Jesus's middle name is Hume! Caution: Some NSFW images within!

[Fritzo]

It's like turducken...

 

[zinfamous]

I guess it was a mom with its joey, otherwise I can't imagine it thinking "I will go attack this giant death-sail beast that has descended upon my territory!"

 

[Ichinisan]

https://imgur.com/f7rgUi3

Perfect application!

 

[destrekor]

What is this ephemeral post of yours?

What are you asking? Which movie is it from?

It’s from Edge of Tomorrow / Live Die Repeat

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1631867/

If you haven’t seen it, it’s awesome. Highly recommend it.

It's still so damn weird that even when I quote your post now, it still is literally blank in appearance.

But I've discovered that I can still "see" the content when inspecting the page code:



Meanwhile, different methods of sharing the same link, which I have as:
https://i.imgur.com/W9cKoCO.gifv

Below, I pasted the link as pure text, no code or other wrappers, so it looks like the above:

https://imgur.com/W9cKoCO

Below I used the Insert -> Media function, where I pasted the game link as above, to the .gifv. (which creates this wrapper and formatting for me: [MEDIA=imgur]W9cKoCO[/MEDIA])

https://imgur.com/W9cKoCO

I just previewed this a few times, and strangely enough, the first preview the "MEDIA" which looked like a link but was the generic imgur link style, not the direct image .gifv
Software is weird man.

edit:
Oh I left out an important clue perhaps: when I use the Insert Image function and paste the gifv, it errors out on me. And searching the page code and having attempted adding it that way a few times, I don't see it anywhere in the source.

And note: I do have Tampermonkey extension for Chrome, and the only user script I have there is for Imgur gif to video, that script is disabled presently. That script also seems to only reference changing .gif imgur embeds to .mp4 or .webm instead.
the script, for those interested:

// ==UserScript==
// @name        Imgur Gif to Video
// @namespace   http://sites.google.com/site/kenscode/
// @include     *
// @version     1
// @grant       none
// ==/UserScript==
var imgurgifs = document.querySelectorAll('img[src^="http://i.imgur.com/"][src$=".gif"]');
for (var i=0; i<imgurgifs.length; i++) {
  imgurgifs[i].style.display = "none";
}
for (var i=0; i<imgurgifs.length; i++) {
  var vid = document.createElement("video");
  vid.loop="loop";
  vid.muted="muted";
  vid.autoplay="autoplay";
  var vidsrc = document.createElement("source");
  vidsrc.src = imgurgifs[i].src.slice(0,-3) + 'mp4';
  vid.appendChild(vidsrc);
  vidsrc = document.createElement("source");
  vidsrc.src = imgurgifs[i].src.slice(0,-3) + 'webm';
  vid.appendChild(vidsrc);
  var imgparent = imgurgifs[i].parentNode;
  imgparent.insertBefore(vid, imgurgifs[i]);
  imgparent.removeChild(imgurgifs[i]);

No idea if it works still, I'll try enabling it and report back.
Well it doesn't appear to work anymore. Perhaps due to the way embeds work with this platform versus what the script is expecting.

 

[destrekor]

edit:
Nuts -

Mouse is hovering over the page section where an image ought to be, or a link, or something, but nope just not there.

 

[pmv]

Morning swimmers in Las Vegas 1953 watch nuclear test 75 miles away:

View attachment 3951

Can you imagine that happening today?

There were unforeseen concequences* (that probably should have been foreseen). Wrong forum/thread to go on about it, but was listening to a podcast about it not long ago.

* not an inter-dimensional invasion, though.

 

[Sonikku]

 

[Paratus]

It's still so damn weird that even when I quote your post now, it still is literally blank in appearance.

But I've discovered that I can still "see" the content when inspecting the page code:

View attachment 4012

Meanwhile, different methods of sharing the same link, which I have as:
https://i.imgur.com/W9cKoCO.gifv

Below, I pasted the link as pure text, no code or other wrappers, so it looks like the above:

https://imgur.com/W9cKoCO

Below I used the Insert -> Media function, where I pasted the game link as above, to the .gifv. (which creates this wrapper and formatting for me: [MEDIA=imgur]W9cKoCO[/MEDIA])

https://imgur.com/W9cKoCO

I just previewed this a few times, and strangely enough, the first preview the "MEDIA" which looked like a link but was the generic imgur link style, not the direct image .gifv
Software is weird man.

edit:
Oh I left out an important clue perhaps: when I use the Insert Image function and paste the gifv, it errors out on me. And searching the page code and having attempted adding it that way a few times, I don't see it anywhere in the source.

And note: I do have Tampermonkey extension for Chrome, and the only user script I have there is for Imgur gif to video, that script is disabled presently. That script also seems to only reference changing .gif imgur embeds to .mp4 or .webm instead.
the script, for those interested:

// ==UserScript==
// @name        Imgur Gif to Video
// @namespace   http://sites.google.com/site/kenscode/
// @include     *
// @version     1
// @grant       none
// ==/UserScript==
var imgurgifs = document.querySelectorAll('img[src^="http://i.imgur.com/"][src$=".gif"]');
for (var i=0; i<imgurgifs.length; i++) {
  imgurgifs[i].style.display = "none";
}
for (var i=0; i<imgurgifs.length; i++) {
  var vid = document.createElement("video");
  vid.loop="loop";
  vid.muted="muted";
  vid.autoplay="autoplay";
  var vidsrc = document.createElement("source");
  vidsrc.src = imgurgifs[i].src.slice(0,-3) + 'mp4';
  vid.appendChild(vidsrc);
  vidsrc = document.createElement("source");
  vidsrc.src = imgurgifs[i].src.slice(0,-3) + 'webm';
  vid.appendChild(vidsrc);
  var imgparent = imgurgifs[i].parentNode;
  imgparent.insertBefore(vid, imgurgifs[i]);
  imgparent.removeChild(imgurgifs[i]);

No idea if it works still, I'll try enabling it and report back.
Well it doesn't appear to work anymore. Perhaps due to the way embeds work with this platform versus what the script is expecting.

That’s really weird. I’ve noticed weird behavior by the post editor ignoring manual img tags among other things.

 

[ctbaars]

What's up with all of yesterdays' blank posts?

 

[KMFJD]

https://imgur.com/L9dIxdo

 

[Paratus]

https://imgur.com/L9dIxdo

https://imgur.com/rVt12br

 

[destrekor]

https://imgur.com/L9dIxdo

The good news: those are Harvestmen, and while they are arachnids, they are not spiders. They are also harmless to humans.

The bad news: they are still creepy, especially when amassed

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

The good news: those are Harvestmen, and while they are arachnids, they are not spiders. They are also harmless to humans.

The bad news: they are still creepy, especially when amassed

Do they still kill flies like spiders? Otherwise bring out the flamethrower.

 

[KMFJD]

The good news: those are Harvestmen, and while they are arachnids, they are not spiders. They are also harmless to humans.

The bad news: they are still creepy, especially when amassed

https://imgur.com/dGV7ePA

 

[destrekor]

Do they still kill flies like spiders? Otherwise bring out the flamethrower.

They do eat all sorts of things, and are either active hunters, ambush predators, or more akin to scavengers (different species of Harvestmen behave differently). But they don't make webbing as they have no silk glands.

 

[Sonikku]

 

[KMFJD]

https://imgur.com/oxnzIMQ

sound

 

[Artorias]

Lol. Who paid for this one day a year advert?

https://imgur.com/dGV7ePA

Then a clump fall on you.......shudder.

 

[rh71]

Women tolerate pain longer than men: http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/mythbusters-database/women-tolerate-pain/

 

[highland145]

Women tolerate pain longer than men: http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/mythbusters-database/women-tolerate-pain/

Uh, they tolerate men longer than men.

Not too bright, imo.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Women tolerate pain longer than men: http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/mythbusters-database/women-tolerate-pain/

Seems silly to assert that with no real scientific research - at least none in that article and certainly not from Mythbusters.

What kind of pain? All levels of pain are entirely different - at least that is the case for me. I can get a cut and not even realize it until my wife notices and gets pissed off from me getting blood all over the place. On the other hand muscle pain will hurt me like a mofo.

How much experience do they have with pain? And how do you quantify that?
What is their emotional state? Emotions can definitely play a factor since afterall - pain is simply your brain telling you what to feel.

In all honesty - I call bullshit on that stupid "feel good" PC notion that women tolerate pain better then men.


See: https://www.sciencealert.com/do-women-tolerate-pain-better-than-men

It’s widely thought that women tolerate pain better, thanks to an evolutionary history of having been repeatedly put through the wringer of childbirth. However, in 2012 a team of researchers from Stanford University in the US completed a review of over 11,000 medical records and discovered that women actually tend to feel pain more intensely, particularly when it comes to acute inflammation. Within that zero-to-10 pain rating scale, on average women's pain ratings were almost a point higher than men's.

Back in 2009, a team of researchers from the University of Florida performed a massive literature review of pain-related research studies, and also found that women show greater sensitivity to most forms of pain. They also found that women experience more pain in general - they go to the doctor with pain-related issues more often than men, they take more painkillers, and suffer from more painful ailments, such as lower back pain and migraines.

In conclusion:

So does that mean women actually succumb to pain more easily, and the childbirth connection is a total myth? Not necessarily. As you've already gathered, the experience of pain is vastly subjective. The type of ailment, a person’s mood, and stress can all contribute to the experience; for women hormonal fluctuations throughout their menstrual cycle also influence pain sensitivity, although in individually varied ways.

 

[highland145]

Seems silly to assert that with no real scientific research - at least none in that article and certainly not from Mythbusters.

What kind of pain? All levels of pain are entirely different - at least that is the case for me. I can get a cut and not even realize it until my wife notices and gets pissed off from me getting blood all over the place. On the other hand muscle pain will hurt me like a mofo.

How much experience do they have with pain? And how do you quantify that?
What is their emotional state? Emotions can definitely play a factor since afterall - pain is simply your brain telling you what to feel.

In all honesty - I call bullshit on that stupid "feel good" PC notion that women tolerate pain better then men.


See: https://www.sciencealert.com/do-women-tolerate-pain-better-than-men





In conclusion:

lolololllll

BS or not. The 1st guy that has to push a kid out of his pecker and that's the end of humans.

Maybe you should try it and get back.

 

[Sonikku]

https://imgur.com/byuK42z

 

[Newbian]

lolololllll

BS or not. The 1st guy that has to push a kid out of his pecker and that's the end of humans.

Maybe you should try it and get back.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Pfft. I've given birth to kidney stones out my dickhole. That's literally razor sharp rocks shredding your kidney, shredding your ureter, shredding your bladder, and then shredding your pocket rocket. At least a baby doesn't have jagged edges (maybe a meth baby does)