x
Click to expand

lilnuggetbob

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Consoles Owned: PC
Video Games Played: Garry's mod, Arma 2 OA, War thunder
X-box Gamertag: Xbox? More like x-gay
Interests: Your mom, dicks, gayness, dragon dildos
Date Signed Up:3/22/2012
Last Login:4/21/2015
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Ranking:#11960
Comment Ranking:#2623
Highest Content Rank:#1236
Highest Comment Rank:#1076
Content Thumbs: 10706 total,  12239 ,  1533
Comment Thumbs: 7539 total,  9365 ,  1826
Content Level Progress: 8% (8/100)
Level 204 Content: Comedic Genius → Level 205 Content: Comedic Genius
Comment Level Progress: 33% (33/100)
Level 267 Comments: Pure Win → Level 268 Comments: Pure Win
Subscribers:2
Content Views:407399
Times Content Favorited:788 times
Total Comments Made:3053
FJ Points:8234
Favorite Tags: 4Chan (3) | comp (3) | to (3) | 4 (2) | a (2) | bad (2) | chan (2) | Cute (2) | funny (2) | gmod (2) | How (2) | humor (2) | is (2) | k (2) | Russian (2) | tags (2) | Tank (2) | the (2) | Time (2) | WTF (2)

latest user's comments

#19 - Stfu gay oldfag you know nothing.  [+] (2 new replies) 04/02/2015 on Fhanny Joke +1
#22 - Aerosmither (04/02/2015) [-]
Don't be talking shit about oldfags
#21 - madnessdude (04/02/2015) [-]
This hurts the man.
#15 - "A starving population will rush a firing line unarmed an…  [+] (19 new replies) 04/02/2015 on What's happening in NK? +7
User avatar #23 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_War

Or more generally, the entire french revolution. I'm sure i could dig up plenty of stories from the USSR and china under the great leap forward too.

People will have food or they will die. When denied it, gaining food overrides all safety and ethical concerns, it's simple logic.
User avatar #22 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
3000 is a completely unreasonable estimate. An active hardworking adult man uses approximately 2500kcal a day.

Women use less, asians, who tend to be shorter and have less muscle mass, use less. Children use less, people with sedentary lifestyles use less, and so do the elderly.

in any case, homegrown food fills most of the needs, shall we go and dig up data on chinese imports?
User avatar #44 - babyanalraper (04/02/2015) [-]
Hah! Hah! Hah!

A hard working small man uses 4000 kcal a day. I'm small (70 kg), and as an experiment I measured how much I ate per day during a week of intense training. So at 70 kg i averaged at 7500 kcal/day. And I weighed the food, and the program used is really complex with pretty much all types of food already calculated, so I just had to write quantity (that was weighed), so it cannot possibly be more than +- 1Mcal.
User avatar #28 - centurionprime (04/02/2015) [-]
just about everything i've read from this person makes sense as long as North Korea's population IS growing.

either way, i'm too lazy to look up information, but i dont get why he's getting thumbed down.

yeah yeah, we dont like north kora, bad place, bad government, blah blah, can you prove this person wrong?
I haven't seen it done yet.
I'd lol if he were getting thumbed up stupidly because based admin.
#97 - anonymous (04/03/2015) [-]
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. Since they provided extremely weak evidence to show that starvation is not an issue any more in North Korea (and changed the definition of the word starvation to fit their agenda) there isn't a need to provide counter evidence. If they had more concrete evidence then people would be more inclined to believe them and provide counter evidence. For example their first source given counters their own claim >>#16. If they were completely correct then no African country would have seen any population growth in decades, which clearly isn't true.
User avatar #100 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
, as i've said already, >>#16, is evidence in my favour. Rather than sitting aroujnd starving, the north korean people have turned to subsistence farming to make up the shortfall, and continued average population growth proves that it is working out adequately,

I have not changed the definition of starvation. It's a state of inadequate energy income plus a lack of bodyfat stores that will result in organ shutdown and death within a matter of weeks or days.

comparing it to africa as a whole is apples and oranges, compare to specific african counries insead. But he same logic applies, any african counry where the population continues to increase, is not starving on average.
#123 - anonymous (04/03/2015) [-]
It continues to have food issues despite citizens trying to grow their own food away from state farms. That's what the picture shows. It disproves your claim and does not support it no matter how much you want to believe otherwise. You have changed the definition of starvation as you changed it from "a severe energy deficiency which can lead to death" to a "severe energy deficiency which always leads to death". Not all people who are starving die, which is what you are trying to claim and why African countries continue to have a rising population. Comparing Africa to North Korea is not apples to oranges as both have similar problems with military dictatorships leading to food (among other) problems. You can have a starving population on average and still have the population increase otherwise no African country would have seen a population increase in decades. There's way more evidence to suggest that the opposite of your claim is true and it's not going to change now matter how many times you refuse to believe that you've made a mistake.
#126 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
I changed nothing. My first post in this thread clearly stated "When people starve, they die" and i have held to that interpretation. "food issues" are not starvation, starvation is a specific extreme type of food issue where the body does not have enough calories to maintain basic functions

no, you cannot have a starving population on average, and continue to grow population
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_%28Ireland%29
User avatar #47 - babyanalraper (04/02/2015) [-]
Because he's blatantly wrong and overall edgy. He makes hypothesises, backs them with calculations, but they don't add up with the reality we know of (typical conspiracy theorist). He might sound logical, idc as long as all sources claim that the population is starving. If every North Korean who flees tell horror stories of malnurishment and slavelike working conditions, and every leaked image contains starved children, then he needs to change his hypothesis OR provide experimental data that proves him right and ALL data so far wrong, which he clearly hasn't done.

Also, the very idea that starvation is justified sounds so "I just read about biology in eight grade and now I know the truth that "the man" is keeping from us". If we got the ability to feed people there's no reason not to. I'd love to see him tell a starving mother that her starving child can't have some of America's excess food because her country already had their fill of food.
User avatar #61 - centurionprime (04/02/2015) [-]
Listen, of course it's a hellhole.

i just wanna know if their population is growing.
User avatar #124 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
Yes, the population is growing. Also, from his sources, you can read that the birthrate woman/man is exceptionally high, above values typically found in active war zones. This can only be because of the women constantly struggling with death due to famine and work overload Google for sources. It's well known but still an interesting read . This is solid proof that his "logic" has some flaws.
User avatar #127 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
wrong, read my sources.>>#104,
The birthrate is slightly below replacement rate, and the population is continuing to grow in the short term because of a lower death rate than birth rate. The people are not frantically churning out hordes of babies to keep population growing

This is a pretty similar trend to most western nations, although it's missing immigration.

What do active warzones have to do anything? North korea is not a warzone, it is a stable oppressive nation, i don' see where your conclusion of death from famine comes from.
User avatar #129 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
What is wrong? What can I get from reading your sources? You really need to be more specific...

Google what happens to the ratio woman/man during periods of harshness and you'll see why it's relevant.
User avatar #132 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
sorry

your statement that the birthrate is exceptionally high, is incorrect. It's about average for non socialised nations, and is slightly below replacement level
User avatar #133 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
Ahh. I mean birth rate of girls divided by birth rate of boys. I should've written divided by instead of /.
You're still wrong though :p
User avatar #134 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
can you explain this farther? I've never seen any evidence of environmental factors affecting the sex of foetuses
User avatar #136 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
Why Do We Have More Boys Than Girls?
I finally found a youtube video so I don't have to link boring articles!

From the wikipedia article you linked: "The figures disclosed by the government reveal an unusually low proportion of males to females: in 1980 and 1987, the male-to-female ratios were 86.2 to 100, and 84.2 to 100, respectively. Low male-to-female ratios are usually the result of a war, but these figures were lower than the sex ratio of 88.3 males per 100 females recorded for 1953, the last year of the Korean War."
User avatar #128 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
32% are malnourished...
#12 - IF they aren't starving why are they now constantly dickwaving…  [+] (21 new replies) 04/02/2015 on What's happening in NK? +8
User avatar #13 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
because it's a good way to gain international sympathy by appealing to liberals, and to make america and its sanctions look bad.

Actual starvation is a state which lasts a few weeks, and results in death. It also triggers many responses in a human including an overwhelming desire to get food at all costs, and a complete lack of fear as a result. A starving population will rush a firing line unarmed and overwhelm them with numbers, complete economic and civil collapse is the only possible outcome
User avatar #15 - lilnuggetbob (04/02/2015) [-]
"A starving population will rush a firing line unarmed and overwhelm them with numbers"
*Citation needed*

Also your numbers add up.
For a starving population.

W/O chinese imports:
with 22 million people needing around, let say 3,000 calories a day.
Means they need need 2.409e+13 calories a year, but are producing 1.8e+12 calories a year.
AKA 75 percent as many as normal people would have, or, on average, 2,250 calories per person per day, and that isn't assuming they work slave condition, that many do.
And assuming all food is given equally, and it isnt.

User avatar #23 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_War

Or more generally, the entire french revolution. I'm sure i could dig up plenty of stories from the USSR and china under the great leap forward too.

People will have food or they will die. When denied it, gaining food overrides all safety and ethical concerns, it's simple logic.
User avatar #22 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
3000 is a completely unreasonable estimate. An active hardworking adult man uses approximately 2500kcal a day.

Women use less, asians, who tend to be shorter and have less muscle mass, use less. Children use less, people with sedentary lifestyles use less, and so do the elderly.

in any case, homegrown food fills most of the needs, shall we go and dig up data on chinese imports?
User avatar #44 - babyanalraper (04/02/2015) [-]
Hah! Hah! Hah!

A hard working small man uses 4000 kcal a day. I'm small (70 kg), and as an experiment I measured how much I ate per day during a week of intense training. So at 70 kg i averaged at 7500 kcal/day. And I weighed the food, and the program used is really complex with pretty much all types of food already calculated, so I just had to write quantity (that was weighed), so it cannot possibly be more than +- 1Mcal.
User avatar #28 - centurionprime (04/02/2015) [-]
just about everything i've read from this person makes sense as long as North Korea's population IS growing.

either way, i'm too lazy to look up information, but i dont get why he's getting thumbed down.

yeah yeah, we dont like north kora, bad place, bad government, blah blah, can you prove this person wrong?
I haven't seen it done yet.
I'd lol if he were getting thumbed up stupidly because based admin.
#97 - anonymous (04/03/2015) [-]
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. Since they provided extremely weak evidence to show that starvation is not an issue any more in North Korea (and changed the definition of the word starvation to fit their agenda) there isn't a need to provide counter evidence. If they had more concrete evidence then people would be more inclined to believe them and provide counter evidence. For example their first source given counters their own claim >>#16. If they were completely correct then no African country would have seen any population growth in decades, which clearly isn't true.
User avatar #100 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
, as i've said already, >>#16, is evidence in my favour. Rather than sitting aroujnd starving, the north korean people have turned to subsistence farming to make up the shortfall, and continued average population growth proves that it is working out adequately,

I have not changed the definition of starvation. It's a state of inadequate energy income plus a lack of bodyfat stores that will result in organ shutdown and death within a matter of weeks or days.

comparing it to africa as a whole is apples and oranges, compare to specific african counries insead. But he same logic applies, any african counry where the population continues to increase, is not starving on average.
#123 - anonymous (04/03/2015) [-]
It continues to have food issues despite citizens trying to grow their own food away from state farms. That's what the picture shows. It disproves your claim and does not support it no matter how much you want to believe otherwise. You have changed the definition of starvation as you changed it from "a severe energy deficiency which can lead to death" to a "severe energy deficiency which always leads to death". Not all people who are starving die, which is what you are trying to claim and why African countries continue to have a rising population. Comparing Africa to North Korea is not apples to oranges as both have similar problems with military dictatorships leading to food (among other) problems. You can have a starving population on average and still have the population increase otherwise no African country would have seen a population increase in decades. There's way more evidence to suggest that the opposite of your claim is true and it's not going to change now matter how many times you refuse to believe that you've made a mistake.
#126 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
I changed nothing. My first post in this thread clearly stated "When people starve, they die" and i have held to that interpretation. "food issues" are not starvation, starvation is a specific extreme type of food issue where the body does not have enough calories to maintain basic functions

no, you cannot have a starving population on average, and continue to grow population
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_%28Ireland%29
User avatar #47 - babyanalraper (04/02/2015) [-]
Because he's blatantly wrong and overall edgy. He makes hypothesises, backs them with calculations, but they don't add up with the reality we know of (typical conspiracy theorist). He might sound logical, idc as long as all sources claim that the population is starving. If every North Korean who flees tell horror stories of malnurishment and slavelike working conditions, and every leaked image contains starved children, then he needs to change his hypothesis OR provide experimental data that proves him right and ALL data so far wrong, which he clearly hasn't done.

Also, the very idea that starvation is justified sounds so "I just read about biology in eight grade and now I know the truth that "the man" is keeping from us". If we got the ability to feed people there's no reason not to. I'd love to see him tell a starving mother that her starving child can't have some of America's excess food because her country already had their fill of food.
User avatar #61 - centurionprime (04/02/2015) [-]
Listen, of course it's a hellhole.

i just wanna know if their population is growing.
User avatar #124 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
Yes, the population is growing. Also, from his sources, you can read that the birthrate woman/man is exceptionally high, above values typically found in active war zones. This can only be because of the women constantly struggling with death due to famine and work overload Google for sources. It's well known but still an interesting read . This is solid proof that his "logic" has some flaws.
User avatar #127 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
wrong, read my sources.>>#104,
The birthrate is slightly below replacement rate, and the population is continuing to grow in the short term because of a lower death rate than birth rate. The people are not frantically churning out hordes of babies to keep population growing

This is a pretty similar trend to most western nations, although it's missing immigration.

What do active warzones have to do anything? North korea is not a warzone, it is a stable oppressive nation, i don' see where your conclusion of death from famine comes from.
User avatar #129 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
What is wrong? What can I get from reading your sources? You really need to be more specific...

Google what happens to the ratio woman/man during periods of harshness and you'll see why it's relevant.
User avatar #132 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
sorry

your statement that the birthrate is exceptionally high, is incorrect. It's about average for non socialised nations, and is slightly below replacement level
User avatar #133 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
Ahh. I mean birth rate of girls divided by birth rate of boys. I should've written divided by instead of /.
You're still wrong though :p
User avatar #134 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
can you explain this farther? I've never seen any evidence of environmental factors affecting the sex of foetuses
User avatar #136 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
Why Do We Have More Boys Than Girls?
I finally found a youtube video so I don't have to link boring articles!

From the wikipedia article you linked: "The figures disclosed by the government reveal an unusually low proportion of males to females: in 1980 and 1987, the male-to-female ratios were 86.2 to 100, and 84.2 to 100, respectively. Low male-to-female ratios are usually the result of a war, but these figures were lower than the sex ratio of 88.3 males per 100 females recorded for 1953, the last year of the Korean War."
User avatar #128 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
32% are malnourished...
#7 - AFRICANS POPULATION IS GROWING!!!!! GOOD NEWS EVERYONE NO …  [+] (31 new replies) 04/02/2015 on What's happening in NK? +110
#122 - hazardpay (04/03/2015) [-]
I dont know if this is the face you want but here ya go
User avatar #131 - lilnuggetbob (04/03/2015) [-]
It was suppost to be an insult to his logic.
User avatar #11 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
>>#8, >>#7,

What you both need to realise is that china is propping up both of these areas massively. North korea recieves vast amounts of foreign aid, including tons upon tons of food shipments

china is currently investing heavily in africa, buying land building infrastructure, etc. I'd be willing to bet they're running farms and selling to locals

Now that aside, check some economic data: www.nkeconwatch.com/category/food/

Last year north korea harvested just under 6 million tons of crops (after processing)
A metric ton of wheat is approximately 3 million calories: www.evi.com/q/how_many_calories_in_a_tonne_of_wheat

Do the math, or if you like, i'll give you the short version. NK is growing enough to feed around 20 million healthy young adult men, or about 22 million healthy young adults assuming a 50/50 gender ratio. This is assuming that they have reasonable levels of activity and aren't conserving calories by being sedentary, and it's also assuming no children.

If you factor in children making up some of the population, and chinese food imports, i'd wager north korea has an overall surplus.
#16 - anonymous (04/02/2015) [-]
Here's a picture from 2014 from your own source that shows that the food aid clearly isn't getting to the people and they are still starving.

Did you read what your source was before posting it or were you just hoping that it would match what you said?
User avatar #21 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
again no, they are not starving. They are food insecure, and some are suffering from malnourishment. I never said their lives were comfortable.

If people are still alive, they are not starving. And food security contrary to popular belief, is not a necessary or expected thing. Our ancestors survived for millenia by feasting when they could to store bodyfat, and living off stored fat when there was no food. Someone with stored energy can live for weeks, sometimes months, without taking in food.
#94 - mapleseamen has deleted their comment.
User avatar #27 - silvanyis (04/02/2015) [-]
>if people are still alive, they are not starving.
>When people starve, they die, and here are fewer left to share in what food there is. Nature fixes the problem.

Marie Antoinette, when did you get here?
#17 - anonymous (04/02/2015) [-]
*2013
User avatar #12 - lilnuggetbob (04/02/2015) [-]
IF they aren't starving why are they now constantly dickwaving about that in America's face like they do with everything else?
Why don't they show of shitloads of pictures of fat people or something instead of showing nothing but not really impressive military pictures?
User avatar #13 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
because it's a good way to gain international sympathy by appealing to liberals, and to make america and its sanctions look bad.

Actual starvation is a state which lasts a few weeks, and results in death. It also triggers many responses in a human including an overwhelming desire to get food at all costs, and a complete lack of fear as a result. A starving population will rush a firing line unarmed and overwhelm them with numbers, complete economic and civil collapse is the only possible outcome
User avatar #15 - lilnuggetbob (04/02/2015) [-]
"A starving population will rush a firing line unarmed and overwhelm them with numbers"
*Citation needed*

Also your numbers add up.
For a starving population.

W/O chinese imports:
with 22 million people needing around, let say 3,000 calories a day.
Means they need need 2.409e+13 calories a year, but are producing 1.8e+12 calories a year.
AKA 75 percent as many as normal people would have, or, on average, 2,250 calories per person per day, and that isn't assuming they work slave condition, that many do.
And assuming all food is given equally, and it isnt.

User avatar #23 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_War

Or more generally, the entire french revolution. I'm sure i could dig up plenty of stories from the USSR and china under the great leap forward too.

People will have food or they will die. When denied it, gaining food overrides all safety and ethical concerns, it's simple logic.
User avatar #22 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
3000 is a completely unreasonable estimate. An active hardworking adult man uses approximately 2500kcal a day.

Women use less, asians, who tend to be shorter and have less muscle mass, use less. Children use less, people with sedentary lifestyles use less, and so do the elderly.

in any case, homegrown food fills most of the needs, shall we go and dig up data on chinese imports?
User avatar #44 - babyanalraper (04/02/2015) [-]
Hah! Hah! Hah!

A hard working small man uses 4000 kcal a day. I'm small (70 kg), and as an experiment I measured how much I ate per day during a week of intense training. So at 70 kg i averaged at 7500 kcal/day. And I weighed the food, and the program used is really complex with pretty much all types of food already calculated, so I just had to write quantity (that was weighed), so it cannot possibly be more than +- 1Mcal.
User avatar #28 - centurionprime (04/02/2015) [-]
just about everything i've read from this person makes sense as long as North Korea's population IS growing.

either way, i'm too lazy to look up information, but i dont get why he's getting thumbed down.

yeah yeah, we dont like north kora, bad place, bad government, blah blah, can you prove this person wrong?
I haven't seen it done yet.
I'd lol if he were getting thumbed up stupidly because based admin.
#97 - anonymous (04/03/2015) [-]
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. Since they provided extremely weak evidence to show that starvation is not an issue any more in North Korea (and changed the definition of the word starvation to fit their agenda) there isn't a need to provide counter evidence. If they had more concrete evidence then people would be more inclined to believe them and provide counter evidence. For example their first source given counters their own claim >>#16. If they were completely correct then no African country would have seen any population growth in decades, which clearly isn't true.
User avatar #100 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
, as i've said already, >>#16, is evidence in my favour. Rather than sitting aroujnd starving, the north korean people have turned to subsistence farming to make up the shortfall, and continued average population growth proves that it is working out adequately,

I have not changed the definition of starvation. It's a state of inadequate energy income plus a lack of bodyfat stores that will result in organ shutdown and death within a matter of weeks or days.

comparing it to africa as a whole is apples and oranges, compare to specific african counries insead. But he same logic applies, any african counry where the population continues to increase, is not starving on average.
#123 - anonymous (04/03/2015) [-]
It continues to have food issues despite citizens trying to grow their own food away from state farms. That's what the picture shows. It disproves your claim and does not support it no matter how much you want to believe otherwise. You have changed the definition of starvation as you changed it from "a severe energy deficiency which can lead to death" to a "severe energy deficiency which always leads to death". Not all people who are starving die, which is what you are trying to claim and why African countries continue to have a rising population. Comparing Africa to North Korea is not apples to oranges as both have similar problems with military dictatorships leading to food (among other) problems. You can have a starving population on average and still have the population increase otherwise no African country would have seen a population increase in decades. There's way more evidence to suggest that the opposite of your claim is true and it's not going to change now matter how many times you refuse to believe that you've made a mistake.
#126 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
I changed nothing. My first post in this thread clearly stated "When people starve, they die" and i have held to that interpretation. "food issues" are not starvation, starvation is a specific extreme type of food issue where the body does not have enough calories to maintain basic functions

no, you cannot have a starving population on average, and continue to grow population
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_%28Ireland%29
User avatar #47 - babyanalraper (04/02/2015) [-]
Because he's blatantly wrong and overall edgy. He makes hypothesises, backs them with calculations, but they don't add up with the reality we know of (typical conspiracy theorist). He might sound logical, idc as long as all sources claim that the population is starving. If every North Korean who flees tell horror stories of malnurishment and slavelike working conditions, and every leaked image contains starved children, then he needs to change his hypothesis OR provide experimental data that proves him right and ALL data so far wrong, which he clearly hasn't done.

Also, the very idea that starvation is justified sounds so "I just read about biology in eight grade and now I know the truth that "the man" is keeping from us". If we got the ability to feed people there's no reason not to. I'd love to see him tell a starving mother that her starving child can't have some of America's excess food because her country already had their fill of food.
User avatar #61 - centurionprime (04/02/2015) [-]
Listen, of course it's a hellhole.

i just wanna know if their population is growing.
User avatar #124 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
Yes, the population is growing. Also, from his sources, you can read that the birthrate woman/man is exceptionally high, above values typically found in active war zones. This can only be because of the women constantly struggling with death due to famine and work overload Google for sources. It's well known but still an interesting read . This is solid proof that his "logic" has some flaws.
User avatar #127 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
wrong, read my sources.>>#104,
The birthrate is slightly below replacement rate, and the population is continuing to grow in the short term because of a lower death rate than birth rate. The people are not frantically churning out hordes of babies to keep population growing

This is a pretty similar trend to most western nations, although it's missing immigration.

What do active warzones have to do anything? North korea is not a warzone, it is a stable oppressive nation, i don' see where your conclusion of death from famine comes from.
User avatar #129 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
What is wrong? What can I get from reading your sources? You really need to be more specific...

Google what happens to the ratio woman/man during periods of harshness and you'll see why it's relevant.
User avatar #132 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
sorry

your statement that the birthrate is exceptionally high, is incorrect. It's about average for non socialised nations, and is slightly below replacement level
User avatar #133 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
Ahh. I mean birth rate of girls divided by birth rate of boys. I should've written divided by instead of /.
You're still wrong though :p
User avatar #134 - nanako (04/03/2015) [-]
can you explain this farther? I've never seen any evidence of environmental factors affecting the sex of foetuses
User avatar #136 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
Why Do We Have More Boys Than Girls?
I finally found a youtube video so I don't have to link boring articles!

From the wikipedia article you linked: "The figures disclosed by the government reveal an unusually low proportion of males to females: in 1980 and 1987, the male-to-female ratios were 86.2 to 100, and 84.2 to 100, respectively. Low male-to-female ratios are usually the result of a war, but these figures were lower than the sex ratio of 88.3 males per 100 females recorded for 1953, the last year of the Korean War."
User avatar #128 - babyanalraper (04/03/2015) [-]
32% are malnourished...
User avatar #10 - nanako (04/02/2015) [-]
" Asia, the most densely populated as well as most populous continent, has 137 people per square kilometre. Africa has 39. There should be room for more Africans."

My point still stands.
#3 - My account is 10 days older than yours. ******* can…  [+] (4 new replies) 04/02/2015 on Fhanny Joke +29
User avatar #17 - madnessdude (04/02/2015) [-]
Sit down please.
User avatar #19 - lilnuggetbob (04/02/2015) [-]
Stfu gay oldfag you know nothing.
#22 - Aerosmither (04/02/2015) [-]
Don't be talking shit about oldfags
#21 - madnessdude (04/02/2015) [-]
This hurts the man.
#42 - Yea i was just looking at Wikipedia's page on it, same armamen…  [+] (1 new reply) 04/01/2015 on Free Steam Games 0
User avatar #43 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
It was announced some time before 1.45, and was supposed to come this patch. It was pushed back however.

I can try and find it again, but itll be hard because most information was on the Russian forums that I saw through the subreddit.
#37 - Than they'll but its BR t 7.0 cause 3op5me or some other shieeet.  [+] (3 new replies) 04/01/2015 on Free Steam Games 0
#40 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
I believe its getting here after the new Matchmaker is implemented, so I have hope.

Even if not, at 7.0 it would have better performance and the same BR as the Tigercat.

Related, the Do 335 Pfeil (arrow).

User avatar #42 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
Yea i was just looking at Wikipedia's page on it, same armament at the TA-152?
Seems neat.

Also new matchmaker? When was that announced?
User avatar #43 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
It was announced some time before 1.45, and was supposed to come this patch. It was pushed back however.

I can try and find it again, but itll be hard because most information was on the Russian forums that I saw through the subreddit.
#35 - DO 335? Haven't heard of it, i need to look that up. Also …  [+] (5 new replies) 04/01/2015 on Free Steam Games 0
User avatar #36 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
Exactly.

And trust me, the Do 335 will make it all worth it.

Heavily armed, great climb speed, great energy retention. It was the fastest piston-engined aircraft of the war.

I cant wait.
User avatar #37 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
Than they'll but its BR t 7.0 cause 3op5me or some other shieeet.
#40 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
I believe its getting here after the new Matchmaker is implemented, so I have hope.

Even if not, at 7.0 it would have better performance and the same BR as the Tigercat.

Related, the Do 335 Pfeil (arrow).

User avatar #42 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
Yea i was just looking at Wikipedia's page on it, same armament at the TA-152?
Seems neat.

Also new matchmaker? When was that announced?
User avatar #43 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
It was announced some time before 1.45, and was supposed to come this patch. It was pushed back however.

I can try and find it again, but itll be hard because most information was on the Russian forums that I saw through the subreddit.
#33 - From what iv seen the TA-152 seem pretty good, but i haven't h…  [+] (7 new replies) 04/01/2015 on Free Steam Games 0
User avatar #34 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
Both the K4 and Ta 152 are usable, but neither are up to par with the aircraft of other nations. They require a huge amount more planning and ability than others at their tier, like the Tempest II or Bearcat or Grif Spits.

It will be different when the Low Altitude Ta 152 and the Do 335 are released.
User avatar #35 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
DO 335? Haven't heard of it, i need to look that up.
Also some of the jap/german BR's are crazy, Like the FW190 A5/U2 with the same BR as some american jets.....
User avatar #36 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
Exactly.

And trust me, the Do 335 will make it all worth it.

Heavily armed, great climb speed, great energy retention. It was the fastest piston-engined aircraft of the war.

I cant wait.
User avatar #37 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
Than they'll but its BR t 7.0 cause 3op5me or some other shieeet.
#40 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
I believe its getting here after the new Matchmaker is implemented, so I have hope.

Even if not, at 7.0 it would have better performance and the same BR as the Tigercat.

Related, the Do 335 Pfeil (arrow).

User avatar #42 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
Yea i was just looking at Wikipedia's page on it, same armament at the TA-152?
Seems neat.

Also new matchmaker? When was that announced?
User avatar #43 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
It was announced some time before 1.45, and was supposed to come this patch. It was pushed back however.

I can try and find it again, but itll be hard because most information was on the Russian forums that I saw through the subreddit.
#30 - Mosin-Nagant clone or variant. A lower level bolt ri… 04/01/2015 on The Thing 0
#8 - Close but the guy who jumped out died by shrapnel from the roc… 04/01/2015 on Close call 0
#29 - Here's another one OP: War thunder. A …  [+] (9 new replies) 04/01/2015 on Free Steam Games 0
User avatar #32 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
WTs only P2W setup is crew skills, but they really dont matter much (especially is you play Arcade) and you'll level them through play anyway.

Its Pay to Advance.

Also, if you're Germany or Japan and actually want to play German or Japanese aircraft at end game, you're shit outta luck. Neither have competitive Super props and their end game jets are foreign.
User avatar #33 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
From what iv seen the TA-152 seem pretty good, but i haven't hear much about the BF-109 k4, as i don't really play the German aircraft.

And the poor jet performance is due to the shitty BR's they have for most aircraft/tanks.
User avatar #34 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
Both the K4 and Ta 152 are usable, but neither are up to par with the aircraft of other nations. They require a huge amount more planning and ability than others at their tier, like the Tempest II or Bearcat or Grif Spits.

It will be different when the Low Altitude Ta 152 and the Do 335 are released.
User avatar #35 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
DO 335? Haven't heard of it, i need to look that up.
Also some of the jap/german BR's are crazy, Like the FW190 A5/U2 with the same BR as some american jets.....
User avatar #36 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
Exactly.

And trust me, the Do 335 will make it all worth it.

Heavily armed, great climb speed, great energy retention. It was the fastest piston-engined aircraft of the war.

I cant wait.
User avatar #37 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
Than they'll but its BR t 7.0 cause 3op5me or some other shieeet.
#40 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
I believe its getting here after the new Matchmaker is implemented, so I have hope.

Even if not, at 7.0 it would have better performance and the same BR as the Tigercat.

Related, the Do 335 Pfeil (arrow).

User avatar #42 - lilnuggetbob (04/01/2015) [-]
Yea i was just looking at Wikipedia's page on it, same armament at the TA-152?
Seems neat.

Also new matchmaker? When was that announced?
User avatar #43 - enkmaster (04/01/2015) [-]
It was announced some time before 1.45, and was supposed to come this patch. It was pushed back however.

I can try and find it again, but itll be hard because most information was on the Russian forums that I saw through the subreddit.
#202 - They were made illegal in the 1989 assault weapons ban. … 03/28/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
#201 - But civilians are even lessl'y armed than they were in the 50'… 03/28/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
#27 - Ill put this in english and anti-gunner speak English: A p… 03/28/2015 on 'murikuh 0
#113 - There were 12,664 homicides with firearms in the US in 2011 …  [+] (3 new replies) 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
User avatar #198 - theruinedsage (03/28/2015) [-]
The problem is that the ones who cause trouble cause more than homicides Even if that is the worst they can do with it , like robbery and home invasions. And knowing that a criminal can carry a gun no problem makes a lot of people uncomfortable. And what's more, it makes the police uncomfortable. That's why there are so many instances where the police shoots people because they "looked like they had a gun". Your police is becoming more and more weaponized, and it's causing a lot of trouble.

I don't think guns should be banned, but I think they should be more controlled.
User avatar #202 - lilnuggetbob (03/28/2015) [-]
They were made illegal in the 1989 assault weapons ban.

#201 - lilnuggetbob (03/28/2015) [-]
But civilians are even lessl'y armed than they were in the 50's, and that includes for criminals as well.
You could easily buy full auto military style literal assault rifles.
#109 - And i obviously prefer the idea that everyone should be able t… 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
#105 - True These are just to thread out all the people who …  [+] (6 new replies) 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
User avatar #107 - theruinedsage (03/27/2015) [-]
Giving people a gun doesn't make them bad people
But giving bad people a gun is still a shitty ass idea
I have no problems with guns, I just don't like the idea of them being readily available to most people, even if most people are mature and sane enough to handle it.
User avatar #113 - lilnuggetbob (03/27/2015) [-]
There were 12,664 homicides with firearms in the US in 2011
www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11

Lets assume that only 30% of Americans own guns.
www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/19/how-many-people-own-guns-in-america-and-is-gun-ownership-actually-declining/

There are 319 million people in america.
www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=america%27s%20population%202014

That leaves 95.7 million gun owners.
And 12,664 gun related homicides.

1 in every 24,000 gun owners will kill someone with their gun.

So 24,000 people should be punished for the action of one?
Ill let you decide.


User avatar #198 - theruinedsage (03/28/2015) [-]
The problem is that the ones who cause trouble cause more than homicides Even if that is the worst they can do with it , like robbery and home invasions. And knowing that a criminal can carry a gun no problem makes a lot of people uncomfortable. And what's more, it makes the police uncomfortable. That's why there are so many instances where the police shoots people because they "looked like they had a gun". Your police is becoming more and more weaponized, and it's causing a lot of trouble.

I don't think guns should be banned, but I think they should be more controlled.
User avatar #202 - lilnuggetbob (03/28/2015) [-]
They were made illegal in the 1989 assault weapons ban.

#201 - lilnuggetbob (03/28/2015) [-]
But civilians are even lessl'y armed than they were in the 50's, and that includes for criminals as well.
You could easily buy full auto military style literal assault rifles.
User avatar #109 - lilnuggetbob (03/27/2015) [-]
And i obviously prefer the idea that everyone should be able to own guns.
Yes i know there are bad eggs.
But i'm not the person who takes away everyone's freedoms just because a few can't get their shit together.
#102 - Anti-gunners like to say that more guns = more crime. This…  [+] (8 new replies) 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
User avatar #104 - theruinedsage (03/27/2015) [-]
Except it doesn't show that
Statistics doesn't show anything
It could easily cause more crime
It's just that something is reducing crime
And statistics can't possibly prove what it is
There are simply too many variables

Education
Drug availability and types
Police presence
Job availability
Changes in public behavior
Social programs
Media
Veterans treatment

etc.

You can't really claim anything when there are this many unknown variables, which makes the gun discussion such a mess. Any research will simply be ignored entirely by the other side because they can find research that proves the exact opposite correlation.
User avatar #105 - lilnuggetbob (03/27/2015) [-]
True

These are just to thread out all the people who think that the second you give someone a gun they become a baby killing nigger hating kkk racist.
User avatar #107 - theruinedsage (03/27/2015) [-]
Giving people a gun doesn't make them bad people
But giving bad people a gun is still a shitty ass idea
I have no problems with guns, I just don't like the idea of them being readily available to most people, even if most people are mature and sane enough to handle it.
User avatar #113 - lilnuggetbob (03/27/2015) [-]
There were 12,664 homicides with firearms in the US in 2011
www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11

Lets assume that only 30% of Americans own guns.
www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/19/how-many-people-own-guns-in-america-and-is-gun-ownership-actually-declining/

There are 319 million people in america.
www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=america%27s%20population%202014

That leaves 95.7 million gun owners.
And 12,664 gun related homicides.

1 in every 24,000 gun owners will kill someone with their gun.

So 24,000 people should be punished for the action of one?
Ill let you decide.


User avatar #198 - theruinedsage (03/28/2015) [-]
The problem is that the ones who cause trouble cause more than homicides Even if that is the worst they can do with it , like robbery and home invasions. And knowing that a criminal can carry a gun no problem makes a lot of people uncomfortable. And what's more, it makes the police uncomfortable. That's why there are so many instances where the police shoots people because they "looked like they had a gun". Your police is becoming more and more weaponized, and it's causing a lot of trouble.

I don't think guns should be banned, but I think they should be more controlled.
User avatar #202 - lilnuggetbob (03/28/2015) [-]
They were made illegal in the 1989 assault weapons ban.

#201 - lilnuggetbob (03/28/2015) [-]
But civilians are even lessl'y armed than they were in the 50's, and that includes for criminals as well.
You could easily buy full auto military style literal assault rifles.
User avatar #109 - lilnuggetbob (03/27/2015) [-]
And i obviously prefer the idea that everyone should be able to own guns.
Yes i know there are bad eggs.
But i'm not the person who takes away everyone's freedoms just because a few can't get their shit together.
#68 - Picture 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
#67 - Picture 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
#66 - Picture 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
#65 - Picture 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ +1
#64 - Picture 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ 0
#63 - Picture 03/27/2015 on ♪Oh say! Can you see...♫ +1

items

Total unique items point value: 1570 / Total items point value: 2120
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #28 to #27 - lilnuggetbob (03/21/2015) [-]
OP was not a fag
User avatar #24 - atheisttsiehta (06/27/2014) [-]
You pass
#20 - drewbridge (07/15/2013) [-]
Wear a seatbelt, 			******
Wear a seatbelt, ******
 Friends (0)