I don't understand why people give a fuck what Mel Gibson said while he was drunk.

8/1/2006 4:30:33 PM

2

[Edited on August 1, 2006 at 4:31 PM. Reason : ]

8/1/2006 4:30:40 PM

Depends on who is drinking. I can hold myself quite well with a .12, thank you. And I doubt I'll yell about owning Malibu or anything about "fucking Jews"

8/1/2006 4:30:53 PM

^^ I win! So guood...

8/1/2006 4:32:03 PM

for 3 drinks to give you a .12 you would have to drink them in an hour and weigh 100lbs

8/1/2006 4:32:35 PM

Yeah, I guess if you weighed more, your BAC would be less.

8/1/2006 4:33:08 PM

If you were the same person and weighed more your bac would be higher

[Edited on August 1, 2006 at 4:34 PM. Reason : for obvious reasons]

8/1/2006 4:34:33 PM

Ahaahahahahahahahahahahhaaha, dickwad, have you ever taken any math or science courses? You're as smart as cxmai.

8/1/2006 4:35:32 PM

^ damn he must be dumb as a rock

8/1/2006 4:36:17 PM

READ FUCKING GOOGLE YOU DUMB FUCKS

8/1/2006 4:36:37 PM

http://www.ou.edu/oupd/bac.htm

Play with that and increase the weight. See if that helps you out some, kid.

8/1/2006 4:37:04 PM

THOSE ASSUME THAT PEOPLE AREN'T HUGE FATASSES
THE SAME PERSON WITH A HIGHER BODY FAT PERCENTAGE WILL HAVE A HIGHER BAC
IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME LOOK IT UP
OR
JUST LOOK AT THE LINK
IF MEL GIBSON WEIGHED 400LBS THEN HIS BAC WOULD BE HIGHER

8/1/2006 4:38:16 PM

Google:
Down $11.09 (2.87%) in slightly less than normal trading.


375.51 -11.09 (-2.87%) 1 Aug at 4:00PM ET
Open: 385.11
High: 385.77
Low: 375.51

Volume: 5,425,838
Avg Vol: 6,150,000
Mkt Cap: 113.81B

8/1/2006 4:38:49 PM

^^

[Edited on August 1, 2006 at 4:39 PM. Reason : ;]

8/1/2006 4:39:00 PM

http://www.askmen.com/sports/health_100/120_mens_health.html

Quote :

"Does my body weight affect how quickly I get drunk? Here's the formula you need to remember. More fat = higher blood alcohol concentration (BAC). Why? Alcohol has a high affinity to water and will pervade all body parts that contain it. A person with a lot of body fat has a lower percentage of body water, so their BAC will be higher. But this formula applies only to body fat. Bigger people necessarily have more body water than smaller ones. Therefore, a tall overweight guy will be less affected by alcohol than a short overweight guy, even if their body fat percentage is identical."

8/1/2006 4:40:15 PM

http://www.dot.state.wi.us/safety/motorist/drunkdriving/calculator.htm

Quote :

"Body size. Large people tend to reach lower BACs than smaller people, given the same amount of alcohol."

8/1/2006 4:41:28 PM

Ask Men?!

8/1/2006 4:41:49 PM

fat and size are different you fucking water baby

8/1/2006 4:42:31 PM

Ask Men--now that's a reputable source.

8/1/2006 4:42:33 PM

http://www.alcohol.vt.edu/Students/alcoholEffects/intoxFactors.htm

Quote :

"Body Fat Alcohol has a high affinity for water and is therefore found in body tissues and fluids inasmuch as they contain water. Thus person's with a lower percent body fat will, in general, have lower BACs than individuals with a higher percent body fat. In general, but by no means in all cases, women tend to have a higher percentage of body fat and thus a lower percentage of body water. Therefore, in general, if a man and a woman of the same weight ingest the same amount of alcohol the woman will tend to have a higher BAC. This, of course, would not be true if the woman was very fit and the man was somewhat obese, but on average, this is the case."

8/1/2006 4:43:02 PM

Quote :

"fat and size are different"

You're right. I've got a pretty big dick, but it isn't fat.

8/1/2006 4:44:42 PM

Damnit you're so fucking retarted. People who are larger, regardless of whether or not they're fatties or fatloss barry, have MORE BLOOD than people who are smaller.
Since it's measured in units of alcohol per units of blood, people who are larger are generally going to have lower BACs.

Too bad the cops don't have a breathalizer for stupidity yet.

[Edited on August 1, 2006 at 4:47 PM. Reason : ]

8/1/2006 4:47:10 PM

this is surprisingly fun

8/1/2006 4:48:47 PM

^ I agree.
Much more so than arguing over jews and whether or not Mel Gibson talked about them while he was drunk.

[Edited on August 1, 2006 at 4:49 PM. Reason : ]

8/1/2006 4:49:10 PM

another thread gheyed up by TreeTwista10

8/1/2006 4:50:40 PM

HE WASN'T DRINKING MODERATELY YOU SAP

8/1/2006 4:52:22 PM

1.2 is pretty fucked up.

8/1/2006 4:53:40 PM

Quote :

"WHEN WILL THIS ANTI-SEMITISM EVER STOP? "

8/1/2006 4:57:16 PM

Quote :

"In fact, though Gibson should certainly be rebuked for his threats to an arresting officer, emotional outburst, and the idiotic timing of his political remarks, he should be respected for his bold conclusions."

Should we also respect him for his bold conclusion that he "owns Malibu"? Obviously if his drunk statement regarding jewish power over the world is true, then it is also indisputable that he owns all of Malibu. Why don't we see you attaching equal weight to his other ridiculous claims and actions that night? Because they don't fit in with your agenda. As always, you ignore everything that contradicts your beliefs or that doesn't fit in with your worldview. You closemindedness has put blinders on you that only let you see the world how you want to. Ever hear the old addage "If your only tool is a hammer, then every problem will look like a nail?" As such, you only have one way of interpreting world events - as part of a vast jewish conspiracy, regardless of the facts proving you wrong. In psychology, this is called a confirmation bias. Feel free to look it up

If someone provides an article that proves you wrong, you label it "a zionist hit piece" or a "jew propaganda". Whenever the news reports the opposite of what you beleive to be true, you exclaim that the media is all owned by the jews - you aren't wrong, they just make it look that way.

Here is Wikipedias definition of a conspiracy theory. Your Zionist NWO plot is in line with ever single point.

1. Initiated on the basis of limited, partial or circumstantial evidence;
Conceived in reaction to media reports and images, as opposed to, for example, thorough knowledge of the relevant forensic evidence.

2. Addresses an event or process that has broad historical or emotional impact;
Seeks to interpret a phenomenon which has near-universal interest and emotional significance, a story that may thus be of some compelling interest to a wide audience.

3. Reduces morally complex social phenomena to simple, immoral actions;
Impersonal, institutional processes, especially errors and oversights, interpreted as malign, consciously intended and designed by immoral individuals.

4. Personifies complex social phenomena as powerful individual conspirators;
Related to (3) but distinct from it, deduces the existence of powerful individual conspirators from the 'impossibility' that a chain of events lacked direction by a person.

5. Allots superhuman talents or resources to conspirators;
May require conspirators to possess unique discipline, unrepentant resolve, advanced or unknown technology, uncommon psychological insight, historical foresight, unlimited resources, etc.

6. Key steps in argument rely on inductive, not deductive reasoning;
Inductive steps are mistaken to bear as much confidence as deductive ones.

7. Appeals to 'common sense';
Common sense steps substitute for the more robust, academically respectable methodologies available for investigating sociological and scientific phenomena.

8. Exhibits well-established logical and methodological fallacies;
Formal and informal logical fallacies are readily identifiable among the key steps of the argument.

9. Is produced and circulated by 'outsiders', often anonymous, and generally lacking peer review;
Story originates with a person who lacks any insider contact or knowledge, and enjoys popularity among persons who lack critical (especially technical) knowledge.

10. Is upheld by persons with demonstrably false conceptions of relevant science;
At least some of the story's believers believe it on the basis of a mistaken grasp of elementary scientific facts.

11. Enjoys zero credibility in expert communities;
Academics and professionals tend to ignore the story, treating it as too frivolous to invest their time and risk their personal authority in disproving.

12. Rebuttals provided by experts are ignored or accommodated through elaborate new twists in the narrative;
When experts do respond to the story with critical new evidence, the conspiracy is elaborated (sometimes to a spectacular degree) to discount the new evidence, often incorporating the rebuttal as a part of the conspiracy.

13. The conspiracy is claimed to involve just about anybody;
Conspiracy tales grow in the telling, and can swell to world-spanning proportions. As the adherents struggle to explain counter-arguments, the conspiracy grows even more (see preceding item). Conspiracy theories that have been around for a few decades typically encompass the whole world and huge portions of history.

14. The conspiracy centers on the "usual suspects";
Classical conspiracy theories feature people, groups or organizations that are discriminated against in the culture where the story is told. Jews and foreigners are a common target. Likewise, organizations with a bad or colorful reputation feature prominently, such as the Templars, the Nazis and just about any secret service.

8/1/2006 4:58:18 PM

8/1/2006 4:59:43 PM

Damnit the dude was drunk.

8/1/2006 5:00:13 PM

He looks shitfaced in the pictures from earlier in the night.

8/1/2006 5:02:51 PM

of course he was drunk...the sky is also blue and grass is green

8/1/2006 5:03:30 PM

YOU RETARD

8/1/2006 5:05:10 PM

has al gore made any good docudramas lately?

8/1/2006 5:10:52 PM

I remember this one time I was really drunk, and I went up to this guy that I'd had a crush on for 10 years and hadn't said anything, so I did that night.

Also, one night I remember I was trashed and my friend was really pissing me off like she always did, but I'd never said anything, but that night I finally told her to STFU.

And then this other night, we were wasted and this girl I knew who was 5'4" 200lbs and who was one of those who was always like, 'OMG, Do you think I'm fat?' and I'd always answered 'No' cause I didn't want to hurt her feelings, well she asked me that question after about half a bottle of tequila and I was like, 'YES! You're fat! OK...YOU ARE FAT'.....

8/1/2006 5:13:42 PM

yeah alcohol lowers your inhibitions

sometimes it lowers good inhibitions, ie you finally talking to the person you liked but were (i'm guessing) too shy to before

sometimes it lowers bad inhibitions, ie Mel Gibson

8/1/2006 5:16:12 PM

question: Who doesnt launch into a anti-semitic tirade when they drink?

8/1/2006 5:20:34 PM

in vino veritas

[Edited on August 1, 2006 at 5:24 PM. Reason : sdf]

8/1/2006 5:23:56 PM

Mel needs to go on Oprah and cry some.

8/1/2006 8:04:20 PM

Josh8315 made me laugh.

8/1/2006 9:02:30 PM

Just curious...but if he's claiming to be addicted to alcohol, then how can he have gone into a tizzy and blamed alcohol? I mean if that were the case, then wouldn't he have been able to control his outburst?

Either way it doesn't matter...either he was speaking his true feelings and knew what he was saying but found that being an alcoholic was the only plausible way to get out of some responsibility OR he was just wasted and his inhibitions were lowered...

8/1/2006 9:12:39 PM

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2263047

Quote :

". His father, Hutton Gibson, has described the Holocaust as "maybe not all fiction, but most of it is.""

8/1/2006 9:25:04 PM

^^My brain almost exploded trying to reason through that.

8/1/2006 9:29:36 PM

well I'll admit it wasn't the best thoughtout question....

8/1/2006 9:37:06 PM

Quote :

"Either way it doesn't matter...either he was speaking his true feelings and knew what he was saying but found that being an alcoholic was the only plausible way to get out of some responsibility OR he was just wasted and his inhibitions were lowered..."

I see those two things as the same. Alcohol has never "made" me do or say anything that I hadn't thought of doing or saying sober. Granted, being drunk facilitated doing things that I may not do sober by removing common sense/tact/public decency. The point is, however, people don't make up new things when they're drunk.

Also...alcohol may be a reason, but it is never an excuse.

8/1/2006 9:37:26 PM

No, I totally agree with you...I was just curious about the PR strategy behind sending him to rehab. I don't think they though about it very well to be honest with you. And sadly, this is why people have publicists a lot of the time...crisis communication/damage control.

8/1/2006 9:40:18 PM

everyday i'm on tww my hate for jews grows ten fold

8/1/2006 9:55:57 PM

I'm curious how this hate is increasing? what about tww makes you hate jews more and more?

8/1/2006 10:21:03 PM

oh did i say jews...i mean "anyone thats not an american citizen"

8/1/2006 10:26:35 PM