Page 1 of 2
Good God.
Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:01 pm
by TPFKA@W
Didn't everyone do something ghastly to his/her hair at some point while not yet old enough for kindergarten?
An adult did this, and another adult, I think she is an adult anyway, allowed it to be done.
https://www.facebook.com/Barbershapp/vi ... 860763866/
Re: Good God.
Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:28 pm
by Bicycle Bill
@W, I think you are confusing 'the age of majority' with 'adulthood'. 'Tain't necessarily the same thing, because even though they grow old some people never grow up.
-"BB"-
Re: Good God.
Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:50 pm
by Econoline

It occurs to me that it would've taken much less time and effort to simply make her a big sign saying
"I AM A IDIOT!!!"
that the girl could hang from her neck...
ETA: on second thought, I guess at least 2 signs would be necessary. 
GOOD GOD.
Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 3:47 pm
by RayThom
It's ONLY hair... and it ALWAYS grows back.
As my daughter grew up I told her she could do whatever she damned well pleased with her hair -- short, long, black, purple, bald -- it wouldn't bother me. She's the one that ultimately had to live with it.
Her most radical of hair statements were odd looking color tints applied to her long blonde hair. Oh, ears pierced (at 6), a navel piercing (at 16) and a tattoo on her foot (at 18). They were all birthday presents that I paid for, and I was with her for them all.
And now, at 26, she's been a wonder daughter, never displaying anything more than the normal "teenage angst" necessary for proper development.
Love conquers all... while promoting understanding and a healthy parent/child relationship.
Re: Good God.
Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 7:10 pm
by oldr_n_wsr
It's ONLY hair... and it ALWAYS grows back.
Not ALWAYS.

Re: Good God.
Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:29 pm
by rubato
Speaking as a scientist with long flowing locks I am inclined to think that male pattern baldness is a way of god marking those he especially does not like.
http://www.improbable.com/hair/gallery1/
I have WAY better hair than this guy does.
Longer, thicker and more luxuriant. Much longer. Even after my annual haircut.
Even better than this guy:
yrs,
rubato
Re: Good God.
Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:51 pm
by Gob
rubato wrote:Speaking as a scientist with long flowing locks I am inclined to think that male pattern baldness is a way of god marking those he especially does not like.
I have WAY better hair than this guy does.
Photo or we won't believe you.
Used to be long, I have some very interesting photos of me back in the day.
Re: Good God.
Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 11:02 pm
by rubato
Has it ever seemed to you that I gave a rats ass about what you believe or do not?
You really are stupid. Monumentally.
yrs,
rubato
Re: Good God.
Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 11:09 pm
by wesw
I m actually letting my hair grow out, much to family s dismay

. I haven t actually had my hair fully grown out since I was an adolescent.
I let it grow a bit when I was a younger man but my beard was still scruffy and I always got tired of taking care of it when it got too long.
I want to see what god intended me to look like at least once before my hair gets all grey and squirrely...
it greying along quite a bit now, but my hair is sandy brown so it blends in.
Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:09 am
by Gob
rubato wrote:Has it ever seemed to you that I gave a rats ass about what you believe or do not?
You really are stupid. Monumentally.
yrs,
rubato
Of course you don't care. I just wanted to show up your monumental cowardice, and total inability to back up your claims. Again.
So I think that's a
BTW, that hairstyle is really staring to give you a balding fringe.
Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:41 am
by TPFKA@W
a scientist with long flowing locks
aSo Rubato might look like this:

Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:02 am
by MajGenl.Meade
TPFKA@W wrote: a scientist with long flowing locks
aSo Rubato might look like this:

This is weird. Here's another image that doesn't appear on my Firefox powered webachine. What's going on? As before, the code looks good and I can copy the address to Google Image search and find it. But can't see it here. It happened as soon as rubato posted a picture of daffodils in his 10,000 acre estate
Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:07 am
by TPFKA@W
Clearly God doesn't like you.

Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:09 am
by rubato
MajGenl.Meade wrote:
This is weird. Here's another image that doesn't appear on my Firefox powered webachine. What's going on? As before, the code looks good and I can copy the address to Google Image search and find it. But can't see it here. It happened as soon as rubato posted a picture of daffodils in his 10,000 acre estate
10,000 acre estate? Whose 10,000 acre estate?
Asshole.
yrs,
rubato
Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:15 am
by MajGenl.Meade
I think you deleted it. Photo of more daffodils than Wordsworth ever saw and pretending they were yours, if I recall correctly.
Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:25 am
by TPFKA@W
MajGenl.Meade wrote:I think you deleted it. Photo of more daffodils than Wordsworth ever saw and pretending they were yours, if I recall correctly.
Really good drugs or a UTI.
Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:33 am
by dales
....a scientist with long flowing locks....

Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 1:36 am
by MajGenl.Meade
Perhaps I misjudged. The photo of daffodils in his "yard" is still there.
rubato wrote:Daffodils of various types have been blooming in my yard for a month now. The King Alfreds just popped yesterday:

yrs,
rubato
But it didn't look like a yard - more like a public park. Or from Vanengelen. com/catalog... you might think he'd put "like these"
My guess is, drugs
Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 2:33 am
by Joe Guy
It's your typical garden variety plagiarism...
Re: Good God.
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 4:36 am
by Econoline
If you read that post from rubato carefully--keeping in mind that he never ever EVER has posted ANY personal information or photos on any of the different boards where we have known him--then it will be obvious that the photo was there simply to illustrate what King Alfred daffodils look like. (If you examine the URL of the image, it appears to be from a seed catalog.)