The first pic is cut off.
Intentional. The only thing after the text is the other image I included, but I coudnât get both in the same screenshot without cutting off some of it. So I cut off most of it, and then just included the image.
Itâs always fun to throw rocks at a waspâs nest and saying the bees did it.
1 Like
Nah, not even that. Itâs like watching a small, yappy dog attack a mirror, because it doesnât understand that itâs looking at itself, and doesnât like what it sees.
2 Likes
The best part is that we have a picture of Mei without her thick parka on. Specifically, her Table Tennis spray from the Olympics event.
Which look nothing like the factory-second realdoll Redditâs fapping over.
1 Like
Churbaâs trace-over makes it out so that Mei looks like Garnet. Itâs like Garnet if Ruby was like âNah Iâm not feeling it today, you got this Saf-famâ so she was just blue.
[quote=âSWATrous, post:111, topic:36, full:trueâ]
Churbaâs trace-over makes it out so that Mei looks like Garnet. Itâs like Garnet if Ruby was like âNah Iâm not feeling it today, you got this Saf-famâ so she was just blue.
[/quote]Not mine - Mary Cagle of Kiwi Blitz and Sleepless Domain. I didnât mention her by name in the kotaku thread, because Iâd rather not fill her twitter feed with horrible assbags yelling at her that she doesnât understand what womenâs bodies look like.
[quote=âNeito, post:110, topic:36â]
The best part is that we have a picture of Mei without her thick parka on. Specifically, her Table Tennis spray from the Olympics event.
[/quote]Someone actually posted that as a counterpoint to the above trace-over, too, saying that obviously it wasnât skintight on her legs - except, dudebro didnât realize that it was the CNY skin traced over the regular skin.
So metal hydrogen bombs. Yay.
So one man with nothing better to do decides to play along with scam emails for the sake of comedy. The results are entertaining to watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZlYFlyDNkI&index=1&list=PLSKUhDnoJjYmeW6nNasZSaVAGh4u91pEk
2 Likes
4 Likes
Reddit was made slightly less awful today.
Looks like a working hypothesis at the moment, I canât find the published paper to work out if USA Today if USA today is presenting the authorâs opinion versus his findings or his hypothesis.
Newspapers need to reference more appropriately or maybe Iâve been trained to read and write papers with references to a fault.
They link to the paper right at the end:
http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14086
Calling it a âlost continentâ seems quite misleading; apparently Mauritia is the term for a microcontinent and/or a bunch of continental fragments. Their Figure 1 is worth a look:
