Atheist Lolcats & Motivational Posterz
Offline SEE THE OFFICIAL RRS THREAD FOR CEILING CATS!
Don't miss the LOLCat bible!
PREVIEW:
Boreded Ceiling Cat makinkgz Urf n stuffs
1 Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem.
2 Da Urfs no had shapez An haded dark face, An Ceiling Cat rode invisible bike over teh waterz.
3 At start, no has lyte. An Ceiling Cat sayz, i can haz lite? An lite wuz.4 An Ceiling Cat sawed teh lite, to seez stuffs, An splitted teh lite from dark but taht wuz ok cuz kittehs can see in teh dark An not tripz over nethin.5 An Ceiling Cat sayed light Day An dark no Day. It were FURST!!!1
6 An Ceiling Cat sayed, im in ur waterz makin a ceiling. But he no yet make a ur. An he maded a hole in teh Ceiling.7 An Ceiling Cat doed teh skiez with waterz down An waterz up. It happen.8 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has teh firmmint wich iz funny bibel naim 4 ceiling, so wuz teh twoth day.
*Our world is far more complex than the rigid structure we want to assign to it, and we will probably never fully understand it.*
"Those believers who are sophisticated enough to understand the paradox have found exciting ways to bend logic into pretzel shapes in order to defend the indefensible." - Hamby
- Login to post comments
Thank you so much for posting that link!!
I had never heard of LOLCat Bible!
I laughed my arse off (my favorite is Revelations)
Slowly building a blog at ~
http://obsidianwords.wordpress.com/
are these fuckin' cats supposed to be foreign or what? trying to decypher what they're saying is giving me a headache.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
LOL!
How many cats have you seen in 3rd grade English classes?
well, if we're required to suspend our belief so cats can talk or write or whatever the fuck they're doing, it's not a big stretch to give them decent english.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
It's supposed to be funny. Guess it's kind of like British humor: either you like it, or you don't.
The bad english, grammar, spelling is part of the 'joke'. Also, the font that is used is part of the joke as well. I find some of them pretty freaking hilarious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolcat
i get it that it's part of the joke. it just gave me a headache.
aaaallll i'm sayin'...
Some are pretty bad, I do have to admit.
Remember, 2 more days until Caturday!!!
There is no such thing as "British Humor". Where the fuck did people get the idea that England has a monopoly on dry sarcasm?
"Faith, Faith is an island in the setting sun,
but proof, proof is the bottom line for everyone."
Proof, Paul Simon
Nothing this hard should taste so beefy.
i didn't pick up that these were "british humor" either, but come on, britain definitely has a distinct brand of humor. it's not just dry sarcasm. there's a lot of madcapness in there too. and some other certain savoir faire i can't put my finger on. maybe its the juxtaposition of somebody like graham chapman referencing blaise pascal while dressed as an old lady.
i mean, monty python, benny hill, fawlty towers, keeping up appearances, are you being served?, waiting for god, that's my boy, little britain, the vicar of dibley, as time goes by...who the hell else has shows like these? and even when the states does do over a show like the office, they turn it into something entirely different. i don't know why you say there's no such thing as "british humor." every culture has their own brand of humor. look at the japanese, for chrissakes.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
Like Arrested Development, anything by the Coen bros., Spinal Tap (and almost every other Christopher Guest flick, and clearly the inspiration for the office), The Simpsons, Frasier, The Office (It's pretty popular here and it may be a spin off, but the only difference between the British and American versions in my opinion are the interpretations of the boss. There is more depth and breadth to the American cast, but they didn't call it quits after two seasons. They have to fill the time with something.), The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, South Park, The Venture Bros.? There's probably more but you get the point. Clearly there's some inspiration drawn from both sides of the pond but to declare it unique to one region is inaccurate at best.
As for the Japanese, that's called slapstick (Benny Hill, Three Stooges). One of their shows, Takeshi's Castle I think it was, was dubbed over with American announcers giving the color commentary full of awesomely bad NSFW puns and renamed Most Extreme Elimination Challenge. I thought it was fucking hilarious and I'm not the least bit Japanese. I don't even know anyone who is, but if you couple anatomy jokes with awkward, everyday schlubs biting it on various obstacle course you've got comedic gold. I defy you to watch it with a straight face. It may be that centuries of living a repressive society has stunted the growth of their funny bone, but again that doesn't make it uniquely Japanese.
My beef with the concept of "British Humor" is that it's the battle cry of snobby people who think they're in on a secret and other people "don't get it". Something is either funny or it's not, and most humor is universal.
"Faith, Faith is an island in the setting sun,
but proof, proof is the bottom line for everyone."
Proof, Paul Simon
Nothing this hard should taste so beefy.
but my whole point was, it's not the individual elements. it's how they fit together. and these mixes are unique to cultures, both national and geographical. while they may both work in the mode of mockumentaries, christopher guest and ricky gervais do things differently because they grew up in different cultures. as for the two offices, if you really think it's only a matter of how the boss is interpreted, i think you didn't watch one of them closely enough. garreth and dwight are entirely different, for one. the chemistry between tim and dawn as opposed to jim and pam are also very different. the british version on the whole has a much darker feel (and so does season 1 of the american version, before it broke away more from the british; michael scott is much less sympathetic in season 1). i think this reflects the fact that british comedies tend to have darker undertones than american comedies.
it's hardly that simple. never mind the big differences between benny hill and the stooges. what about influences from kabuki?
i'm not the least bit british. i never said you had to be a member of a culture to appreciate that culture's humor.
well, A, i don't think anyone on this thread was being snobby about it, and B, there are plenty of universal motifs that make us laugh. but you cannot deny that every culture has its own interpretations of those motifs and, although in the globalized world the lines are blurring, the demarcations are still clearly recognizable. and some people just don't "get" some cultures' humor, just like they don't care for their food. there's nothing intrinsically elitist about that, and i think that's all anyone ever tried to say.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
I couldn't disagree more with you regarding stylistic similarities between Gervais and Guest. I do agree that the Gervais' Office is darker than Carrell's, but I still maintain that much of that difference comes from the fact that the American version has been running for longer, which allows for a little more variety of characters and deeper exploration of said characters. You're right about British sitcoms being more cynical. Americans like their happy endings. (That's what she said.)
Gameshows in which people humiliate themselves on national television definitely falls under slapstick, and doesn't look anything like kabuki to me. To be fair I don't know much about kabuki, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't involve giant foam boulders or kiddie pools filled with baby alligators.
I know. I was just being a dick.
I don't think anyone did either. I just hate that term and want it to die. I don't know about where you're from, but here in Seattle (a hipster Mecca) it's almost always said with the haughty attitude of a modern art afficianado, and therefore not a term I care for.
"Faith, Faith is an island in the setting sun,
but proof, proof is the bottom line for everyone."
Proof, Paul Simon
Nothing this hard should taste so beefy.
I know this is supposed to be funny, but you do realize how innacurate it is, right?
Because it left out the Branch Davidians?
"Faith, Faith is an island in the setting sun,
but proof, proof is the bottom line for everyone."
Proof, Paul Simon
Nothing this hard should taste so beefy.
Because it's not an accurate definition of Occam's Razor?
occam's razor isn't even accurate. his name was william of "ockham." so there.
actually, i'm a firm believer in popular use makes it so (in the area of language, that is). still, i've often wondered why people started spelling it "occam."
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
Because there is no such thing as modern atheism and early atheism?
It's just atheism, it's that simple. Every human is an atheist at birth, they have to later be infected with the thousands of different belief systems that we've made up along the way.
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
oooh, i know why! the east-west schism in the church is not what is traditionally referred to as the "great schism." the great schism was the split in the western church in the fourteenth century between the pope and anti-pope(s). recently it seems like it's in vogue to call the east-west schism the "great schism": even wikipedia gives the western schism only secondary claim to this term, but i strongly contest that. in most of the old ecclesiastical histories i've read, many of them from the nineteenth and early twentieth century, the western schism is the "great schism." i believe hans kung even uses the same terminology, if my memory serves me well.
other than that, i don't know what the problem is...
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
Help us out, here. Which part is inaccurate?
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence
Perhaps there are several more branches that were ommitted?
At least another 500 branches of Christianity have been left out.
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Okay, none of you are even close.
It's prepostrous to suggest that there has only been one branch of atheism throughout history. Like I said, I know it's just a funny poster, but sometimes I get the feeling that people are starting to believe it.
Oh crap, does each rejected god get their own branch of atheism ?
And the A-Thori-sts rejected the claims of the "there is no such thing as Isis" branch until the great reformation of 1012, when Randy Pan the goat boy suggested that all of the made-up fear mongering, superstition be assigned jointly under one branch. And the term, "bullshit" was coined.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
Nope.
But there are divisions such as strong and weak atheism, to name just a few out of many.
i think everybody agrees there are theoretical differences within the atheist community. the point of the poster is that these theoretical differences don't tend to spawn different organizations which are often violently hostile to one another. on the other hand, the theoretical differences within christianity segued into the realm of human history, causing wars, persecutions, and a lot of very nasty verbal mudslinging. if this ever happens between atheistic organizations, it's doubtful it will ever be big and embarrassing enough to make it into the history books.
also, unlike christianity, atheism does not trace its roots back to a single "founder" nor does any atheistic organization claim to be the sole possessor of a founder's legacy or the sole possessor of a correct interpretation of atheism. in fact, atheism cannot have multiple interpretations since it's a negative. it might have multiple applications but that's it.
so, in a nutshell, there are no branching lines from atheism in the poster because nobody ever bore down hard enough on the pencil to leave a lasting impression. christianity, on the other hand, carved its branching lines into the skin of history with a fucking dagger. you ain't never washin' off that shit.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
This is why I was hesitant to follow up. The mental gymnastics that Christians do is rivalled (and perhaps surpassed) only by atheists who deeply wish that their ideology includes no blood trails.
am i reading into this or are you implying that there's been some sort of persecution based upon atheism? if so, i'd like to know what happened.
second.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
Perhaps he means the rigors of atheistic science has produced the knowledge for blood transfusions, blood banks, and now blood produced from stem cells. Yes, the blood trail of Atheism has saved untold number of lives.
Any idea which is transformed into an ideology is capable of being used to create bloodshed. As far as I am concerned, religion is only one particularly irrational form of it. Look at the extremes some people take environmentalism. Or communism. Or capitalism. Or {insert ideology here}. Religion is just one particularly nasty piece of irrationality. And the various interpretations of Christianity have inspired a lot of bloodshed.
Stalin, Mao and Kim Il-Sung(for a few examples) all tore down the ideologies of religion and replaced them with their own brands of ideology. As an atheist, I seek to tear down all such ideologies, and simply not replace them. Let people think on their own. Teach them to subject every thought and idea to rational critique. Let there be no sacred texts or ideas.
All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
I'm cool with that.
More of the same crap.
As a theist you easily reject a vast array of competing theologies. Each god you choose to reject does not assign you w/ some new ideology. And it seems rather apparent that it is not reason that leads the theist to all these rejections but that their own theology either strongly encourages or it or in most cases demands it. That and the human EGO make this a simple process.
Just as it is not reason that ecourages the violence and/or bloodtrail. It is the exclusionary/polarizing nature of the theist (or STATE run) ideology that most theists/totalitarians embrace & the consequential demands to abandon reason & replace it w/ complete devotion to the ideology that allows the human to shed blood so easily.
One more time w/ this: A simple rejection of faith based ideas or exclusionary ideologies does not an ideology make. Whether or not the ideology is comprised of faith based mythology or totalitarianism makes no difference.
Atheism has no ideology on its own..... and reason itself never seems to leave a bloodtrail.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
... not a lolcat, but definetly food for thought
Great pics. I have printed the cat "eated" and church cat and have them posted on my fridge.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
and of course the original:
Instead of thinking people made up the idea of God, did you ever stop to think people made up the idea of no God?
No. Humans invented gods not the other way round.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
It would be the lack of an idea.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
The evidence of mountains of mythologies stands against you.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin