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.

(The Raw Story)   Former starship captain narrates junk science movie bankrolled by notorious anti-semite. WTF IS THIS SH*T?   (rawstory.com) divider line 335
    More: Stupid, Star Trek, Earth, Kate Mulgrew, Lawrence Krauss, Michio Kaku, captain, promotions  
•       •       •

22001 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Apr 2014 at 6:16 PM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-07 07:47:04 PM  

ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: Geocentrism is still a thing people believe? That's off the potato scale level derp.


You need to look around the political landscape. That's very nearly a bag with a string in the Tea Party. Remember, even more Americans think "Noah" is a documentary and that Putin's a great guy.
 
2014-04-07 07:47:20 PM  

Pimparoo: Much more bothered by the fact Dr. Michio Kaku would be in something like this. The Star Trek lady can say she was just acting.

You would hope a theoretical physicist would be smarter than this.


I'm wondering if the entire thing isn't just being misrepresented. This sounds like the opposite of what Kaku generally does.
 
2014-04-07 07:48:20 PM  

ScaryBottles: Smeggy Smurf: It's called a paycheck submitter.  You know the kind of thing that keeps decent, hard working people off of welfare.  You should try getting one, you might like it.

[www.quickmeme.com image 407x405]

You are without doubt the most inept derp I've ever seen.


noob


;-)
 
2014-04-07 07:48:42 PM  

foxy_canuck: fusillade762: All I heard her say is "Everything we know about the universe is wrong". Considering about half the talking heads there are talking about dark matter and NOT geocentrism I think it's possible she wasn't aware of the nature of what she signed up for. I certainly think Michio Kaku can't be happy with having his position misrepresented.

Maybe they all thought it was a parody move? Or maybe it IS a parody movie?

Or quite likely the scientists suffered the same fate as David Albert in What the Bleep do we Know?  Interview is selectively edited and a scientist who thinks they are doing a documentary ends up as a figure endorsing pseudoscientific bunk.

Without seeing the film, I can sort of see where they appear to be going.  Not geocentrism in the classical sense, but rather our solar system is in the middle.  To a lay person, there is a good chunk of cosmological evidence that could be interpreted that way.  The consistent red-shift of almost everything, the fact that any direction you look is basically towards the big bang... stuff like that.  It's hard for someone who's not a high level expert who can understand at least some of the math to really get that stuff.  Most of us believe it based on the fact we trust in scientific expertise and the simplified models that are presented by good educators.  Much the same way the folks at The Secret get conscious thought and measurement using EM fields and other particles confused.


Man do you ever stop making excuses for your potatohead brethren? Seriously until now I always gave Canadians the benefit of the doubt when it came to being civilized but you're proving that you people can be just as dumb and reactionary as the most deluded teabagger.
 
2014-04-07 07:49:20 PM  

WTF Indeed: This is final proof that Voyager was, and will always be, the worst series.


You spelled "Deep Space Nine" wrong.
 
2014-04-07 07:51:43 PM  
"What orbits what" is a function of your frame of reference, nothing more. Makes more sense to have a geocentric perspective, considering that we, you know, live on Earth.
 
2014-04-07 07:55:35 PM  

FlashHarry: Confabulat: Maybe she's just insane.

this is certainly a possibility. after all, hollywood has produced class-a nutbags like michael moriarty, victoria jackson and chuck norris.


It could be worse; she could be shilling for Scientology like half of her peers.
 
2014-04-07 07:56:51 PM  
I wonder how many who claim to believe in geocentrism are really just discordians, like flat Earthers. If someone asked me anonymously, I might claim to believe in geocentrism, just for kicks.
 
2014-04-07 07:57:02 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: To see that the the planets orbit about the Sun, all you have to do is go outside and farking LOOK!


That wasn't what did it. From our vantage point, it looks like everything orbits the Earth.

But then people noticed that some planets would move backward for awhile, and then forward again. There needed to be an explanation for this behavior, and it just so happens that the heliocentric model explains it succinctly.

And every observation we've made on the solar system since then have confirmed this explanation, and then we went to space and saw for ourselves.
 
2014-04-07 07:58:56 PM  

Truther: I know my names Truther and all, but WTF?

"1 in 4 Americans believe the Sun revolves around the Earth".

REALLY? That's not a joke??

/flabbergasted


People are willing to take seriously some statistics pushed by a geocentricism pusher? Really? Come on, guys.

/It was an internet poll, I'd wager.
 
2014-04-07 07:59:30 PM  

untaken_name: "What orbits what" is a function of your frame of reference, nothing more. Makes more sense to have a geocentric perspective, considering that we, you know, live on Earth.


Except, um, no.

Your perception of an orbit may change depending on your frame of reference, but in terms of mathematics an orbit is pretty much absolute.

(Technically any two objects orbit around each other, but when the center of their orbits is located INSIDE one of those objects, it's pretty safe to say the smaller object orbits around the larger.)
 
2014-04-07 08:01:50 PM  

Valiente: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: Geocentrism is still a thing people believe? That's off the potato scale level derp.

You need to look around the political landscape. That's very nearly a bag with a string in the Tea Party. Remember, even more Americans think "Noah" is a documentary and that Putin's a great guy.


I'm picturing more of a Leno "Man On The Street" segment that yielded those dubious 1 in 4 numbers.

I suppose they could have limited their questionnaire to a thin slice of a slice of a slice of the larger society (TeaBaggers), but I seriously doubt it.
 
2014-04-07 08:02:23 PM  

TheOtherMisterP: untaken_name: "What orbits what" is a function of your frame of reference, nothing more. Makes more sense to have a geocentric perspective, considering that we, you know, live on Earth.

Except, um, no.

Your perception of an orbit may change depending on your frame of reference, but in terms of mathematics an orbit is pretty much absolute.

(Technically any two objects orbit around each other, but when the center of their orbits is located INSIDE one of those objects, it's pretty safe to say the smaller object orbits around the larger.)


It's cool. Astronomy is difficult for the average person to understand. Some day, if you keep studying, you may understand. You're using words like "inside" and "center" which have no meaning outside of your limited frame of reference. Clearly you do not grasp the concepts involved.
 
2014-04-07 08:09:46 PM  

Astorix: Her dog whine voice is the main reason I refused to watch Voyager.


What, you didn't like listening to the voice I affectionately referred to as "chain-smoker Janeway"? She had the black coffee down, so you know she also had to be lighting up with maybe a danish or three.
 
2014-04-07 08:12:15 PM  

TheOtherMisterP: untaken_name: "What orbits what" is a function of your frame of reference, nothing more. Makes more sense to have a geocentric perspective, considering that we, you know, live on Earth.

Except, um, no.

Your perception of an orbit may change depending on your frame of reference, but in terms of mathematics an orbit is pretty much absolute.

(Technically any two objects orbit around each other, but when the center of their orbits is located INSIDE one of those objects, it's pretty safe to say the smaller object orbits around the larger.)


Not exactly, but close enough
 
2014-04-07 08:14:11 PM  

Ehcks: Not exactly, but close enough


Apparently I don't know how to post an image. Here's a link, then.
http://zidbits.com/2011/09/the-earth-doesnt-actually-orbit-the-sun/
 
2014-04-07 08:14:54 PM  

ScaryBottles: Smeggy Smurf: It's called a paycheck submitter.  You know the kind of thing that keeps decent, hard working people off of welfare.  You should try getting one, you might like it.

[www.quickmeme.com image 407x405]

You are without doubt the most inept derp I've ever seen.


Oh, no. Smeggy is one of the eptest derpers we've got.
 
2014-04-07 08:16:19 PM  

mutterfark: [fandangogroovers.files.wordpress.com image 792x449]
'It is not her fault. She was not born Korean.'


+1
 
F42
2014-04-07 08:19:28 PM  
Science turned her into a newt!

She got better.
 
2014-04-07 08:19:45 PM  

foxyshadis: Truther: I know my names Truther and all, but WTF?

"1 in 4 Americans believe the Sun revolves around the Earth".

REALLY? That's not a joke??

/flabbergasted

People are willing to take seriously some statistics pushed by a geocentricism pusher? Really? Come on, guys.

/It was an internet poll, I'd wager.


TomD9938: Valiente: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: Geocentrism is still a thing people believe? That's off the potato scale level derp.

You need to look around the political landscape. That's very nearly a bag with a string in the Tea Party. Remember, even more Americans think "Noah" is a documentary and that Putin's a great guy.

I'm picturing more of a Leno "Man On The Street" segment that yielded those dubious 1 in 4 numbers.

I suppose they could have limited their questionnaire to a thin slice of a slice of a slice of the larger society (TeaBaggers), but I seriously doubt it.



All you had to do was click a couple of times (or read the thread) to find out that the National Science Foundation is the source of that statistic.

I would hope that most of the 26% answered that way due to simple confusion or smartassery rather than a genuine belief in geocentrism. But a lot of people just don't pay attention to such things...not knowing the first thing about astronomy has virtually no consequence in the everyday life of most people.
 
2014-04-07 08:20:07 PM  
foxy_canuck:

Without seeing the film, I can sort of see where they appear to be going.  Not geocentrism in the classical sense, but rather our solar system is in the middle.  To a lay person, there is a good chunk of cosmological evidence that could be interpreted that way.  The consistent red-shift of almost everything, the fact that any direction you look is basically towards the big bang... stuff like that.  It's hard for someone who's not a high level expert who can understand at least some of the math to really get that stuff.  Most of us believe it based on the fact we trust in scientific expertise and the simplified models that are presented by good educators.  Much the same way the folks at The Secret get conscious thought and measurement using EM fields and other particles confused.

The best layman understandable (and believe me, when it comes to maths I'm a layman) representation I've seen about the expanding universe and how things seemed to accelerate faster the farther away they are (which would create more red shift) involved a few balls on a length of surgical tubing. Pick a ball that's somewhere in the middle, and start stretching the tube-the ones farther from the one you've chosen will move father away than the ones closer to it, even though the rate at which your stretching the tube is constant.

It worked better when you actually see it, sorry if my description sucks.
 
2014-04-07 08:21:14 PM  

foxy_canuck: fusillade762: All I heard her say is "Everything we know about the universe is wrong". Considering about half the talking heads there are talking about dark matter and NOT geocentrism I think it's possible she wasn't aware of the nature of what she signed up for. I certainly think Michio Kaku can't be happy with having his position misrepresented.

Maybe they all thought it was a parody move? Or maybe it IS a parody movie?

Or quite likely the scientists suffered the same fate as David Albert in What the Bleep do we Know?  Interview is selectively edited and a scientist who thinks they are doing a documentary ends up as a figure endorsing pseudoscientific bunk.

Without seeing the film, I can sort of see where they appear to be going.  Not geocentrism in the classical sense, but rather our solar system is in the middle.  To a lay person, there is a good chunk of cosmological evidence that could be interpreted that way.  The consistent red-shift of almost everything, the fact that any direction you look is basically towards the big bang... stuff like that.  It's hard for someone who's not a high level expert who can understand at least some of the math to really get that stuff.


Is it really that hard to get the basic concept?  We're not in the center of the universe in roughly the same way we're not on the center of the world.  The world is actually (the surface of) a big round ball, so every point in the world has equal claim to being the "center" of a round surface that is finite but unbounded.  The universe works the same way  --- every point in it has equal claim to be being at the "center" of a surface that is likewise finite but unbounded, like the skin of an orange.

Sure, it's on a higher dimension than the few we intuitively experience, and the math is tricky, but the basic concept is quite elementary.

And that's before you even get to the "it's like we're on a balloon that is getting blown up so every point seems to be receding from every other point, as the balloon gets bigger" part.

And even if my analogy is flawed, it should still manage to get the basic idea of "finite but unbounded, with all points equally appearing to be central" across.
 
2014-04-07 08:21:30 PM  

Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: I'll admit it. I'm part of the one in four who believes that the sun - and the entire universe - revolves around the Earth.



Look at this diagram. Earth is clearly in the center. I don't know how you can argue with that.


I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

I'd go to mars, but it keeps moving away from me...

// Dammit, hold still already! I can't jump if you keep rotating in your orbitz thingy!
 
2014-04-07 08:23:05 PM  

UsikFark: madgordy: Kepler stole Tycho's observations and discovered elipses.

Tycho died. For science.


Does he still make Lego ripoffs?
 
2014-04-07 08:23:51 PM  
It's bullshiat, the earth revolves around me. Al Gore says so.
 
2014-04-07 08:24:59 PM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: Metronym: 1) metonym constructed from name of a city or part thereof; 2) heteronym that spends inordinate amount of time cultivating its physical appearance


LOL.
 
2014-04-07 08:25:15 PM  
I know I'm late to the thread.  Sorry if this has been addressed.  Wouldn't successfully sending numerous satellites out to the remote planets disprove the geocentric universe by experiment?
 
2014-04-07 08:29:01 PM  
ScaryBottles:

Man do you ever stop making excuses for your potatohead brethren? Seriously until now I always gave Canadians the benefit of the doubt when it came to being civilized but you're proving that you people can be just as dumb and reactionary as the most deluded teabagger.

I have no idea what the fark you are talking about or what excuses you think I'm making, or even who I'm making them for.  If you actually read my post, all I'm saying is that I can see Kaku ended up in the film much the same way Albert ended up in What the Bleep do we Know... because they were lied to about the nature of the 'documentary' then selectively edited to appear to support it.  The other part of what I posted was a guess about the nature of the documentary based on the 'evidence' (please note the use of air quotes here to indicate I don't view what this particular idiot filmmaker is using as actual evidence... I'm not certain your reading comprehension skills are up to the task of deciphering that).  I'm also suggesting it's not a big leap for someone who doesn't actually get the science behind it, which is a lot of people, to buy into this particular erroneous conclusion, just like a bunch of scientifically illiterate folks buy into that secret crap.

Next time try reading a little more carefully or STFU.
 
2014-04-07 08:29:38 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: To see that the the planets orbit about the Sun, all you have to do is go outside and farking LOOK!


Sometimes it's really hard to tell if someone's serious or not on the Internet.

/Poe said it first.
//Not that Poe.
///Or that one.  Put the bunny down.
 
2014-04-07 08:29:54 PM  

Ehcks: Ehcks: Not exactly, but close enough

Apparently I don't know how to post an image. Here's a link, then.
http://zidbits.com/2011/09/the-earth-doesnt-actually-orbit-the-sun/


Your link is wrong.  "The Earth doesn't even orbit where the barycenter currently is. It orbits where it was roughly eight minutes ago"

While theoretically limited to the speed of light, for purposes of orbital mechanics, the "speed of gravity" is assumed to be infinite.  If you try to work out our solar system based on assuming that gravity "travels at the speed of light" (and assuming Newtonian mechanics) it doesn't work.
 
2014-04-07 08:30:52 PM  

MIRV888: I know I'm late to the thread.  Sorry if this has been addressed.  Wouldn't successfully sending numerous satellites out to the remote planets disprove the geocentric universe by experiment?


Unless you assume it's all lies on a soundstage (yes grown adults actually believe this).
 
2014-04-07 08:35:01 PM  
www.therpf.com


Work with someone who doesn't believe we went to the moon...
 
2014-04-07 08:38:11 PM  

MIRV888: I know I'm late to the thread.  Sorry if this has been addressed.  Wouldn't successfully sending numerous satellites out to the remote planets disprove the geocentric universe by experiment?


The problem is that geocentrists don't believe we've actually done that. Especially not this guy, who also believes the Earth is flat, only thousands of years old and not billions, and that the universe was created in a literal Earth-week.

It is outright impossible for any of these things to be true while still believing space flight is anything but a hoax.
 
2014-04-07 08:38:11 PM  

Savage Belief: SnakeLee: "About one in four believe in geocentrism, which places the Earth at the center of the universe and the sun, planets, and stars revolving around it."

WTF??

I questioned that statistic as well.


Worldwide I find it plausible.  Lot's of places left with little to no education.
 
2014-04-07 08:38:24 PM  

ciberido: Ehcks: Ehcks: Not exactly, but close enough

Apparently I don't know how to post an image. Here's a link, then.
http://zidbits.com/2011/09/the-earth-doesnt-actually-orbit-the-sun/

Your link is wrong.  "The Earth doesn't even orbit where the barycenter currently is. It orbits where it was roughly eight minutes ago"

While theoretically limited to the speed of light, for purposes of orbital mechanics, the "speed of gravity" is assumed to be infinite.  If you try to work out our solar system based on assuming that gravity "travels at the speed of light" (and assuming Newtonian mechanics) it doesn't work.


That's really cool!
 
2014-04-07 08:40:16 PM  

Pointy Tail of Satan: Zariski-Riemann space? Affine space?

Who knew that Kate Mulgrew was the next Leonhard Euler!!!!!


Sigh......So much for physics humor.
 
2014-04-07 08:41:31 PM  

Ehcks: MIRV888: I know I'm late to the thread.  Sorry if this has been addressed.  Wouldn't successfully sending numerous satellites out to the remote planets disprove the geocentric universe by experiment?

The problem is that geocentrists don't believe we've actually done that. Especially not this guy, who also believes the Earth is flat, only thousands of years old and not billions, and that the universe was created in a literal Earth-week.

It is outright impossible for any of these things to be true while still believing space flight is anything but a hoax.


The fact that this guy believes the world is flat makes me wonder if he isn't a discordian. Flat-Earthers don't usually believe the Earth is flat. They are just discordians who have chosen to amuse themselves by watching people freak out.
 
2014-04-07 08:42:27 PM  

ciberido: While theoretically limited to the speed of light, for purposes of orbital mechanics, the "speed of gravity" is assumed to be infinite. If you try to work out our solar system based on assuming that gravity "travels at the speed of light" (and assuming Newtonian mechanics) it doesn't work.


Science is so confusing. I can almost see why some people give up and say goddidit.
 
2014-04-07 08:43:26 PM  
I hate when they say "X% of Americans believe..." as evidence of how backwater we are. In reality, most of the country falls in line with the UK on science issues, but then The South is a whole different animal.
 
2014-04-07 08:44:37 PM  

Pimparoo: Much more bothered by the fact Dr. Michio Kaku would be in something like this. The Star Trek lady can say she was just acting.

You would hope a theoretical physicist would be smarter than this.


Surely he had no idea that this nut job was going to be pro-geocentrism!!! I hope....
 
2014-04-07 08:45:19 PM  

ciberido: foxy_canuck: fusillade762: All I heard her say is "Everything we know about the universe is wrong". Considering about half the talking heads there are talking about dark matter and NOT geocentrism I think it's possible she wasn't aware of the nature of what she signed up for. I certainly think Michio Kaku can't be happy with having his position misrepresented.

Maybe they all thought it was a parody move? Or maybe it IS a parody movie?

Or quite likely the scientists suffered the same fate as David Albert in What the Bleep do we Know?  Interview is selectively edited and a scientist who thinks they are doing a documentary ends up as a figure endorsing pseudoscientific bunk.

Without seeing the film, I can sort of see where they appear to be going.  Not geocentrism in the classical sense, but rather our solar system is in the middle.  To a lay person, there is a good chunk of cosmological evidence that could be interpreted that way.  The consistent red-shift of almost everything, the fact that any direction you look is basically towards the big bang... stuff like that.  It's hard for someone who's not a high level expert who can understand at least some of the math to really get that stuff.

Is it really that hard to get the basic concept?  We're not in the center of the universe in roughly the same way we're not on the center of the world.  The world is actually (the surface of) a big round ball, so every point in the world has equal claim to being the "center" of a round surface that is finite but unbounded.  The universe works the same way  --- every point in it has equal claim to be being at the "center" of a surface that is likewise finite but unbounded, like the skin of an orange.

Sure, it's on a higher dimension than the few we intuitively experience, and the math is tricky, but the basic concept is quite elementary.

And that's before you even get to the "it's like we're on a balloon that is getting blown up so every point seems to be receding from every oth ...


I'm well aware and not arguing with any of that.  I'm just pointing out that given the level of derp about science these days (seriously, YECs, power bands, the healing power of magnets, tide goes in/tide goes out, EMR sensitivity, anti-vaxers... it's non-stop), it's not hard to believe someone could easily twist the evidence and models to present the universe as not quite geocentric and have far too many people who agree for any of us to be comfortable with.
 
2014-04-07 08:48:17 PM  

Deedeemarz: Pimparoo: Much more bothered by the fact Dr. Michio Kaku would be in something like this. The Star Trek lady can say she was just acting.

You would hope a theoretical physicist would be smarter than this.

Surely he had no idea that this nut job was going to be pro-geocentrism!!! I hope....


I can't seem to find any of the scientists or even Mulgrew making statements about this movie. The movie had its first screening today, according to their facebook page, but no one involved in any sense has posted anything on any of their social media pages.

It feels weird to want information faster than the internet can provide it.
 
2014-04-07 08:49:59 PM  
She must be thinking of a star system in the Delta quadrant.
 
2014-04-07 08:50:43 PM  

MIRV888: I know I'm late to the thread.  Sorry if this has been addressed.  Wouldn't successfully sending numerous satellites out to the remote planets disprove the geocentric universe by experiment?


They would simply dismiss the data as contrived.  They would say that either the satellites never existed or were programmed to send back false data or something else similar that would allow them to dismiss it.
 
2014-04-07 08:50:53 PM  

you are a puppet: Before you deride geocentrism you should know that it's an established theory with as many followers in the scientific community as those who deny the myth of climate change, and is almost at the number of scientists who believe in creationism and alchemy. It's a hell of a good theory and one that I'd be proud to teach my children if the stork ever brought any to me.


Pray harder, the kids will come.
 
2014-04-07 08:53:04 PM  

Tsar_Bomba1: [www.therpf.com image 544x435]


Work with someone who doesn't believe we went to the moon...


I'm amazed how many people I run into that have bought into that conspiracy theory.
 
2014-04-07 08:55:45 PM  

madgordy: as a historian who studies ancient history, medieval history, history of religions in Europe, Ancient philosophy, medieval philosophy  and contemporary philosophy (and a job fixing and deploying computers), I can point out and say without a doubt that

until quite recently people believed the world was round like a ball.


i.imgur.com

"The world, she's a-round like-a the apple-a!"

"She's flat, like the pancake!"

/she's a round--a, like-a my a-head
//*whack*  she's flat, like your head
 
2014-04-07 08:55:53 PM  

Ehcks: Deedeemarz: Pimparoo: Much more bothered by the fact Dr. Michio Kaku would be in something like this. The Star Trek lady can say she was just acting.

You would hope a theoretical physicist would be smarter than this.

Surely he had no idea that this nut job was going to be pro-geocentrism!!! I hope....

I can't seem to find any of the scientists or even Mulgrew making statements about this movie. The movie had its first screening today, according to their facebook page, but no one involved in any sense has posted anything on any of their social media pages.

It feels weird to want information faster than the internet can provide it.


Would you?  It either shows that you're a big enough fool to get suckered into participating in this or you are a big enough fool to believe it.
 
2014-04-07 08:58:48 PM  

Colin O'Scopy: So lemme make sure I get you:

An ACTOR spoke and people are believing what is being said.

By. An. ACTOR.


That explains why the US hasn't sent Special Forces to capture Jackie Gleeson for crimes against humanity.
 
2014-04-07 09:00:25 PM  

Callous: Ehcks: Deedeemarz: Pimparoo: Much more bothered by the fact Dr. Michio Kaku would be in something like this. The Star Trek lady can say she was just acting.

You would hope a theoretical physicist would be smarter than this.

Surely he had no idea that this nut job was going to be pro-geocentrism!!! I hope....

I can't seem to find any of the scientists or even Mulgrew making statements about this movie. The movie had its first screening today, according to their facebook page, but no one involved in any sense has posted anything on any of their social media pages.

It feels weird to want information faster than the internet can provide it.

Would you?  It either shows that you're a big enough fool to get suckered into participating in this or you are a big enough fool to believe it.


I would at least attempt to distance myself from it, because people are certainly asking them about the movie.
 
Displayed 50 of 335 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is 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