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

hide menu

llortemageht    

Rank #48110 on Subscribers
llortemageht Avatar Level 219 Comments: Comedic Genius
Offline
Send mail to llortemageht Block llortemageht Invite llortemageht to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:8/03/2011
Last Login:7/23/2013
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 3356 total,  3722 ,  366
Comment Thumbs: 1983 total,  2414 ,  431
Content Level Progress: 56% (56/100)
Level 133 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 134 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry
Comment Level Progress: 83% (83/100)
Level 219 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 220 Comments: Mind Blower
Subscribers:1
Content Views:73414
Times Content Favorited:218 times
Total Comments Made:859
FJ Points:391
Favorite Tags: You (4) | a (2) | bad (2) | friend (2) | i (2) | is (2)

latest user's comments

#233 - German Rock 03/12/2012 on Accept diversity 0
#133 - Did you know that if you take your username, take out all of t… 03/12/2012 on Don't you ever try to fuck me! +2
#159 - I have an MP5. It's a music player. Wat. 03/12/2012 on The evolution of the mp +1
#247 - I jumped. I'm ashamed of myself.  [+] (1 new reply) 03/11/2012 on i know that face +1
#258 - argyleknight (03/11/2012) [-]
I know the feel bro ;_; pic unrelated.
#191 - He doesn't have a big sword. 03/11/2012 on Willem Defoe +1
#212 - Picture  [+] (1 new reply) 03/09/2012 on Drawing skills 0
#213 - danjoyas (03/09/2012) [-]
#333 - Picture  [+] (1 new reply) 03/09/2012 on DDIIIEEE +3
User avatar #335 - JonRoutery (03/09/2012) [-]
thank you! I needed that picture
#210 - Explain how.  [+] (3 new replies) 03/09/2012 on Drawing skills +1
#211 - danjoyas (03/09/2012) [-]
#212 - llortemageht (03/09/2012) [-]
#213 - danjoyas (03/09/2012) [-]
#148 - Picture 03/08/2012 on Drawing skills 0
#147 - I need short nails for playing guitar.  [+] (5 new replies) 03/08/2012 on Drawing skills -13
#208 - danjoyas (03/09/2012) [-]
You're both filthy twats
User avatar #210 - llortemageht (03/09/2012) [-]
Explain how.
#211 - danjoyas (03/09/2012) [-]
#212 - llortemageht (03/09/2012) [-]
#213 - danjoyas (03/09/2012) [-]
#112 - Picture 03/07/2012 on Photoshopping Done Right +1
#102 - >Teacher asks you a question >You weren't listening … 03/07/2012 on When the teacher looks at you. +2
#121 - They didn't have a choice to go back in time, though. That fac…  [+] (1 new reply) 03/06/2012 on nice title 0
User avatar #122 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but I do see your point. I feel like our opinions are really similar with minor details that make a big difference...
#119 - They didn't have a choise. The fact that they'd been in the pa…  [+] (3 new replies) 03/06/2012 on nice title 0
User avatar #120 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess that's where I disagree.
I think that if they hadn't chosen to go back in time, the Hermione that threw the rock would disappear.
User avatar #121 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choice to go back in time, though. That fact was decided the moment there were two Harrys and two Hermiones on the school grounds during Buckbeak's execution. The timeline's fixed. If someone goes back in the past to do something, then that thing has already happened.
User avatar #122 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but I do see your point. I feel like our opinions are really similar with minor details that make a big difference...
#117 - But they had to go back in time, because they were already i…  [+] (5 new replies) 03/06/2012 on nice title 0
User avatar #118 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I don't understand. Them going into the past would change the future... They had the choice to.
User avatar #119 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choise. The fact that they'd been in the past (such as when Hermione threw the rock to get Harry's attention to the window) forced them to go back in time. Nothing could have ever changed that. The past and future weren't changed.
User avatar #120 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess that's where I disagree.
I think that if they hadn't chosen to go back in time, the Hermione that threw the rock would disappear.
User avatar #121 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choice to go back in time, though. That fact was decided the moment there were two Harrys and two Hermiones on the school grounds during Buckbeak's execution. The timeline's fixed. If someone goes back in the past to do something, then that thing has already happened.
User avatar #122 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but I do see your point. I feel like our opinions are really similar with minor details that make a big difference...
#115 - Sirius was saved because they'd already saved him. It's a para…  [+] (7 new replies) 03/06/2012 on nice title 0
User avatar #116 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I think both of us are right. We're going around in circles.
If they hadn't gone back in time, then the future wouldn't be changed. Timeturners do change the future.
User avatar #117 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
But they had to go back in time, because they were already in the past. There was no stopping them going into the past, that was already set
User avatar #118 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I don't understand. Them going into the past would change the future... They had the choice to.
User avatar #119 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choise. The fact that they'd been in the past (such as when Hermione threw the rock to get Harry's attention to the window) forced them to go back in time. Nothing could have ever changed that. The past and future weren't changed.
User avatar #120 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess that's where I disagree.
I think that if they hadn't chosen to go back in time, the Hermione that threw the rock would disappear.
User avatar #121 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choice to go back in time, though. That fact was decided the moment there were two Harrys and two Hermiones on the school grounds during Buckbeak's execution. The timeline's fixed. If someone goes back in the past to do something, then that thing has already happened.
User avatar #122 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but I do see your point. I feel like our opinions are really similar with minor details that make a big difference...
#113 - They couldn't see Buckbeak being killed, but they knew he was …  [+] (9 new replies) 03/06/2012 on nice title 0
User avatar #114 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
They did change the future. Just like SIrius was going to have his soul taken by the dementors and they saved him.
If you can't change the future, what's the point of a time turner?
User avatar #115 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
Sirius was saved because they'd already saved him. It's a paradox in that sirius was saved in the future because Harry and Hermione had gone into the past to specifically save him. That's the only thing that could ever happen, because it already had happened in the future.
User avatar #116 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I think both of us are right. We're going around in circles.
If they hadn't gone back in time, then the future wouldn't be changed. Timeturners do change the future.
User avatar #117 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
But they had to go back in time, because they were already in the past. There was no stopping them going into the past, that was already set
User avatar #118 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I don't understand. Them going into the past would change the future... They had the choice to.
User avatar #119 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choise. The fact that they'd been in the past (such as when Hermione threw the rock to get Harry's attention to the window) forced them to go back in time. Nothing could have ever changed that. The past and future weren't changed.
User avatar #120 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess that's where I disagree.
I think that if they hadn't chosen to go back in time, the Hermione that threw the rock would disappear.
User avatar #121 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choice to go back in time, though. That fact was decided the moment there were two Harrys and two Hermiones on the school grounds during Buckbeak's execution. The timeline's fixed. If someone goes back in the past to do something, then that thing has already happened.
User avatar #122 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but I do see your point. I feel like our opinions are really similar with minor details that make a big difference...
#111 - No they didn't. That's not how Time Turners work. They were fu…  [+] (11 new replies) 03/06/2012 on nice title 0
#112 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
Buckbeak was dead, and they went back in time to free him before he died... That's why this picture happened.
User avatar #113 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They couldn't see Buckbeak being killed, but they knew he was going to be killed and assumed that the executioner cutting the pumpkin was Buckbeak being killed.

It is impossible for them to change the past with a Time Turner, because the past had already been set by their future selves.
User avatar #114 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
They did change the future. Just like SIrius was going to have his soul taken by the dementors and they saved him.
If you can't change the future, what's the point of a time turner?
User avatar #115 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
Sirius was saved because they'd already saved him. It's a paradox in that sirius was saved in the future because Harry and Hermione had gone into the past to specifically save him. That's the only thing that could ever happen, because it already had happened in the future.
User avatar #116 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I think both of us are right. We're going around in circles.
If they hadn't gone back in time, then the future wouldn't be changed. Timeturners do change the future.
User avatar #117 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
But they had to go back in time, because they were already in the past. There was no stopping them going into the past, that was already set
User avatar #118 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I don't understand. Them going into the past would change the future... They had the choice to.
User avatar #119 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choise. The fact that they'd been in the past (such as when Hermione threw the rock to get Harry's attention to the window) forced them to go back in time. Nothing could have ever changed that. The past and future weren't changed.
User avatar #120 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess that's where I disagree.
I think that if they hadn't chosen to go back in time, the Hermione that threw the rock would disappear.
User avatar #121 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choice to go back in time, though. That fact was decided the moment there were two Harrys and two Hermiones on the school grounds during Buckbeak's execution. The timeline's fixed. If someone goes back in the past to do something, then that thing has already happened.
User avatar #122 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but I do see your point. I feel like our opinions are really similar with minor details that make a big difference...
#109 - They didn't, the thing the executioner hit with the axe is a f…  [+] (13 new replies) 03/06/2012 on nice title 0
User avatar #110 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
But originally, if they hadn't used the timeturner, they killed Buckbeak.
User avatar #111 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
No they didn't. That's not how Time Turners work. They were fufilling what had already happened, which was Buckbeak escaping. Buckbeak wasn't dead once.
#112 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
Buckbeak was dead, and they went back in time to free him before he died... That's why this picture happened.
User avatar #113 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They couldn't see Buckbeak being killed, but they knew he was going to be killed and assumed that the executioner cutting the pumpkin was Buckbeak being killed.

It is impossible for them to change the past with a Time Turner, because the past had already been set by their future selves.
User avatar #114 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
They did change the future. Just like SIrius was going to have his soul taken by the dementors and they saved him.
If you can't change the future, what's the point of a time turner?
User avatar #115 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
Sirius was saved because they'd already saved him. It's a paradox in that sirius was saved in the future because Harry and Hermione had gone into the past to specifically save him. That's the only thing that could ever happen, because it already had happened in the future.
User avatar #116 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I think both of us are right. We're going around in circles.
If they hadn't gone back in time, then the future wouldn't be changed. Timeturners do change the future.
User avatar #117 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
But they had to go back in time, because they were already in the past. There was no stopping them going into the past, that was already set
User avatar #118 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I don't understand. Them going into the past would change the future... They had the choice to.
User avatar #119 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choise. The fact that they'd been in the past (such as when Hermione threw the rock to get Harry's attention to the window) forced them to go back in time. Nothing could have ever changed that. The past and future weren't changed.
User avatar #120 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess that's where I disagree.
I think that if they hadn't chosen to go back in time, the Hermione that threw the rock would disappear.
User avatar #121 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choice to go back in time, though. That fact was decided the moment there were two Harrys and two Hermiones on the school grounds during Buckbeak's execution. The timeline's fixed. If someone goes back in the past to do something, then that thing has already happened.
User avatar #122 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but I do see your point. I feel like our opinions are really similar with minor details that make a big difference...
#75 - "No spell can reawaken the dead...except for the timeturn…  [+] (19 new replies) 03/06/2012 on nice title -2
User avatar #92 - nopresident (03/06/2012) [-]
Buckbeak never was dead. But in the Prisoner of Azkaban Buckbeak would have been killed if they had not used the time turner. They sent someone to execute him if you don't remember. That's the whole reason they used the time turner.
User avatar #99 - bangarang (03/06/2012) [-]
That's his point. Buckbeak never died, he was saved by Harry/Hermione going back in time.
Harry's parents did die, and they wouldn't be able to change that...
User avatar #123 - nopresident (03/07/2012) [-]
I know what his point was. But he said that the pic implied that Buckbeak had already died when they went back in time to save him, and that's not what the pic was implying. And I'm pretty sure if the time turner could've went back that far in time they could've saved Harry's parents, you know, by stopping Voldemort before he got too powerful and all....
#83 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
Also, implying the timeturner is a spell and not an item.
But wtf, they beheaded buckbeak >_>
User avatar #109 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't, the thing the executioner hit with the axe is a fence/a pumpkin (depending on whether you go by the book or the film)
User avatar #110 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
But originally, if they hadn't used the timeturner, they killed Buckbeak.
User avatar #111 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
No they didn't. That's not how Time Turners work. They were fufilling what had already happened, which was Buckbeak escaping. Buckbeak wasn't dead once.
#112 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
Buckbeak was dead, and they went back in time to free him before he died... That's why this picture happened.
User avatar #113 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They couldn't see Buckbeak being killed, but they knew he was going to be killed and assumed that the executioner cutting the pumpkin was Buckbeak being killed.

It is impossible for them to change the past with a Time Turner, because the past had already been set by their future selves.
User avatar #114 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
They did change the future. Just like SIrius was going to have his soul taken by the dementors and they saved him.
If you can't change the future, what's the point of a time turner?
User avatar #115 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
Sirius was saved because they'd already saved him. It's a paradox in that sirius was saved in the future because Harry and Hermione had gone into the past to specifically save him. That's the only thing that could ever happen, because it already had happened in the future.
User avatar #116 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I think both of us are right. We're going around in circles.
If they hadn't gone back in time, then the future wouldn't be changed. Timeturners do change the future.
User avatar #117 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
But they had to go back in time, because they were already in the past. There was no stopping them going into the past, that was already set
User avatar #118 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I don't understand. Them going into the past would change the future... They had the choice to.
User avatar #119 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choise. The fact that they'd been in the past (such as when Hermione threw the rock to get Harry's attention to the window) forced them to go back in time. Nothing could have ever changed that. The past and future weren't changed.
User avatar #120 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess that's where I disagree.
I think that if they hadn't chosen to go back in time, the Hermione that threw the rock would disappear.
User avatar #121 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choice to go back in time, though. That fact was decided the moment there were two Harrys and two Hermiones on the school grounds during Buckbeak's execution. The timeline's fixed. If someone goes back in the past to do something, then that thing has already happened.
User avatar #122 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but I do see your point. I feel like our opinions are really similar with minor details that make a big difference...
#77 - iwanttousenumbers (03/06/2012) [-]
#71 - Buckbeak wasn't dead.  [+] (21 new replies) 03/06/2012 on nice title -2
User avatar #74 - iwanttousenumbers (03/06/2012) [-]
Nowhere does it say that Buckbeak is dead
User avatar #75 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
"No spell can reawaken the dead...except for the timeturner. We'll use that to save Buckbeak."

Implying that Buckbeak was dead and the timeturner saved him from that death
User avatar #92 - nopresident (03/06/2012) [-]
Buckbeak never was dead. But in the Prisoner of Azkaban Buckbeak would have been killed if they had not used the time turner. They sent someone to execute him if you don't remember. That's the whole reason they used the time turner.
User avatar #99 - bangarang (03/06/2012) [-]
That's his point. Buckbeak never died, he was saved by Harry/Hermione going back in time.
Harry's parents did die, and they wouldn't be able to change that...
User avatar #123 - nopresident (03/07/2012) [-]
I know what his point was. But he said that the pic implied that Buckbeak had already died when they went back in time to save him, and that's not what the pic was implying. And I'm pretty sure if the time turner could've went back that far in time they could've saved Harry's parents, you know, by stopping Voldemort before he got too powerful and all....
#83 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
Also, implying the timeturner is a spell and not an item.
But wtf, they beheaded buckbeak >_>
User avatar #109 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't, the thing the executioner hit with the axe is a fence/a pumpkin (depending on whether you go by the book or the film)
User avatar #110 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
But originally, if they hadn't used the timeturner, they killed Buckbeak.
User avatar #111 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
No they didn't. That's not how Time Turners work. They were fufilling what had already happened, which was Buckbeak escaping. Buckbeak wasn't dead once.
#112 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
Buckbeak was dead, and they went back in time to free him before he died... That's why this picture happened.
User avatar #113 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They couldn't see Buckbeak being killed, but they knew he was going to be killed and assumed that the executioner cutting the pumpkin was Buckbeak being killed.

It is impossible for them to change the past with a Time Turner, because the past had already been set by their future selves.
User avatar #114 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
They did change the future. Just like SIrius was going to have his soul taken by the dementors and they saved him.
If you can't change the future, what's the point of a time turner?
User avatar #115 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
Sirius was saved because they'd already saved him. It's a paradox in that sirius was saved in the future because Harry and Hermione had gone into the past to specifically save him. That's the only thing that could ever happen, because it already had happened in the future.
User avatar #116 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I think both of us are right. We're going around in circles.
If they hadn't gone back in time, then the future wouldn't be changed. Timeturners do change the future.
User avatar #117 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
But they had to go back in time, because they were already in the past. There was no stopping them going into the past, that was already set
User avatar #118 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I don't understand. Them going into the past would change the future... They had the choice to.
User avatar #119 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choise. The fact that they'd been in the past (such as when Hermione threw the rock to get Harry's attention to the window) forced them to go back in time. Nothing could have ever changed that. The past and future weren't changed.
User avatar #120 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess that's where I disagree.
I think that if they hadn't chosen to go back in time, the Hermione that threw the rock would disappear.
User avatar #121 - llortemageht (03/06/2012) [-]
They didn't have a choice to go back in time, though. That fact was decided the moment there were two Harrys and two Hermiones on the school grounds during Buckbeak's execution. The timeline's fixed. If someone goes back in the past to do something, then that thing has already happened.
User avatar #122 - biblioklept (03/06/2012) [-]
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but I do see your point. I feel like our opinions are really similar with minor details that make a big difference...
#77 - iwanttousenumbers (03/06/2012) [-]
#503 - Picture 03/06/2012 on Break my car, i break you -1
#444 - **llortemageht rolls 98** 03/06/2012 on Morning feel 0
#319 - I also don't have a suitable reaction picture. Take an Angel B…  [+] (1 new reply) 03/05/2012 on i dont wanna live on this... +1
#357 - punchanun (03/05/2012) [-]
ahh thank you. here take this
#59 - I do, @llortemageht 03/05/2012 on One can only dream 0

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
Anonymous commenting is allowed
User avatar #28 - benedicto (11/01/2012) [-]
so....you needed furnaces?
#29 to #28 - llortemageht (11/01/2012) [-]
Thank you for the offer, but I just acceped a trade. You can, however, have this GIF as thanks
Thank you for the offer, but I just acceped a trade. You can, however, have this GIF as thanks
#8 - zameckis (04/24/2012) [-]
hi there~
#9 to #10 - llortemageht (04/24/2012) [-]
Why hello there
#10 to #11 - zameckis (04/24/2012) [-]
pardon for my intrusion
its just i wanna have a lil bit chit chat with new people

sooo
how are you today?
#11 to #12 - llortemageht (04/24/2012) [-]
I am very well, thank you. What about you?
#12 to #13 - zameckis (04/24/2012) [-]
just like i said
i just wanna meet new people for my exper
*cough
i mean to talk with :P

overall today is well spend i guess

what are you doing atm?
#13 to #14 - llortemageht (04/24/2012) [-]
Oh, nothing much. Now I'm just worrying about Kanade performing experiments on me
#14 to #15 - zameckis (04/24/2012) [-]
haha i see   
well then   
i    
um.,.   
uuh.,.,    
   
damn, can't find a single topic to talk   
guess immah a boring person eh
haha i see
well then
i
um.,.
uuh.,.,

damn, can't find a single topic to talk
guess immah a boring person eh
#18 to #19 - zameckis (04/24/2012) [-]
your resistance only make me harder
#22 to #23 - zameckis (04/24/2012) [-]
btw, nice user name
btw, nice user name
#23 to #24 - llortemageht (04/24/2012) [-]
I troll a lot of people with it. Pic unrelated.
#24 to #25 - zameckis (04/24/2012) [-]
am i getting trolled too??
am i getting trolled too??
#25 to #26 - llortemageht (04/24/2012) [-]
Depends on if you've read it backwards
#26 to #27 - zameckis (04/24/2012) [-]
that's why i said nice user name


#6 - subparforsakenn **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#5 - lordaurion (03/09/2012) [-]
So were you made speachless at the absurdity of this as well?

funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/3424126/Drawing+skills/159#159
 Friends (0)