Where are all the jokes?
-
bennyboy351
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 6:01 pm
A man walks in to a bar - clumsy git, should have looked where he was going!
-
MobiusGrey
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:10 pm
What do you call a deer with only one eye?
No idea
No idea
-
MobiusGrey
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:10 pm
What do you call a deer with only one eye and no legs?
Still no idea
Still no idea
Very, very old joke.
-
MobiusGrey
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 8:10 pm
-
Trader Pat
- Posts: 4327
- Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:50 pm
After having dug to a depth of 10 feet last year, French scientists found traces of copper wire dating back 200 years and came to the conclusion that their ancestors already had a telephone network more than 150 years ago.
Not to be outdone by the French: in the weeks that followed, American archaeologists dug to a depth of 20 feet before finding traces of copper wire. Shortly afterwards, they published an article in the New York Times saying : "American archaeologists, having found traces of 250-year-old copper wire, have concluded that their ancestors already had an advanced high-tech communications network 50 years earlier than the French."
A few weeks later, ‘The British Archaeological Society of Northern England’ reported the following: "After digging down to a depth of 33 feet in the Skipton area of North Yorkshire in 2011, Charlie Hardcastle, a self-taught amateur archaeologist, reported that he had found absolutely f&*% all. Charlie has therefore concluded that 250 years ago, Britain had already gone wireless."
Not to be outdone by the French: in the weeks that followed, American archaeologists dug to a depth of 20 feet before finding traces of copper wire. Shortly afterwards, they published an article in the New York Times saying : "American archaeologists, having found traces of 250-year-old copper wire, have concluded that their ancestors already had an advanced high-tech communications network 50 years earlier than the French."
A few weeks later, ‘The British Archaeological Society of Northern England’ reported the following: "After digging down to a depth of 33 feet in the Skipton area of North Yorkshire in 2011, Charlie Hardcastle, a self-taught amateur archaeologist, reported that he had found absolutely f&*% all. Charlie has therefore concluded that 250 years ago, Britain had already gone wireless."
-
wearthefoxhat
- Posts: 3552
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 9:55 am
My robot friend always wondered why his family ran on a DC current but he ran on an AC current, until one day he found out he was adapted.
-
paspuggie48
- Posts: 737
- Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:22 am
My mate was telling me someone has been stealing all the gates from the houses in his road.
I said why don't you complain to the police?
He said they might take a fence........
I said why don't you complain to the police?
He said they might take a fence........
There was this king whose daughter's beauty was legendary. Princes would come hoping to marry her. The king was arrogant and cruel. Whenever a suitor came the king would say 'only if you touch your arse with your dick!' The suitors would leave in shock and dismay.
There was a man who'd been watching for a while and decided to chance his luck. He approached the king and the king gave the usual statement. To everyone's surprise the man whipped his trousers down, took hold of his dick and tried to pull it through but it was way short.
Not to be undone the guy went to various massage experts who used special oils and treatments and he managed to eek out some extra length.
He returned confiidently to the king who gave the ususal statement. The guy took his trousers down and to everyone's surprised pulled his dick through and the tip of it just touched his areshole. In shock the king said 'now go fuck yourself!'
There was a man who'd been watching for a while and decided to chance his luck. He approached the king and the king gave the usual statement. To everyone's surprise the man whipped his trousers down, took hold of his dick and tried to pull it through but it was way short.
Not to be undone the guy went to various massage experts who used special oils and treatments and he managed to eek out some extra length.
He returned confiidently to the king who gave the ususal statement. The guy took his trousers down and to everyone's surprised pulled his dick through and the tip of it just touched his areshole. In shock the king said 'now go fuck yourself!'
-
wearthefoxhat
- Posts: 3552
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 9:55 am
I wish people wouldn't use the same word twice in a sentence. Enough is enough.
-
eatyourgreens
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:53 am
not a joke, but on a similar topic to the above joke, ......I have often wondered why people use two do's in sentence................why would people say something like "I tell you what they do do" or "if you do do that, you are using too many do's" surely one do is enough and it means exactly the same thing?wearthefoxhat wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 1:29 pmI wish people wouldn't use the same word twice in a sentence. Enough is enough.
It is no wonder the dodo became extinct, it was over used !
A quote I heard many years ago :
"it is not about what they dont do, but about what they do do"
It was by Desmond Tutu!!
The first do at the end of the sentence relates to the don't, the last do relates to the first do.eatyourgreens wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 1:46 pmA quote I heard many years ago :
"it is not about what they dont do, but about what they do do"
It was by Desmond Tutu!!
-
eatyourgreens
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:53 am
..........now thats confused me even more!
would it not be suffecient to say "its not about what they dont do, but about what they do"
Does that mean exactly the same thing? and it saves wasting a do on the end!!
looks like i have a spelling mistake, "suffecient" does not look right, I think I need to brush up on my English!
would it not be suffecient to say "its not about what they dont do, but about what they do"
Does that mean exactly the same thing? and it saves wasting a do on the end!!
looks like i have a spelling mistake, "suffecient" does not look right, I think I need to brush up on my English!
That means exactly the same thing but it's not complete. It's like then the bride says "I do". You need to have heard the vicar's question to know what she does and assume that's what she's referring to. I think do do is more consistent.eatyourgreens wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:59 pm..........now thats confused me even more!
would it not be suffecient to say "its not about what they dont do, but about what they do"
Does that mean exactly the same thing? and it saves wasting a do on the end!!
looks like i have a spelling mistake, "suffecient" does not look right, I think I need to brush up on my English!
It's not what he doesn't earn, but what he does [earn]. You can take your pick.