonder you are uninformed. Sorry did not realize you are just stupid.


If you can't be bothered to read your own link and be able to quote a single relevant statement supporting your position, then you're not worth talking to.
 
2013-05-03 01:12:07 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: You're the one asking to prove the negative, not me.


No I am not.  I am asking you to refrain from telling everyone that A equals B when you have no clue if it does or not.  If you can't prove A equals B (which this graph does not), then quit stating it.

It is pretty simple really.
 
2013-05-03 01:18:06 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: jrodr018: BraveNewCheneyWorld: jrodr018: Read the two papers I listed.

You can link the relevant sections if you'd like.  If you're too lazy to read your own link, then I'm not bothering with you.

Well no wonder you are uninformed. Sorry did not realize you are just stupid.

If you can't be bothered to read your own link and be able to quote a single relevant statement supporting your position, then you're not worth talking to.


Wow, so the data presented is not good enough for you? have you ever read a scientific paper? Like I said, I see the problem now. Once again, I did not realize your deficiencies.
 
2013-05-03 01:18:44 PM  

HeadLever: Wayne 985: Its job is to do for people what they can't do for themselves.

I don't look at it that way.  If the people (goverment) want flouride in thier drinking water, fine. If you don't, that doesn't bother me either.  However, I'll correct you all day when you want to concoct some cocamamy story as to why it is going to kill us all and ignore the science on the issue.

I tend to support it just because the societal benifit is typically greater than the cost, not that I think that you 'need' it.


Okay, so you clearly didn't actually read what I wrote. Try again, please: http://www.fark.com/comments/7732350/83992343#c83992343

It ain't that difficult to figure out.
 
2013-05-03 01:19:40 PM  
i.imgur.com

If history is any indicator, I'd get out now. Looks like a market correction is just around the corner...
 
2013-05-03 01:22:04 PM  

soup: [i.imgur.com image 728x523]

If history is any indicator, I'd get out now. Looks like a market correction is just around the corner...


Look at that... the DMFT levels are rising through the roof in spite of fluoridation!


/Yes, I'm bored.
 
2013-05-03 01:25:57 PM  

Wayne 985: Okay, so you clearly didn't actually read what I wrote.


I know what you wrote.  Is it unneccesary?  For the most part yes.  However, my point was not that it was necessary, but that it was benifical as indicated by the vaious sources I listed.  Chlorine in the water supply is also unnessary, so long as every user boils thier water for 10 minutes before using any of it.
 
2013-05-03 01:32:49 PM  

LordJiro: What if the only people able to recognize the damage it does aren't doctors and scientists but conspiracy theorists and people on Facebook?
If science explicitly disagrees with tinfoil-hat nutters and dipshiats on Facebook, I think it's a pretty safe bet to side with the scientists.


Well, it actually  has been shown to occasionally give kids 'flouride poisoning', i.e. white spots on their teeth. I knew two brothers in my homeschool group who had pretty weird-looking teeth because they drank flouridated water all the time.

That said, yeah, it's basically a good thing, just ask your dentist if you're worried about white spots.
 
Displayed 50 of 321 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | 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