posted                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noemon:
Andrew Carter

---

Posts: 1164 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noemon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by calaban:
..and then Bruce Lee kicked his @#$

---

Actually, I think it was Galdalf the Grey and Galdalf the white and Monty Python and the Holy Grail's Black Knight, Benito Mussolini and the Blue Meanie, Cowboy Curtis and Jambi the Genie, RoboCop, the Terminator, Captain Kirk, Darth Vader, Lo Pan, Superman, every single power ranger, William S. Preston, Theodore Logan, Spock, The Rock, Doc Ock and Hulk Hogan that kicked Chuck Norris in his cowboy ass.

::whew! Did I miss any? I feel like I'm forgetting a chunk of them::

---

quote:

---

then Gandalf the Grey and Gandalf the White and "Monty Python and the Holy Grail"'s Black Knight and Benito Mussolini and The Blue Meanie and Cowboy Curtis and Jambi the Genie
Robocop, the Terminator, Captain Kirk, and Darth Vader Lo Pan, Superman, every single Power Ranger
Bill S. Preston and Theodore Logan, Spock, The Rock, Doc Ock, and Hulk Hogan all came out of no where lightning fast and they kicked Chuck Norris in his cowboy ass

---

Posts: 1164 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Dear Editor,

A recent editorial in The DePauw contained the following assertion: “Using a Chuck Norris quote in your philosophy paper does not, in fact, make your argument more emphatic.” As a philosophy professor, I feel I cannot let this claim pass unchallenged. The fact of the matter is that a well-placed “Chuck Norris quote” (which I assume indicates one of the currently popular “facts” about Chuck Norris) can indeed enhance the quality of philosophical argumentation.
Suppose, for instance, that you are attempting to describe the concept of teleological explanation, or explanation in terms of goals or purposes. This concept is well-illustrated by the following Chuck Norris “fact”: “Outer space exists because it’s afraid to be on the same planet with Chuck Norris.” Or perhaps your assignment calls for explication of the notion of success terms, terms that may be properly applied only to actions that succeed in achieving their intended aims: “Chuck Norris doesn’t go hunting; Chuck Norris goes killing.” If it’s an illustration of the distinction between logical possibility and physical possibility that you’re after, the following does the trick: “According to the Laws of Physics, it is impossible for Chuck Norris to build more muscle. Upon realizing this, Chuck Norris swiftly roundhouse kicked every law of physics known to man, as well as those known only by Chuck Norris. He now has the ability to will his muscles to any level of strength he desires at any given time.” Need a nifty illustration of stipulative definition? “Chuck Norris defines ‘love’ as the reluctance to murder. If you’re still alive, it’s because Chuck Norris loves you.” Is it mathematical puzzles you’re after? How about: “Chuck Norris counted to infinity. Twice.”
I could go on, but these simple examples should suffice to establish my point. I hope that in the future the editorial staff of The DePauw will engage in some Chuck-related research before making broad claims about the uses to which “facts” about Chuck Norris can and cannot appropriately be put. In a Chuckshell: If you think Chuck Norris “facts” can’t enhance your philosophy paper, then you don’t know Chuck.

Sincerely yours,


Erik Wielenberg
Department of Philosophy
x6275

---

Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by starLisa:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noemon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by starLisa:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noemon:
::whew! Did I miss any? I feel like I'm forgetting a chunk of them::

---

Damn, that was close. Bill S. Preston, but other than that, you did the whole thing. Oh, and they came out of nowhere lightning fast before the kicking part. <grin.

---

Right, right, Bill S. Preston. I knew something seemed wrong with that.

I knew who pretty much everyone named in the song was (except for Andrew Carter), but there are a couple of background figures I'm not sure of. Who is the guy surfing through the sky? There are also two pairs of people fighting that I'm not placing. One of the people in one of these pairs has a smiley face looking head, and (if I'm remembering correctly), one of the people in this pair knocks the other one down. The other pair is made up of two ordinary looking people kind of slapping at each other (again, if memory serves--I can't view the video from work).

---

Wikipedia article on the USoUD

I couldn't figure out those either. At first, I was thinking "poorly drawn Silver Surfer", but I don't buy it.

---

Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                  

quote:

---

And the angels sang out, in an imaculate chorus, and down from the heavens, decended Chuck Norris.

---

Posts: 1164 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged |