Absolutely. =D>
One of them uses a lighter, or strikes a flare.
Or, they aren’t actually at sea, so they ask a passer-by for a light.
One of them spontaneously combusts.
OMG I am going to faint.
No, it’s another silly one. I’ll give you the first half of the answer: they throw one of the cigarettes overboard.
Oh God.
Okay. Was the packet full before they threw one overboard…? Does that matter…? Are they actually at sea…?
They throw a cigarette overboard and make the boat a cigarette lighter.
Get it. One cigarette… Lighter.
Correct. Boom boom.
More like linguistic cunning instead of a riddle, because there is no real resolution. They still don’t get to smoke. Funny lingual games would never help me if I was craving nicotine.
Did I get tab’s right? He removes the legs of the table and makes a door.
For some reason that phrase made me chuckle.
Jesus, that’s worse than mine.
=D> Hat’s off.
What about if after a few days of floating in the ocean and being pulled into a giant hopeless loop by sea currents through hundreds of miles, one of the sailors feels very sick. Does the other desperate individual has the following overwhelming dilemma? Either he will kill him and he will eat him, or he will let him die tossing him afterwards over board.
Nah, they get the Coastguard on their cell-phones and a helicopter whisks them out of trouble. Don’t you watch the telly…?
What about if after a few days of floating in the ocean and being pulled into a giant hopeless loop by sea currents through hundreds of miles, one of the sailors feels very sick and the other desperate individual has the following overwhelming dilemma? Eeither he’ll kill him and he’ll eat him, or he will let him die tossing him afterwards over board.
Oh! Now I get it… is a romance…
Wholes can’t have parts because the part is part of a total: and the total does not give the whole.
warning, cheegster: his ideas don’t make sense, he has no justification for them, and he is very stubborn that they’re correct. he has made up a brand new paradigm with which to view the world, and it is completely and utterly incorrect, and there is nothing you can do to tell him so. do not engage: it will be fruitless. unless, of course, you find pleasure in watching someone struggle to keep nonsense in order.
I lost my post. Here it is again. Your example of using “asswhole” insstead of “whole” is apt. I will tell you why. Because only the whole has a meaning, and it is the meaning that identifies the parts. So “asswhole” identifies the parts of wittering on and on. Do yu get me dearie.
ohhh yes they do cheegster
I, too, like Laurel and Hardy, don’t you know…
Oh no he never did!
I think we need a recount.
Well, (cough) I appreciate the sound advice to …do… something… as it were… different …yes, different … as it were, qua qua qua
On no account, parry swords with this lad. It’s so… how do you say, so… mmm
Nay, without berries, yet in the fall.
And how I bloody struggle!
i think that you think you’re clever. i also think you’re mistaken.
I do not agree with your ass-wholistic idea. A society can be made up of many ass-wholes and that does not necessarily represent that the whole could provide meaning to those individuals. On the contrary, those individuals are the ones that will define a whole.