Randomness thread, part two.

taken from the "things that make you tilt" thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lukie

cutting your nipple while shaving

---

In college I shaved my chest one time. I've never really shaved with a blade before (thank you, babyface), so I was pretty clueless. I seriously thought that the probability was very high that I'd cut off my nipples if I shaved the hair around them, so I didn't shave my nipple hair. I thought this was normal, but my roommate's girlfriend's horrified look when she saw me told me I was wrong.

To this day that same roommate will randomly bust out and yell, "HAAAAIRY NIPPPSSSSSS," at the most random moments.

In the poll for climate change, I voted for warming. I don't like it cold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lukie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lukie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

after having learned almost everything a non-biologist should know about evolution, my new favorite topic is climate change

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0519134843.htm

---

interesting

somewhat interesting

but still not lifting

---

From the looks of it, MIT's current projection is very conservative given that they didn't account for several feedback loops that would cause an unknown but theoretically devastating runaway effect of warming. They mentioned the permafrost beginning to melt which hold about 100 years worth of current emissions, but probably other ones like the effects of reduced arctic ice, reduced ocean absorption of carbon, etc

---

to be honest, global warning/climate change is one issue that i feel completely ignorant and uneducated on. of course that describes most people fairly well, but it doesn't stop them from starting with their conclusion (depending on if they are liberal or conservative), then googling for an article that suits their agenda.

quick summary?

---

It's a projection of global warming by 2100 based on all understood empirical data, and the projections are that warming has a 90% chance of being between 3-7 degrees C.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

Things I've read claim global warming is the sun's fault. Our temperatures on earth have risen the past few decades. Over that same time span, the temperatures on ALL planets have risen at the same rate. That's something your mainstream media will not be reporting on in the near future.

---

Yes, there are still people saying this, as there will be for a long time like there's still people saying evolution is false.

Solar activity causing the global warming of the last 100 years has been thoroughly debunked. Here's a video explaining why. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Sf_UIQYc20 This channel is very awesome, and he puts up a new video once a week.

Even if somebody chooses to ignore the data, the theory is solid. Certain gases like methane and carbon absorb heat and they are mega factors in regulating global temperature, these gases are being released by the assloads due to human industrial and agricultural activity (assload is the correct term given that the parts per million of carbon in the atmosphere has increased by about 80% in the last century), the extra greenhouse gases in the atmosphere cause a rise in global temperature, and the rise in global temperature causes alterations in ecosystems.

This is honestly one of the most fascinating topics I've found. The science is very good, and the predictions made by the data are jaw dropping. This is one of the only true doomsday scenarios we have ever known, yet doomsayers are denying it like crazy. But that has to do with the fact of the phenomenon that the more credible a source is, the less likely people are to acknowledge it.

They predicted "Global Cooling" in the 1970's. Now, thirty years later, they're saying that global warming is going to be catastrophic. They've all but said, "Yeah, we were stupid. We didn't know what we were talking about in the 1970's. But now we know for sure what we're talking about, and our future looks terrible unless we do something about it right now."

What are they going to say 20-30 years from now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

They predicted "Global Cooling" in the 1970's. Now, thirty years later, they're saying that global warming is going to be catastrophic. They've all but said, "Yeah, we were stupid. We didn't know what we were talking about in the 1970's. But now we know for sure what we're talking about, and our future looks terrible unless we do something about it right now."

What are they going to say 20-30 years from now?

---

2 years ago we thought tight was right. Now as we've hatcheted deeper into the game, durr shows you theres a deeper understanding to be had.

That's lazy man's logic.

My highschool physics professor was on a graduate team that was sure the universe would begin to compress after hitting full expansion. Now scientists believe that the universe will expand forever. What will they say in 20-30 years?

And that's not to say that you're wrong. That's just saying that if you're right, it's because you got lucky.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

It's a projection of global warming by 2100 based on all understood empirical data, and the projections are that warming has a 90% chance of being between 3-7 degrees C.

---

Also, to put in perspective, 5 degree C rise in global temperature is a TON. The warming would be dramatically higher than the global average, the Arctic ice caps would have completely vanished several decades earlier, most of the Antarctic shelves would also have vanished (possibly all, I'm not sure how much warming it takes to melt the cores, but it's more than it is for the Arctics), a decent chunk of the current landmass will be under water (something like half of Florida will be submerged), the cascading feedback loops of unstoppable warming would have been triggered decades before but by now the permafrost which holds a shitload of frozen greenhouse gases would melt, etc.

An increase in 5 degrees C would not itself mean immediate doom to the human race, even though at some time before then it is very likely for species of invaluable insects to suddenly go extinct (like bees) and we subsequently see a dramatic drop in global crop production and hundreds of millions or even billions die from famine. 5 degrees C increase in global temperature, however, will mean the eventual doom of about 95+% of the human race since the feedback loops would be so great that it could continue on for decades and centuries to come.

Over the last century, global temperature has risen by approximately 1 degree C. This is a lot. Geologic time scale is much slower than human experience. On the scale of Earth, 1 degree C in a century is a drastic warming phase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

They predicted "Global Cooling" in the 1970's. Now, thirty years later, they're saying that global warming is going to be catastrophic. They've all but said, "Yeah, we were stupid. We didn't know what we were talking about in the 1970's. But now we know for sure what we're talking about, and our future looks terrible unless we do something about it right now."

What are they going to say 20-30 years from now?

---

2 years ago we thought tight was right. Now as we've hatcheted deeper into the game, durr shows you theres a deeper understanding to be had.

That's lazy man's logic.

My highschool physics professor was on a graduate team that was sure the universe would begin to compress after hitting full expansion. Now scientists believe that the universe will expand forever. What will they say in 20-30 years?

---

So what's your take on global warming?

Part of how I feel about it: Global warming is a big deal because cnn.com says so. Is it really a big deal, or is the mainstream media latching onto a story for deeper reasons? If it were true (and it is obv true because CNN says so--they wouldn't lie), who would benefit from this thing we call global warming? The news sites that get more hits, more magazines/papers being sold, etc? Companies that like the color green? The government, if they decide to tax people/things that pollute the earth? List could go on and on but you get the point...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

They predicted "Global Cooling" in the 1970's. Now, thirty years later, they're saying that global warming is going to be catastrophic. They've all but said, "Yeah, we were stupid. We didn't know what we were talking about in the 1970's. But now we know for sure what we're talking about, and our future looks terrible unless we do something about it right now."

What are they going to say 20-30 years from now?

---

Before I get into this post specifically, I want to point out that the theory behind climate change does not necessarily claim that it's in one direction or the other and that's why it's important, it claims that its ecosystem change itself that is important and is cause for alarm, no matter which direction it is in. We are, after all, a product of evolutionary adaptation to our ecosystems, and if those ecosystems change quickly enough we will not follow.

Now, the 'Global Cooling' of the 70s has also been debunked. Here's the same channel, Peter Sinclair explaining why http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nTw0...e=channel_page Scientists did not advocate what the popular media claimed they did. Also, this is not the first time the popular media confuses data from peer-reviewed journals, and thus misleads the public.

One great example of this is known as Nebraska Man. Every creationist and evolution denier on the planet will site Nebraska Man as being a great example of biologists getting it wrong. Well, without boring you with the details, the facts of the case of Nebraska Man are that zero scientists made any claims whatsoever having to do with it and evolution, yet the popular media decided to go somewhere with it, they fabricated an entire story, and the uneducated got a hold of it and called it a scientific hoax.

Climate science is solid. It's as good as the science that brings us our telecommunications, internal combustion engines, moon landings, etc.

A scientist's analysis on climate change is one of inductively acknowledging the empirical data. Once something passes the test of the scientific method it's pretty much here for keeps.

One important aspect of lay people like us evaluating scientific matters is understanding the difference between the media and peer-reviewed journals.

Thanks for the link. I'm still on the fence, but that blows my "omg they said this in 70's and now this in 2009" argument right to hell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

They predicted "Global Cooling" in the 1970's. Now, thirty years later, they're saying that global warming is going to be catastrophic. They've all but said, "Yeah, we were stupid. We didn't know what we were talking about in the 1970's. But now we know for sure what we're talking about, and our future looks terrible unless we do something about it right now."

What are they going to say 20-30 years from now?

---

2 years ago we thought tight was right. Now as we've hatcheted deeper into the game, durr shows you theres a deeper understanding to be had.

That's lazy man's logic.

My highschool physics professor was on a graduate team that was sure the universe would begin to compress after hitting full expansion. Now scientists believe that the universe will expand forever. What will they say in 20-30 years?

---

So what's your take on global warming?

Part of how I feel about it: Global warming is a big deal because cnn.com says so. Is it really a big deal, or is the mainstream media latching onto a story for deeper reasons? If it were true (and it is obv true because CNN says so--they wouldn't lie), who would benefit from this thing we call global warming? The news sites that get more hits, more magazines/papers being sold, etc? Companies that like the color green? The government, if they decide to tax people/things that pollute the earth? List could go on and on but you get the point...

---

peoples who's opinions i highly respect tell me theres no question. People who's opinions ive begun to laugh at (my father and brother (geologist with a masters degree in hunting for fossil fuels) tell me its liberal bs, (in addition to: obama is the worst president in history, socialism is at our door and being gay might be the highest offense to lord jesus christ,) tell me that it's all a hoax.

I dont know anything on the subject, but ive become conditioned to believe its way true.

also, for a senior project in a spacecraft engineering class, one class gave a 35 minute presentation on how green house gases could revitalize mars by warming its surface by 8 degrees or something like that.

and its a powerful thought to think about the volume of the atomosphere. Even looking at pictures of Earth, the atomosphere looks tiny from outerspace. No way it can be an infinite dump for anything we pump into it as much as idealize thermo textbooks problems would hope it to be.

I have surprisingly more opinions on the subject than i realized.

So I waxed part of my legs today. It didn't hurt hardly at all. Just dealing with the damn wax getting everywhere was annoying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

Thanks for the link. I'm still on the fence, but that blows my "omg they said this in 70's and now this in 2009" argument right to hell.

---

I was on the fence for about a year. Also on the fence between Christianity and atheism for about six years, between creation and evolution for about two years, between several political policies for about a year. It takes some diligent motivation and research is all.

If you or aboogorilla or others are interested, the best forum information I've found on climate science is on Richard Dawkins forum. Won't link them here cuz I hope to not piss anybody off, but just a couple searches and you'll find the two threads (they allow only three climate threads on the whole site, one is a denier thread). One is in his science forum and it has nothing but a ton of current publications on climate science, and the other is in the politics forum and it's for discussion. They're both super, super long, but they're extremely informative

I've taken so much geology and chemistry with climate change topics in it, and so my education tells me it's way true. It sure is hard to ignore the correlation between increased CO2 and increased temperature. I'd add more but I'm way too lazy.

aboogorilla, ha

did this forum change its text recently? when i first got here the numbers were in such a way and the 'lb' confuses the eye so that it looked to me like aboogorilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

I teach American History. It's supposed to be 1865-present, but because of standards and testing bullshit it was 1900-present this year.

I am also the assistant varsity baseball coach (played through college) and head bowling coach (easiest job in the world)...

---

thats alright, nothing really happened between 1865 and 1900 anyway, no worries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

did this forum change its text recently? when i first got here the numbers were in such a way and the 'lb' confuses the eye so that it looked to me like aboogorilla

---

hahah

The forum changed its text a few months ago I think. I dunno what the old font was called, but it definitely was different (it's verdana now I think).

global warming is just a cyclical event that keeps repeating throughout history is kind of what i have come to believe, but its def. a topic i want to research more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingnat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

I teach American History. It's supposed to be 1865-present, but because of standards and testing bullshit it was 1900-present this year.

I am also the assistant varsity baseball coach (played through college) and head bowling coach (easiest job in the world)...

---

Which esteemed college is able to claim you as it's alum?

---

Missouri Western State, D-II, nothing huge

---

The only reason I ask was that I went to CMSU! (now UCM i guess).. my brother played for the team for two years, though he's older than I am so I doubt there was any overlap. Go Mules!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingnat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingnat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

I teach American History. It's supposed to be 1865-present, but because of standards and testing bullshit it was 1900-present this year.

I am also the assistant varsity baseball coach (played through college) and head bowling coach (easiest job in the world)...

---

Which esteemed college is able to claim you as it's alum?

---

Missouri Western State, D-II, nothing huge

---

The only reason I ask was that I went to CMSU! (now UCM i guess).. my brother played for the team for two years, though he's older than I am so I doubt there was any overlap. Go Mules!

---

Fuck CMSU (now UCM). Damn they were good. My senior year (2002) they had a first-team all-conference player at every position except RF, and possibly catcher. I was second-team all-conference at first base that year, even though I had slightly better statistics than the first team guy (he was national player of the year a season before that so he had the name).

They were/are badass in baseball, we were 0-6 combined while I was there (I played at a JuCo before going to MWSU).

I guess I root for them now, though. I've coached one kid that's on the team now and have coached against a few others in their program that are pretty damn good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bode

global warming is just a cyclical event that keeps repeating throughout history is kind of what i have come to believe, but its def. a topic i want to research more.

---

The primary source that climate deniers give for why they think this is the 'Medieval Warming Period'. Well, this also has been debunked, by the same guy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrKfz8NjEzU

It is true that there is some degree of cyclical aspects on climate, but that is virtually irrelevant because a dramatic enough shift will destroy the ecosystem in which homo sapiens evolved, we will be selected out of the gene pool, and the science doesn't back it up in the first place.

The global warming we have been seeing for the last 100 years is extremely rapid on geologic scales (in fact, it may be the fastest heating period in the history of the planet), it correlates completely with human emissions of greenhouse gases, doesn't correlate with anything else (like solar activity as the first video I posted explained), and the theory about how greenhouse gases cause climate shifts is solid.

Look at it this way, there is enough carbon in the fossil fuels we use to return Earth to the time when there was no ice, like it was about 50 million years ago. If we burned enough fuel, we would all die, no question. But this doesn't account for many other huge greenhouse emissions that have nothing to do with fossil fuels like livestock methane (livestock is responsible for more greenhouse gases than transport) and deforestation

Check it

For the last 650k years, atmospheric levels of carbon never topped 280 parts per million (ppm), but in the last century we have seen this rise to 385 ppm. Projections are that in the near future we will reach 450 ppm, and the long term goal among climate activists/scientists is to reduce down to 350 ppm. Some data claims that we're already at the effective 455 ppm given the levels of methane, hydrofluorocarbons, and nitrous in the atmosphere.

Why is this important?

At 1000 ppm, scientists believe it is very likely that we will trigger an anoxic event which, throughout prehistory, is thought to be responsible for numerous mass extinction events. Anoxic events essentially are very rapid oceanic and atmospheric changes in toxicity that poisons nearly all species of plant and animal

But it's 1000 ppm, it's a ways off, right? Well, not necessarily; this is because of environmental feedback loops that cause greater and greater natural emissions of greenhouse gases.

We don't know everything about these feedback loops because we are essentially conducting the first experiment ever, but we do know many of the numbers, and they suggest that it may be likely that once we hit great enough feedback loops we will have gone beyond a point of no return, and the globe will just continue to warm rapidly despite our ability to reduce greenhouse emissions.

These feedback loops are things like the more ice melts the less heat that gets reflected back into space and thus the faster the Earth heats and melts even more ice, the hotter it gets the more wildfires and thus the fewer carbon sequestering as well as higher levels of carbon emitted due to the plant burn, permafrost melting and thus creating a ginormous feedback loop of released methane which would probably be enough by itself to shoot us up to 1000 ppm or something, etc. There are many feedback loops, they're not well understood, but they are widely considered to be a major cause for alarm

that's some scary shit

http://www.green.tv/6_degrees

Short video of what will likely happen between now and 2100 if the world isn't gung ho about behemoth amounts of gh gas emission reduction soon

hmmm :shock:

So why do people still have to tell me "I just dont believe that carbon should be considered a pollutant"?

"believe" being the key word in the entire issue

ha, thats funny we normally just only made it up til WWII if we were lucky... its like, they knew we werent going to make it all the way, but they just started where the curriculum started anyways...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boost

ha, thats funny we normally just only made it up til WWII if we were lucky... its like, they knew we werent going to make it all the way, but they just started where the curriculum started anyways...

---

that's alright.. you didn't miss a whole lot either. in fact, not a whole lot happened in the world until 1985 or so, give or take. so again, no worries.

Its laughable that people try to deny global warming.

In other random news, I am driving 2K miles from NYC to New Mexico starting Friday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yourfather

Its laughable that people try to deny global warming.

In other random news, I am driving 2K miles from NYC to New Mexico starting Friday.

---

how ironic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warpe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yourfather

Its laughable that people try to deny global warming.

In other random news, I am driving 2K miles from NYC to New Mexico starting Friday.

---

how ironic

---

Maybe he's driving a hydrogen car.

would it be worse if he was hearding methane producing cattle the same distance?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingnat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingnat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

I teach American History. It's supposed to be 1865-present, but because of standards and testing bullshit it was 1900-present this year.

I am also the assistant varsity baseball coach (played through college) and head bowling coach (easiest job in the world)...

---

Which esteemed college is able to claim you as it's alum?

---

Missouri Western State, D-II, nothing huge

---

The only reason I ask was that I went to CMSU! (now UCM i guess).. my brother played for the team for two years, though he's older than I am so I doubt there was any overlap. Go Mules!

---

Fuck CMSU (now UCM). Damn they were good. My senior year (2002) they had a first-team all-conference player at every position except RF, and possibly catcher. I was second-team all-conference at first base that year, even though I had slightly better statistics than the first team guy (he was national player of the year a season before that so he had the name).

They were/are badass in baseball, we were 0-6 combined while I was there (I played at a JuCo before going to MWSU).

I guess I root for them now, though. I've coached one kid that's on the team now and have coached against a few others in their program that are pretty damn good.

---

Nice!.. Yeah, i was down in Montgomery, AL for the D2 CWS in '97.. Mules only got 5th that year, and something my brother will likely never get over because he missed a game-winning bomb that fell 5 ft short of the wall the day after he had badly injured his thumb...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warpe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yourfather

Its laughable that people try to deny global warming.

In other random news, I am driving 2K miles from NYC to New Mexico starting Friday.

---

how ironic

---

Ha yeah I guess, didn't think about that. Whatever I am not walking and will unplug all my appliances so I am all good with mother nature!!!

Also leaving the cattle in my apartment.

short except from a lecture on feedback loops of climate change

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_iBGkSqFAw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UG

wow he fell hard apparently?

---

I'll be in Vegas

Wat?

http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m...rbunnyears.jpg

louis ck is too awesome

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO1Ks...e=channel_page

i burp like a man.

I was doing some "paper work in my office" *wink wink nudge nudge* when i came across this random interesting tidbit in Maxim's May issue

Chelle's post in the Word Association thread reminded me of it.

Quote:

---

"Clinginess", the scourge of non-doting boyfriends everywhere, is a toxic brew of jealousy, neediness, dependency and insecurity. In short, homegirl has separation anxiety. She desperately wants to be your number one priority, and she'll drown your new puppy if he gets in the way. "While men tend to be jealous of potential sexual rivals, women tend to be jealous of time and attention," says Charles T. Hill, professor of psychology at Whittier College. So devote every waking moment to this needy nutjob or dump her and move on, right? Hold your horny horses sheriff-it could be more scientific than that. A recent, and totally awesome University of Washington study found that certain proteins are transferred to women during sex. On a hormonal level, these sly proteins may dampen her interest in other males while heightening her attraction, and possibly psychotic neediness for you. It's like sperm hypnosis.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BennyLaRue

Wat?

http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m...rbunnyears.jpg

---

Yeah, that dog has eyebrows.

I won the disc design again this year. W00t!!

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7859/cuda2009.jpg

what a strange looking vagina

Don Cheadle rocking some cap 1/2nl right now

Rippytyde sitting at my $27.50 document table. Search XxStacks60xX on stars if you want to hassle :D

with a guest appearance from Radashack.. He's railing rippy and sucking on his $27 ballsack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XxStacksxX

with a guest appearance from Radashack.. He's railing rippy and sucking on his $27 ballsack.

---

the girl in your avatar can suck my ballsack

no money necessary

lol youve gotta be kidding. Rada and rippy together?

I bought a nail gun today. I feel extremely powerful, like I can fasten anything to anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BennyLaRue

I bought a nail gun today. I feel extremely powerful, like I can fasten anything to anything.

---

pics

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingnat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BennyLaRue

I bought a nail gun today. I feel extremely powerful, like I can fasten anything to anything.

---

pics

---

Bah. That requires effort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BennyLaRue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingnat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BennyLaRue

I bought a nail gun today. I feel extremely powerful, like I can fasten anything to anything.

---

pics

---

Bah. That requires effort.

---

shoot your nail gun right

H E [ o ] R E

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BennyLaRue

I bought a nail gun today. I feel extremely powerful, like I can fasten anything to anything.

---

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/...-death-001.jpg
http://images.usatoday.com/news/_pho...-gun-brain.jpg

first pic in need of tr

wow that's nuts

Fallon's been trying to reunite the Saved by the Bell crew, awesome

http://www.hulu.com/watch/76560/late...union-update-3

actually that might need it's own thread, will let Lukie decide

saved by the bell is and always was stupid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by givememyleg

I am and always will be a communist sympathizer and a homosexual.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by givememyleg

saved by the bell is and always was stupid

---

This is unacceptable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wesrman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by givememyleg

saved by the bell is and always was stupid

---

This is unacceptable.

---

qft!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by givememyleg

saved by the bell is and always was stupid

---

saying something like this should be a ban-able offense.

No, guys, he's right. The problem is that he's saying it like it's a bad thing.

GMMBAN

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

actually that might need it's own thread, will let Lukie decide

---

here's the way i look at it. it could have gotten it's own thread. it just as easily could have gone in here.

it would have been a pretty bad thread though.. think along the lines of maybe 2/10 or something. what this thread does is take 100 of those threads and adds them together, which is how this thread gets rated a 200 or so on the standard 1-10 scale.

hope that helps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Fallon's been trying to reunite the Saved by the Bell crew, awesome

http://www.hulu.com/watch/76560/late...union-update-3

---

God this makes me feel old

i never watched it growing up, only an episode here and there, what makes/made it so special. just seemed like an absolute mess of a cliche high school circle jerk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by givememyleg

i never watched it growing up, only an episode here and there, what makes/made it so special. just seemed like an absolute mess of a cliche high school circle jerk.

---

there's no real way to explain it, but it's just awesome

I think I watched that show every day after school from like 4th-8th grade or something, and even in high school a little.

ya if you watch the 4 clips from Fallon someone says it "people woke up Saturday morning and saved by the ball was on and when they came home from school in the afternoon saved by the ball was on"

we grew up with the characters, and........

http://almostawesome.files.wordpress...y-kapowski.jpg