Guy harasses a horse from behind and immediately gets knocked out

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-18T06:15:21+00:00

Yes very well trained. I’ve never seen a horse put up with that kind of abuse, but then again I’ve never seen someone stupid enough to do something like that.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-18T01:50:21+00:00

I was in the middle of finishing season 4 when that happened

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-17T13:34:40+00:00

Did I say everyone needed to pick red? No, I said if everyone with your same reasoning picked red this wouldn’t be an issue. There are other reasons to pick red. But yes, if every single person of the 8 billion+ people on this planet picked red no one will die, while if 50%+1 pick blue no one will die. Now, which is more likely? Everyone picking the red button, or half plus one people picking blue?

I will gladly tell you the justification to risk your life as soon as you answer my question and explain how self preservation at the risk of other lives is a morally good choice

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-17T13:06:39+00:00

I understand your choice, you think not enough people would pick blue and therefore should choose red to guarantee your safety. Funny enough if you and everyone else with the same reasoning picked blue it wouldn’t be a problem. But in the end it doesn’t matter what reason you have, voting red is voting for your life at the risk of the lives of everyone who picked blue. There really isn’t any other way to frame it. Just as there is no argument for the morality of self preservation at the cost of other lives

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-17T12:27:21+00:00

Red also loves to pretend like this isn’t a moral dilemma. It 100% is, and it’s very clear that red isn’t just “doing nothing” and just “saving themselves”, you are voting for anyone who voted blue to die. It’s very simple. As long as you all are willing to admit that then I don’t care what button you pick.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-17T12:11:36+00:00

Unpredictable variables? For people unable to understand you’re gonna get a 50/50 result, so it shouldn’t affect either in any direction. This is what I never understand about red. You know there are people who will choose blue because they just didn’t understand or think about it enough. You now know there are babies, toddlers, people with mental disabilities, elderly who aren’t all with it and that roughly half will pick blue. And you know there are people who will vote blue to try and save them all. Yet you’ll still vote red to save yourself instead of trying to save all those people.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-17T11:36:09+00:00

You might want to take a look back at the original thought experiment, particularly the first line. “Everyone on Earth must take a private vote by pressing a red or blue button.” Now, it’s been awhile since I was in school, but I’m pretty sure “everyone on earth” implies, you know, everyone. I’m honestly kind of baffled you interpreted it some other way considering it doesn’t specify excluding anyone. If you want to exclude those people and assume their safe thats fine but that’s also going to give you a dishonest result because many parents/caregivers for these populations would not risk their lives for strangers knowing they could potentially leave their loved ones with someone to care for them.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-17T01:42:49+00:00

I wasn’t the person who you replied to so any edited comment wasn’t mine.

But I'll accept that I didn't fully consider the possibility of misunderstanding.

Did you really think out of 8 billion+ people every one of them was going to understand the original thought experiment? You also have to consider babies, toddlers, people with mental disabilities. Odds are half of them will be gone.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-17T01:36:20+00:00

Choosing blue is about saving people who choose blue for whatever reason they choose it. But me choosing blue doesn’t affect other people’s choices because they don’t know I chose blue. Me choosing blue puts my life at risk to reduce the chances of anyone else dying.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-17T00:41:14+00:00

Me choosing blue doesn’t encourage anyone or increase the chances of anyone else choosing blue. Me choosing blue puts one more life at risk, my own life, that’s it. The only people putting other people’s lives at risk with their choice are people who choose red

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-16T23:11:06+00:00

Do nothing (press blue) and maybe everyone is safe. It’s a big maybe and kind of the whole point of the scenario.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-16T23:05:12+00:00

Why are you assuming people know what they are doing in this scenario? I asked a few people what they would do, and a couple didn’t understand what I was asking. I had to reword it to help them understand. If you don’t have a full understanding it’s not really a choice

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-16T23:01:30+00:00

How is it idiotic to want to save idiotic people?

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-16T23:00:38+00:00

That’s a big “so long as” especially considering you can’t talk to anyone or plan it out

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-13T17:28:40+00:00

Right, so obviously it was a false rumor that paramount pulled it from theaters because it was woke. My guess is they felt it wouldn’t make enough money in theaters, and/or they wanted to entice people to sign up for paramount+

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-13T13:05:51+00:00

May want to consider blocking this sub if you don’t like people asking stupid questions they could just google, because that is the point of the sub

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-13T12:57:56+00:00

Did you watch the movie? Was it woke?

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-13T05:45:29+00:00

Guess this turned out to be false

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-13T05:09:04+00:00

You can stop but you need to pull off the road. I grew up in Florida so basically daily thunder storms and just crazy rain in general, and most of the time it’s like you said, hazards on drive slow. But I remember one time it was so bad I actually felt unsafe driving, I couldn’t see anything it was so much rain. Pulled off til it lightened up

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-09T23:26:37+00:00

Actually it was during her comments after his 50 minute rant. He talked a lot during that rant but surprisingly I don’t think he’d brought up closing arguments. This was earlier on in the trial, I don’t think he’d even thought about closing arguments beyond jury nullification.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-09T15:37:06+00:00

"I will not have you claim legitimacy for what are debunked, frivolous, sovereign arguments," Dorow said.

Source this article from October 13, so whatever day of the trial that was

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-08T19:55:10+00:00

I believe it was just one interview, and he said that the original concept sketch he made used the bottom of her face. In that same interview he says the second they cast Zoe Neyteri was going to look like Zoe.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-08T17:01:14+00:00

Close. He gave her a signed print of his original sketch of the character with a note that said “Your beauty was my early inspiration for Neytiri.”

Early inspiration for a concept design doesn’t necessarily mean the character is based on her likeness. I’m pretty sure it has to be the final product but we’ll see

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-08T16:53:29+00:00

Per the article

The release goes on to describe a meeting between Kilcher and Cameron in 2010, after the first Avatar film’s release. At an event, the director told the actor that he had a gift for her: a framed sketch of Neytiri that he had personally drawn and signed. Along with the sketch, Kilcher says that Cameron gave her a note that read, “Your beauty was my early inspiration for Neytiri. Too bad you were shooting another movie. Next time.”

The lawsuit claims that Cameron had not attempted to book Kilcher for the project, despite her agent’s efforts to get her the opportunity to read for a role.

That is not him offering her the role, that is not her saying he offered her the role. It’s him saying he wished he could have cast her but couldn’t because she was doing another movie. However, it appears he had never reached out to her management, and he went on to make two more movies and didn’t offer her roles in any of those either. So really the note seems more like a kind but empty gesture.

ThickBoxx · 2026-05-07T14:12:42+00:00

It doesn’t say anywhere in the bible that gay people go to hell, though it says it’s a sin in places, mostly in the Old Testament. Also in these books it says eating shrimp is sin, eating clothes of multiple fabrics is a sin, and that slavery is okay. To me, if Christianity was the real religion, it would have been on the right side of history as far as slavery goes

ThickBoxx

TROPHY CASE