/brit/

Exciting. Only 37 minutes to go

What was the story of the webm in the last thread where the girl gets pushed off the cliff edge?

collectivecuck hiveminded gook drones don't understand the fierce individual independent rebelliousness of the Anglo spirit
also
>being Korean and posting in a Japanese general
pathetic

big fan of yanksplitting

when two threads appear and one is by a Brit and the other a Yank I always always side with my country no matter which one was posted first

you wouldnt if you had to live there

Love this album!

youtube.com/watch?v=OkjA6V5XlFQ

Attached: .jpg (970x826, 28K)

need a cuddle with a lass who has a fat bum
I hate sleeping alone

bruh bruuuuuh

to be fair the number of people born in the area of wales that's unshaded is so fucking low it's not surprising

this seems to be decidedly the better thread so I'll ruin it by posting here.

i am half japanese
only legally korean because japanese law only admits paternal citizenship

you guys are such poopheads!!!

Attached: 1550367980136.jpg (1000x750, 77K)

how big's your willer

based nippon

>quantifying historical accomplishments

hello nigger

i am in an unsatisfying relationship :/

Technically speaking, Africans have a richer history than whites

Women are vile whores. Every single one. They don’t have hobbies, they don’t have interests, I’m not even convinced they have thoughts on the same way men do.

For me it's weed man

Attached: electioncandidate.jpg (800x450, 56K)

It always will be my home.
So many good times hanging out at on the rocks in newquay with mates, or weatherspoons in st austell.

Attached: .jpg (356x272, 33K)

He's right. You can't assign objective, numerical values to "accomplishments". Also, Murray is a crank.

why compare a geographic category to a racial category?

yes you can

Because it coincides?

Why can't you quantify such things?

hello nigger
how was your nigger day, do many nigger things?

>Italy
>Northern Europe
Very good post.

African=/=black, so no
Africans have a richer history than Europeans I agree
But whites have a much richer history than blacks

>Value is objective
Nope.
>Value can be measured numerically
Nope

Seems like you're jealous

He never said anything about value. Have you read the book? do you understand Murray's methodology or what the book is trying to say? Or have you just read the snippet from the OP image, become offended by it and taken an immediate stance against his entire works? I must ask as well, what is it about Murrya that makes him a Crank? Specifically what about his quantification of historical events do you find incorrect? Your comment here is entirely meaningless.

Once you have set the criteria for what could be considered a major historical accomplishment it's just a matter of counting. Saying it's simply impossible to quantify such things is retarded. There's also subcategories like inventions & discoveries.

Of continental Africa's history? Sure. They had the Egyptians, the Carthaginians, the Abbasid and Umayyad Caliphates. all very interesting cultures and periods. None of which were black civilisations. I have nothing to be jealous of when it comes to subsaharan black Africans, whose history is largely uninterested and uneventful compared to the history white Europeans forged

>Of continental Africa's history? Sure. They had the Egyptians, the Carthaginians, the Abbasid and Umayyad Caliphates. all very interesting cultures and periods. None of which were black civilisations. I have nothing to be jealous of when it comes to subsaharan black Africans, whose history is largely uninterested and uneventful compared to the history white Europeans forged

Attached: 1551895373938.jpg (800x600, 88K)

I love you

Attached: 1539218240797.jpg (1024x1004, 211K)

Need a femdom gf who makes me choke on her high heels and sticks dildos up my arse

nice rebuttal

>Africans have a richer history than Europeans I agree

Attached: 1527480924202.jpg (798x770, 119K)

>nice rebuttal

Attached: 1545165148817.jpg (599x589, 98K)

why are scots the only anglos that roll Rs?

everything about this post is wrong

>Once you have set the criteria
That's the point user. This can't be done objectively. It's like saying "Once you decide spicy food is better than sweet food, we can now measure foods". Your methodology is already subjective.
In order to rank something, you have to have a criteria of value. Murray is a crank because of his nonsense about race and IQ which has been refuted countless times. He retains the same false views regardless.

So what you're saying is you don't like some separate views he holds due to them conflicting not with science, of course, but with your political opinion, so therefore his entire work and methodology of which you know literally nothing must be wrong? Am I getting close to understanding you here?

>to whom it may concern
>due to the rapid success of the government girlfriend placement program your priority in the queue has lessened as there is a current shortage of viable girls that meet your age and criteria
>as a placeholder and to deliver on Presidents Musk promise we have given you the option of being assigned a male companion. Though this does not meet your entire criterion this companion will try his best to fulfill duties where he does, and over time and transition will hopefully meet all your requirements.
>Please find him attached with this letter and do not hesitate to contact us for more information or even return him if you prefer to wait for the default program girlfriend
>kind regards Department of Companionship and Private Labour

what does that mean

I want to smell Emma Watson’s bumhole and have sex with her.

Attached: 42818EA3-1EEC-434C-9383-4120C7F801EA.jpg (1920x2560, 925K)

seems right

No what you're saying is you like some separate views he holds due to them conflicting with science, of course, but confirming your political opinion, so therefore his entire work and methodology must be right.
On the other hand, the scientific consensus is against you and Murray.

Aight guys I'm going to poo

Heading out to the street eh?

Do you like tanmen

I actually had no idea Murray had made controversial comments on race and IQ (I imagine it's something similar to James Watson correct me if I'm wrong), but I know this book and I know how he quantified it and while it isn't particularly stellar and definitely not perfect it isn't psuedoscience (nor is it pure mathematics either of course, as we are dealing with the non-scientific source matter of History). You however don't know anything about the work in question, do you?

I want Emma Watson’s bare buttocks to rest on my face, with my nose in her crack close to her anus, as she proceeds to rip a foul-smelling fart.

Attached: 71866D4A-0F7A-4B6A-BCBE-071A07728DC0.jpg (558x800, 53K)

Don't really care if pedantic people are going to argue otherwise. If we needed to quantify it with clear criteria we certainly could.

/brit/ is Jow Forums's garbage dump

explains all the yank posters

Ah yes the old ‘I haven’t read it and I don’t want to but a lot of other people came to the consensus that it’s wrong so not only will i choose to believe them but I will also choose to insert myself into arguments about the topic as if i was one of those people who had a tually read it and disagreed with it and furthermore I will hijack their authority as an academic as my own and pretend I have the intellectual high ground all while having no clue what is being debated’

Brilliant lad keep it up the discord will LOVE IT x

All me

You're asking if I've read the book? No but I am familiar with it from prior to this thread. An illegitimate methodology can not produce legitimate results. It's like determining court verdict through an unfair trial. The outcome doesn't matter. The issue here is you respect the methodology and I do not. The results are irrelevant.

Attached: 7742225BF5754F94ADAD6152B3714078.png (815x1236, 758K)

the colours of the rainbow go as follows blue blue blue blue red blue purple you can claw at the wall you can fucking shit yourself but that won't change this is the arrangment
1+1=3
1+2=1
jump of a roof and this will still be true

>No but I am familiar with it from prior to this thread. An illegitimate methodology can not produce legitimate results.
I'm going to give up. I've asked you numerous times if you knew the methodology and you clearly don't or you would simply have answered 'yes'. You admit you haven't even read it yet insist on being familiar with it. I imagine through some biased reddit comment section footnotes on why it's wrong and not even through a real academic response. By no means is the work beyond criticism, nor should ANY work or idea be beyond criticism, but you haven't displayed even a shred of real criticsm that didn't come down to the fact that he offends your political ideology of racial egalitarianism.

Don’t understand how someone can be called a “comedian” when they aren’t the least bit funny.

The only reason you believe this book is because it confirms your pre-existing biases. A book with the opposite conclusion would be rejected by you. And yes, peer review is crucial to determining the quality of any scientific work. Not even Murray would deny that.

need pirate films other than pirates of the caribbean

lovely atmosphere lovely sound i'm quite fond of it

bossman at mcdonalds sorted me right out

hate smokers hate smoke hate nicotine

Cutthroat Island is great.

That kind of shit makes women laugh

>A book with the opposite conclusion would be rejected by you.
I actually haven't come across one and if I did I'd read it before commenting. Can you say the same? You're on a thread which is probably most well known for post such as 'doing a poo lads x' and 'i want emma watson to shit in my mouth' yet you seem less well read and more importantly less willing to read books than those people. Get a grip holy fuck.

I literally can't decide if Sarah Silverman is decidedly plain, or unabashedly attractive.

Yes, she has sex appeal. No, she's not particularly beautiful. Yes, she's raunchy. No, she's not sexy. So what the fuck is it?

I always thought she was hot as a kid, and even now she's quite cute, but at the same time she seems sort of...gross. Like a hot aunt, or a hot meth addict. You know you shouldn't, yet for some reason, your mind tells you you should.

Attached: Sarah Silverman 6.jpg (625x469, 132K)

the knoledge the understanding I think all of it is within us from the star you know? like morality

I never said the book was wrong because of my political views that you know nothing of. Not did I say the book was wrong due to the authors views on race and IQ (I only mentioned this because it reduces his credibility, but doesn't necessarily falsify his work on accomplishments. I said multiple times that the problem was with the method not the results. Perhaps I agree with the results? Even so, that wouldn't validate a conclusion from a false method of investigation.

Didn’t say anything about the book just that you’re arguing from a position of consensual and brazen ignorance and that is retarded and strips you of credibility.

What have you done this time, Nigel?

Treasure Island

organised a trip to NZ then realised visiting will probably just make me angrier about not being antipodean
bigger brain could've prevented this

In the end we parted ways it's natural there is no need to get upset about natural things

She has a pretty face and is fairly MILFy but she has a personality like venom.

Bjork is quite peng

Attached: bork.jpg (736x1021, 117K)

money? no, we should trade with food

Kek

> I said multiple times that the problem was with the method not the results.
Then I shall give you the benefit of the doubt and apologise for misunderstanding you, and ask you for the fourth time in this thread in hopes you may clear it up for me, do you know what his methodology was, do you believe understand this methodology? Have you read up on it at all? Do you know much about histiometry or the common methods for quantifying such data and if so, why do you disagree with it?

rate me lads

Attached: ril.jpg (1676x2981, 346K)

Women enjoy the humiliation of others

>You seem less well read
You don't know anything about my reading habits. Over and over again you make assumptions about me. This suggests that your ability to objectively judge Murrays work doesn't exist and is simply made by your own prior assumptions.