Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

Vandeekree    

Rank #7645 on Comments
Vandeekree Avatar Level 235 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Online
Send mail to Vandeekree Block Vandeekree Invite Vandeekree to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:2/21/2010
Last Login:9/19/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#7645
Highest Comment Rank:#1622
Comment Thumbs: 3733 total,  5527 ,  1794
Content Level Progress: 6.77% (4/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 32% (32/100)
Level 235 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 236 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:2
Content Views:3
Total Comments Made:1650
FJ Points:3458

latest user's comments

#20 - Picture  [+] (1 new reply) 09/09/2014 on This made me feel good 0
User avatar #21 - bendingtimeisgood (09/09/2014) [-]
Yes.
#18 - No, the guy from true facts is Morgan Freeman. This is just so…  [+] (3 new replies) 09/09/2014 on This made me feel good 0
User avatar #19 - bendingtimeisgood (09/09/2014) [-]
No, it's zefrank. And he is twice the narrator that morgan freeman is.
#20 - Vandeekree (09/09/2014) [-]
User avatar #21 - bendingtimeisgood (09/09/2014) [-]
Yes.
#16 - Could take it seriously because he sounded too close to the &q…  [+] (5 new replies) 09/08/2014 on This made me feel good +2
User avatar #17 - bendingtimeisgood (09/09/2014) [-]
I'm pretty sure it's him.
User avatar #18 - Vandeekree (09/09/2014) [-]
No, the guy from true facts is Morgan Freeman. This is just some cheap Morgan Freeman imitator.
User avatar #19 - bendingtimeisgood (09/09/2014) [-]
No, it's zefrank. And he is twice the narrator that morgan freeman is.
#20 - Vandeekree (09/09/2014) [-]
User avatar #21 - bendingtimeisgood (09/09/2014) [-]
Yes.
#23 - Could Spiderman dodge a bullet that close? I'm not familiar wi…  [+] (4 new replies) 09/08/2014 on anotyher +1
User avatar #33 - Vpirate (09/09/2014) [-]
Yes, he can dodge fully automatic fire, provided he is far enough away.

Semi automatic fire at point blank range is nothing to him.
User avatar #30 - alfrebecht (09/08/2014) [-]
yes/no

He wouldn't be able to dodge a bullet in motion, but he wouldn't be where the gun was pointing when it fired, since his reflexes are faster than the person pointing it at him (Deadpool)
#25 - exxcezz (09/08/2014) [-]
Prolly not. His ability exceeds human reflexes. But he isn't inside the damn matrix.
User avatar #24 - roxasbaby (09/08/2014) [-]
He should be able to, as his spidey sense would give him enough time to react without thinking.
#9 - Well I'm not a doctor but....hm...maybe I should just end this… 09/07/2014 on (untitled) +1
#9 - I don't know. I've seen compelling debates over whether op is … 09/07/2014 on Arguments on Funnyjunk 0
#26 - I couldn't tell you. I don't keep up with the most recent pyra… 09/07/2014 on rekt 0
#14 - Hey! That's my mother! 09/07/2014 on more nudes... 0
#17 - The pyramids were less a grave and more a tombstone.  [+] (2 new replies) 09/07/2014 on rekt 0
User avatar #25 - saltyfries (09/07/2014) [-]
wasn't it sort of proven recently that there were no tombs at all and that the design was sort of an ancient microwave power plant or something? Ancient Aliens was fucked up...
User avatar #26 - Vandeekree (09/07/2014) [-]
I couldn't tell you. I don't keep up with the most recent pyramid news. But I will tell you one thing. Bitches ain't nothing but tricks and hoes.
#38 - Picture 09/06/2014 on Thumb This Up If You Want... 0
#20 - It's nice to see he capitalized the first letter of God. A lot… 09/05/2014 on (untitled) +2
#156 - Stop oppressing me.  [+] (1 new reply) 08/31/2014 on Problem 0
User avatar #157 - ninjaroo (08/31/2014) [-]
I'll oppress whatever I want.
#147 - Lets see....rabbit + cat = 10, rabbit + dog = 20 so dog is 10 …  [+] (3 new replies) 08/31/2014 on Problem 0
User avatar #155 - ninjaroo (08/31/2014) [-]
There's an easier method. Add all of them up, and you've weighed each animal twice. The rabbit twice, plus the cat twice, plus the dog twice, weighs 54kg. Divide it by two and you get 27kg.
User avatar #156 - Vandeekree (08/31/2014) [-]
Stop oppressing me.
User avatar #157 - ninjaroo (08/31/2014) [-]
I'll oppress whatever I want.
#13 - Then install two of them, duh.  [+] (2 new replies) 08/29/2014 on I see no problem with this +40
User avatar #40 - erpetrich (08/29/2014) [-]
what is there's more that two? Wouldn't you need more that one rail?
User avatar #53 - anonymoose (08/29/2014) [-]
Just make enough of them to fit the entire fence. And since the entire fence is used, no need to use the censor.
#26 - Wow, it's amazing that for the first time in history all of th… 08/27/2014 on Europe 101 -1
#123 - It goes without saying. He is clearly referring to the "w… 08/22/2014 on -black science man 0
#121 - Exactly, because the first egg is the egg the chicken came fro…  [+] (2 new replies) 08/22/2014 on -black science man 0
User avatar #122 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
They don't even mention that the egg is a bird egg or that it was laid by a chicken relative or that it hatched into anything relating to a chicken.
User avatar #123 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
It goes without saying. He is clearly referring to the "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" question.
#117 - It does say the species in the tweet. He mentions a chicken an…  [+] (4 new replies) 08/22/2014 on -black science man 0
User avatar #119 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
"The egg" not "The chicken egg". "the egg". Egg. Egg. look at that word. Egg. No mention that it came from a chicken or hatched into a chicken. Egg.
User avatar #121 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
Exactly, because the first egg is the egg the chicken came from or the egg the chicken laid, so it could be a chicken egg or a proto-chicken egg. That's the whole point.
User avatar #122 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
They don't even mention that the egg is a bird egg or that it was laid by a chicken relative or that it hatched into anything relating to a chicken.
User avatar #123 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
It goes without saying. He is clearly referring to the "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" question.
#113 - I wasn't backing it up with anything ridiculous. And if you do…  [+] (6 new replies) 08/22/2014 on -black science man 0
User avatar #114 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
You're pretty goddamn pretentious, you know that? The question in the tweet makes no mention of a species of egg. I don't give two shits what some external philosophical debate about the chicken-egg problem has resolved itself into- this one makes no claim as to the species of the egg.
User avatar #117 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
It does say the species in the tweet. He mentions a chicken and another bird that's not a chicken. The bird that came before the chicken i.e. a proto-chicken. And I think that's what you're missing about this. It is a philosophical question and the species of the egg and the chicken is what matters. It's a question of how you categorize the moment that whatever the chicken evolved from finally turned from proto-chicken into chicken. It's similar to the pile of sand question where you have a pile of sand and take a single grain from it over and over. No single grain removed takes t from a pile of sand to not a pile anymore. It's ambiguous. In the same way, that moment when the proto-chicken lays an egg and a chicken comes out of it, do you call it a proto-chicken egg sense it came from a proto-chicken or a chicken egg sense it has a chicken in it?
User avatar #119 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
"The egg" not "The chicken egg". "the egg". Egg. Egg. look at that word. Egg. No mention that it came from a chicken or hatched into a chicken. Egg.
User avatar #121 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
Exactly, because the first egg is the egg the chicken came from or the egg the chicken laid, so it could be a chicken egg or a proto-chicken egg. That's the whole point.
User avatar #122 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
They don't even mention that the egg is a bird egg or that it was laid by a chicken relative or that it hatched into anything relating to a chicken.
User avatar #123 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
It goes without saying. He is clearly referring to the "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" question.
#77 - It was an example that you clearly missed the point of. So let…  [+] (8 new replies) 08/22/2014 on -black science man 0
User avatar #78 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
That's all well and good, but the question being answered has nothing to do with whether it's a proto-chicken egg or a chicken-egg. It just says "egg". I did not miss the point of your argument. You made one, yet you decided to back it up with something ridiculous. That shit don't fly.
User avatar #113 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
I wasn't backing it up with anything ridiculous. And if you don't understand how the proto-chicken fits into this then I don't think you understand the whole chicken and egg argument in the first place.
User avatar #114 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
You're pretty goddamn pretentious, you know that? The question in the tweet makes no mention of a species of egg. I don't give two shits what some external philosophical debate about the chicken-egg problem has resolved itself into- this one makes no claim as to the species of the egg.
User avatar #117 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
It does say the species in the tweet. He mentions a chicken and another bird that's not a chicken. The bird that came before the chicken i.e. a proto-chicken. And I think that's what you're missing about this. It is a philosophical question and the species of the egg and the chicken is what matters. It's a question of how you categorize the moment that whatever the chicken evolved from finally turned from proto-chicken into chicken. It's similar to the pile of sand question where you have a pile of sand and take a single grain from it over and over. No single grain removed takes t from a pile of sand to not a pile anymore. It's ambiguous. In the same way, that moment when the proto-chicken lays an egg and a chicken comes out of it, do you call it a proto-chicken egg sense it came from a proto-chicken or a chicken egg sense it has a chicken in it?
User avatar #119 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
"The egg" not "The chicken egg". "the egg". Egg. Egg. look at that word. Egg. No mention that it came from a chicken or hatched into a chicken. Egg.
User avatar #121 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
Exactly, because the first egg is the egg the chicken came from or the egg the chicken laid, so it could be a chicken egg or a proto-chicken egg. That's the whole point.
User avatar #122 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
They don't even mention that the egg is a bird egg or that it was laid by a chicken relative or that it hatched into anything relating to a chicken.
User avatar #123 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
It goes without saying. He is clearly referring to the "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" question.
#75 - Lets say I give you an egg that came out of a chicken. But the…  [+] (10 new replies) 08/22/2014 on -black science man 0
User avatar #76 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
First, no one specified the egg was a chicken egg. Secondly, how the tits does a frog get inside an egg laid by a chicken? You can't just pull statements out of your ass and use them in an argument. Your example is useless, as chicken eggs don't naturally have frogs in them.
User avatar #77 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
It was an example that you clearly missed the point of. So lets forget the frog and stick with chickens and proto-chickens.

If proto-chicken lays an egg, it is a proto-chicken egg regardless of what is inside because it was laid by a proto-chicken. If there is a chicken in it, then that chicken if the first chicken and came out of a proto-chicken egg and has yet ot lay an egg of its own which would be the first chicken egg. Thus the chicken came first.
User avatar #78 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
That's all well and good, but the question being answered has nothing to do with whether it's a proto-chicken egg or a chicken-egg. It just says "egg". I did not miss the point of your argument. You made one, yet you decided to back it up with something ridiculous. That shit don't fly.
User avatar #113 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
I wasn't backing it up with anything ridiculous. And if you don't understand how the proto-chicken fits into this then I don't think you understand the whole chicken and egg argument in the first place.
User avatar #114 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
You're pretty goddamn pretentious, you know that? The question in the tweet makes no mention of a species of egg. I don't give two shits what some external philosophical debate about the chicken-egg problem has resolved itself into- this one makes no claim as to the species of the egg.
User avatar #117 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
It does say the species in the tweet. He mentions a chicken and another bird that's not a chicken. The bird that came before the chicken i.e. a proto-chicken. And I think that's what you're missing about this. It is a philosophical question and the species of the egg and the chicken is what matters. It's a question of how you categorize the moment that whatever the chicken evolved from finally turned from proto-chicken into chicken. It's similar to the pile of sand question where you have a pile of sand and take a single grain from it over and over. No single grain removed takes t from a pile of sand to not a pile anymore. It's ambiguous. In the same way, that moment when the proto-chicken lays an egg and a chicken comes out of it, do you call it a proto-chicken egg sense it came from a proto-chicken or a chicken egg sense it has a chicken in it?
User avatar #119 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
"The egg" not "The chicken egg". "the egg". Egg. Egg. look at that word. Egg. No mention that it came from a chicken or hatched into a chicken. Egg.
User avatar #121 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
Exactly, because the first egg is the egg the chicken came from or the egg the chicken laid, so it could be a chicken egg or a proto-chicken egg. That's the whole point.
User avatar #122 - dunkleosteus (08/22/2014) [-]
They don't even mention that the egg is a bird egg or that it was laid by a chicken relative or that it hatched into anything relating to a chicken.
User avatar #123 - Vandeekree (08/22/2014) [-]
It goes without saying. He is clearly referring to the "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" question.
#14 - So now I'm curious. I heard that the hulk, wolverine, and dead…  [+] (25 new replies) 08/07/2014 on just flush em! +21
#41 - anonymous (08/07/2014) [-]
i honestly have never read a comic in my life but im pretty sure deadpool and wolverine (never heard of hulk being able to regenerate it just takes a whole fucking lot to even scratch him ) have what they call a "healing factor " not sure what it is but im pretty sure it works like whatever is the larges mass of flesh left after an injury is where the rest of the body forms from but im not sure because in deadpools game deadpools head is torn off, both his body and head stay alive and dont start re-gening and he just re attaches his head so why didn't his head die there and then and his body just re-gen a new one. i doubt either of them could re gen from a single cell but what do i know.
#91 - anonymous (08/07/2014) [-]
In the game (yes, deadpool has a game) He gets torn in half, his lover body part runs around while he has to attach himself to another person, which he then uses to walk around with until he could reattach his lower body half.
User avatar #32 - fuzzyballs (08/07/2014) [-]
look
it's a comic, it doesn't require logic
User avatar #27 - comicexplain (08/07/2014) [-]
swiftshadow said it well! There -has- been points where that happened, but in the comic world, it usually doesn't work that way. Like Groot, when he was blown to pieces, his soul attached to the piece that had the most chance for survival. That piece grows, while others don't. However, for Evil Dead(Pool), it was a different part of his soul, the evil part, that entered that portion of his body! However, for Wolverine and Hulk, that's much harder. Wolverine has a metal structure inside of himself, which acts like a lightning rod for his soul, considering how high his chance of survival -is-, when he has it in him, and the Hulk, well... The Hulk can't be beaten into a pulp like that. He's bench-pressed black holes. Beyond anything elses pay grade, really!
User avatar #44 - payseht (08/07/2014) [-]
"in the comic world, it usually doesn't work that way"
Just decided today to pick up and read New 52 Flash for the first time. That exact premise is the villain's main drive. Okay, villains, technically. They're "clones" of the original character, whom they use to make more of themselves by cutting off his limbs and letting the limbs regenerate into a new individual, while the original grows his limbs independently.

Quite neat how an absurd premise like this gets discussed the very day I come in contact with it.
User avatar #45 - comicexplain (08/07/2014) [-]
Ahh, yeah. That'd be DC! Lobo also works that way. In fact, one time, he was blown to BITS! But then they bits regenerated, and all started fighting one another. Last one alive became the 'real' Lobo, and he went on his merry way!
#24 - swiftshadow (08/07/2014) [-]
Actually there is a story arc where his severed limbs grow into evil deadpool.

marvel.wikia.com/Wade_Wilson_(EvilDeadpool)(Earth-616)

User avatar #33 - fuzzyballs (08/07/2014) [-]
evil deadpool is sorta regular deadpool
#78 - swiftshadow (08/07/2014) [-]
Evil deadpool was straight up evil. If I remember correctly I think he blew up deadpools favorite taco joint.

Regular deadpool isn't evil. He even tries being a hero with much failure. Regular deadpool is just a jackass.
#49 - angelious (08/07/2014) [-]
naw that deadpool was properly evil.
#22 - amuzen (08/07/2014) [-]
probably has something to do with the fact that souls are a tangible and factual force in the DC and Marvel universes. Although for Wolverine and Hulk if their brain is damaged it doesn't regrow all the way and from what I understand the reason deadpool is completely immortal is because he was cursed by Thanos because he got caught in a love triangle with death.
#20 - lerruno (08/07/2014) [-]
I cant remember where I read it but Deadpools regeneration is complete dependent on his will. Thats why In Hulk vs. Wolverine his arm didnt regrow, he chose to reattach it, thats who Deadpool is.

As for this whole, Core Cell. Not a thing. The base level regeneration property for Marvel has always been that the largest remaining, viable (meaning the most important, ie the head vs the heart vs the finger), and living piece would be the one to regrow the rest of the body.

I believe its also in Hulk vs. Wolverine that Nick Fury severs Logans head in order to coerce him into giving Nick information or for help, idr, but his head doesnt regrow logans body because the harness that Logans head is in is physically inhibiting his regeneration. And since his head is intact, the body, likewise not being more important than the head, remains inert.
User avatar #43 - payseht (08/07/2014) [-]
how did he cut through his Adamantium neck?
User avatar #108 - blacklightsun (08/07/2014) [-]
As Logan fought with Hulk, Fury drops an atomic bomb on both.
When Logan wakes up, he is just a head.
Also, in that same comic, Hul rips off Logan's lower body. So the bones may be adamantium covered, but not the joints, so you can tore those appart.
Logan searches his legs back, and thet fuse with his upper body, if you were curious, I guess that's what happened with the head, went reattached to the body.
User avatar #34 - fuzzyballs (08/07/2014) [-]
wait
he can't regrow his metal skeleton, right?
#145 - lerruno (08/07/2014) [-]
No, the adamantium, though fused to his skelatal structure, is not biologically connected to him. You gotta remember that under the metal, his bones are still there. If you were going to look at it rationally, his skeleton is in essence "removed" from his body due to the metal, it simple remains because his musculature keeps it there. If Logan ever had to fully regrow a limb then it wouldnt be covered in adamantium.

Though that opens the question; If Logan had to regrow an arm due to losing it, but then years later found the adamantium skeleton, could he in theory cut off the new growth and place the skeleton in the socket, allowing his muscles to regrow on top of the metal?
User avatar #147 - fuzzyballs (08/07/2014) [-]
if it's just a piece of metal? doubt it
he could maybe open his arm up, rip out his bones, and shove the metal in it's place

or you know, let a doctor handle that
#148 - lerruno (08/07/2014) [-]
Could you imagine going bone by bone, especially the wrist? He'd have to slice open his wrist for every bone DX
User avatar #149 - fuzzyballs (08/07/2014) [-]
"let a doctor handle that"
assuming anestethics even work on him, I don't know anything about the whole "lore besides the movies
then again, they keep changing up their logic, so fuck logic in comic books
User avatar #109 - blacklightsun (08/07/2014) [-]
^Check comment #108^
User avatar #110 - fuzzyballs (08/07/2014) [-]
make me
User avatar #111 - blacklightsun (08/07/2014) [-]
Well it was only if you wanted an answer to your question.
#16 - atheisttsiehta (08/07/2014) [-]
I'm thinking it's gonna be the half with his brain
User avatar #18 - YllekNayr (08/07/2014) [-]
But he's survived having his head blown off, right?
#19 - atheisttsiehta (08/07/2014) [-]
In hulk vs wolverine he had his arm cut off and he just reattaches it. comixexplain would be able to explain it better
#3 - Things got pretty rough after they spent all their money on se… 08/05/2014 on Don't look at the tags +4
#7 - That's not possible. All things are either good or bad, positi… 07/17/2014 on Wut 0
#559 - Minecraft and Kerbal Space Program. You mine materials to … 07/15/2014 on This will be interesting 0
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 550 / Total items point value: 1000

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #19 - kiratheunholy ONLINE (05/09/2013) [-]
Do you not have morals? Like seriously do you not have any? You claim that you only do as the bible instructs every time someone asks you about morals, but do you not know right from wrong without religion?

If so perhaps you should learn it. I'm an agnostic and I still know what's right from wrong without a higher entity instructing me on it. If the only thing keeping you from being a moral-less prick is religion then you are probably a psychopath.
User avatar #16 - justinsane (04/04/2013) [-]
Lets just put this here, shall we? Fewer purple lines
User avatar #18 to #16 - justinsane (04/04/2013) [-]
Now I strongly disagree that more studies need to be done in order to come to a consensus. All of the leading bodies which have done research on the subject have found no reason to indicate that gays are naturally more likely through their expression of sexuality to have any types of adverse effects. The only people I have heard calling for more research are the same people claiming that climate change is not a thing or that natural selection doesnt happen. There is a consensus in the scientific community and it is people who are not a part of the community who claim that they cant make conclusions (because they dont like the ones made)
User avatar #17 to #16 - Vandeekree ONLINE (04/04/2013) [-]
Tis a good idea
#14 - highclassbean (02/11/2013) [-]
thank you for being so informative and calm in that religious conversation with thebritish.guy. really gave a positive look on the religious community.
User avatar #15 to #14 - Vandeekree ONLINE (02/11/2013) [-]
Why thank you. Simply following the bible though. It says to approach the nonbeliever with respect and politeness.
#10 - anonymous (09/07/2012) [-]
******* idiot.
#9 - Vandeekree ONLINE (09/01/2012) [-]
**Vandeekree rolled a random image posted in comment #40 at Christian dating **
#5 - Vandeekree ONLINE (09/14/2011) [-]
**Vandeekree rolled a random image**
User avatar #4 - Vandeekree ONLINE (07/27/2011) [-]
**Vandeekree rolls 1**
User avatar #3 - Vandeekree ONLINE (08/08/2010) [-]
**Vandeekree rolls 4**
#1 - bearycool **User deleted account** (07/14/2010) [-]
*pats head* don't worry my son I read your comment 80
User avatar #2 to #1 - Vandeekree ONLINE (07/14/2010) [-]
Thank you, now I feel loved. i guess that's what I get for posting in the morning when the average funnyjunker is asleep.
 Friends (0)