The Realist`s Crayon Set... [Pic]

Submitted by: fancylad 6 years ago in Funny

Ohh, that fourth crayon down is brutal... but true.
There are 67 comments:
Male 27
Anal bleach. <3
0
Reply
Female 1,894
wheres ur mom?
0
Reply
Female 45
anal bleach and michael jackson 2008 look like the same color..
but i`d still buy it.
0
Reply
Female 55
I`d buy it
0
Reply
Male 363
gangrene is black dead musscle and skin tissue
0
Reply
Male 257
lmfaooo @ r. kelly yellow
0
Reply
Male 177
They should have called black "the color you`re not supposed to say"
0
Reply
Male 2,688
"You can BLEACH your anus?! You`ve got to be kidding....? Right?"

Watch porn sometime and pay attention to the fact that anytime you see anal, the girls anus is pink. In reality, it would be darker, so they bleach the skin to make it look better.
0
Reply
Female 109
ahaha
0
Reply
Female 444
You can BLEACH your anus?! You`ve got to be kidding....? Right?
0
Reply
Male 6,694
Love MJ 2008.
0
Reply
Male 1,505
Where`s the beige one called `Color not entitled to be hired for internships for college grants under diversity funding` because if I were drawing a self pic atm, that`d be the one i need.
0
Reply
Female 5,222
LOL
0
Reply
Male 648
I love how these internet fights start under the most random pictures...

oh and LOL anal bleach.
0
Reply
Male 2,688
LOL... And God knows IAB is a GREAT source of UNBIASED information... Now let`s see them post 4Chan as a source and watch the entire credibility of Wikipedia disappear before our very eyes.
0
Reply
Male 4,004
Even I-A-B has been used as a source.
---------------------------
"Eric`s "Angry" emotion picture used for the web-cliché picture "l33t Cereal".[11]"

11^ "l33t Cereal". I Am Bored. http://www.i-am-bored.com/ bored_link.cfm?link_id=11137. Retrieved 2009-12-19.
---------------------------
0
Reply
Male 4,004
Another note, before anything is added to a page, depending on the importance of the matter, it is usually thoroughly discussed in the "discussion" tab of the page, where moderators, users and admin can debate as to which information is pertinent enough to make the page, and which to omit. It is also the best place to post your ideas for information submission with reference, since someone else will do all the HTML work for you!

Although, should you find a typo, you are completely allowed to, without asking, go to edit, and correct the typo. If you`re right, no one will touch it, if you`re wrong, it will be reverted back.

On the very left, there are a bunch of buttons, one of which is recent changes, it shows you, real time, all the changes that have been done and to which page.

Learn the site and how it works, and you realize it`s not a random data assembly, it`s an intricate ant hill with every human contributing to the cause. It`s an amazing f
0
Reply
Male 4,004
Nice trolling there Shadowtube, you could have done it a little better.

If you weren`t trolling, you would qualify as one of the top tenth percentile on the internet who would qualify for: "most retarded drater on the web".

Seriously, if you write incorrect info on wikipedia and expect it to remain unchanged... don`t you feel, at least a little bit, like you`re the reason you don`t trust Wikipedia? If retards like you weren`t out there vandalizing it, it would actually be even more reliable than it already is because moderators would have to spend less time fixing your drat-ups and more time updating and improving.

I once made several changes to a page, but it was to delete "superfluous information" and "speculation". And it remained unchanged until data was provided to back-up the claims as being, in-fact, true.
0
Reply
Male 2,688
Wow shadowtube... Way to go, ignoring all the intelligent posts beneath you...

Wikipedia is a good source of info if the data on the Wiki page has a viable source. Your edit of the Star Trek page gets changed because you have no source for your info. How retarded are you? Oh wait... You`re probably one of those "I know it all" middle school or high school brats... Wikipedia has been around since before you were old enough to know how to work a computer. And as for thinking it "trekkies" that change your posts, its NOT, fuucktard... Its the ridiculous amount of moderators that CHECK the data against the reference. If there`s no reference for the change of data, they revert it back to the original post. So yes, Wikipedia IS a viable information source as long as the post has good reference sources (usually found on the bottom of the page). So stop thinking you know it all and go terrorize a mall with your friends... if you have any.
0
Reply
Female 876
lmao @ jschall
0
Reply
Male 2,619
Wow Shadowtube. Talk about being anal
0
Reply
Male 253
@jschall
-It is Not a great source of info, last year i edited it to say Startrek was made in 1710, i hate when Star Trek nerds correct that.
-Encyclopedia`s are made by companys who do their work, They are correct, so yes you are supposed to use them as a source.
-Don`t ever use Wikipedia as a Source, at LEAST 40% of it is incorrect.
-No it shouldn`t, If Universities would take Wikipedia as a source, a lot of retards would beat college, an they want to teach the retards.
-IT IS NOWHERE CLOSE to an amazing research tool. NOWHERE CLOSE!
0
Reply
Male 60
Despite the name, Gangrene has nothing to do with the color green. There can be some discoloration (blue or black for a superficial infection, red or bronze for a deep infection), but rarely green.

No offense.

And here`s my source.

P.S. Thank you, Jschall. You took the words right out of my mouth. I would only like to add that using Wikipedia as your source rather than Wikipedia`s source brands you as lazy. I have absolutely no problem with using it properly.
0
Reply
Male 4,004
Damn, Jshall beat me to it.
0
Reply
Male 4,004
"There is a good reason why Wikipedia is not acceptable as a reference in any college or university in the country. "

The fact that Wikipedia is based on quoting/citing where the facts comes from is the best way to use Wikipedia anyways. Rather than listing off the Wikipedia articles you used, simply use the links in the footnotes, should they be unavailable, that information in unverifiable, and therefore unreliable.

Universities and Colleges are smart to disallow Wikipedia as a source, but if you use what sources Wikipedia, then the professor can know you didn`t just edit the article to suit your needs.
0
Reply
Male 3,310
wow, wiki-rage. i just witness
0
Reply
Male 6
On the subject of wikipedia:
- It is a great source of information.
- You`re not supposed to use an encyclopedia as a source
- Wikipedia has references, which you can look at, verify as good, and use as your source. Don`t put wikipedia as your source, put wikipedia`s source as your source.
- Proper usage of wikipedia should be encouraged by universities. It is an amazing research tool.
0
Reply
Male 333
Reminds me when I discovered a crayola colored pencil with the sweet sweet name that was "pale flesh"
0
Reply
Female 3,828
its weird how mj jokes just never get old
0
Reply
Male 2,419
@OldOllie
First of all, wikipedia has been found to have essentially the same amount of bias as encyclopedia britannica. Second, way to assume we are all in this `the country` you speak of.
0
Reply
Male 2,893
I want an Agent Orange crayon.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
"mommy got those bright red stretch marks from giving life to you, ungrateful whelp"

No, she got them from giving life to my crying, screaming, pooping, puking, stinking, worthless little sister!
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Regarding Wiki, it`s great for noncontroversial information like techie stuff, but for anything controversial or political, it`s less than worthless. It`s certainly biased, but you never know which way or how much. Hot topics get edited back and forth minute by minute by cranks and hacks with political agendas.

For political information, get the liberal point of view from liberal sources, and get the conservative point of view from conservatives; then decide what makes sense to you. Never trust what a liberal tells you about what a conservative believes or vice versa.

There is a good reason why Wikipedia is not acceptable as a reference in any college or university in the country.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
"The first one doesn`t make much sense."

The first, second, and last ones are part of the original image before the more contemporary references were Photoshopped in.

Regarding Michael Jackson`s skin, he claimed to have Vitiligo, and I have no reason to doubt that. The condition is benign except that it causes patches of skin to lose pigment. It occurs in all races, but for obvious reasons, it is much more noticeable in black people (see picture).



What caused some controversy among the African-American community was that Michael chose to lighten his skin to match the areas of lost pigment rather than darken those areas to match his natural skin color.
0
Reply
Male 2
What about BP oil spill black?
0
Reply
Female 9,477
lol @ the 3rd one down.
0
Reply
Male 527
Xerasia, Michael Jackson almost didn`t have a nose by the time he was done. He had to wear a prosthesis because otherwise his nose was basically two holes in his head, like what a skull looks like.
0
Reply
Male 2,688
I`m loving this wikipedia debate.

People... The wiki page that was posted has references on the bottom to medical texts and various readings on the subject. Those wiki pages that DON`T provide reference material for their facts are the ones that are phony.

So shadowtube, your edit got deleted by another user because you didn;t back up your fact (as dumb as it was) with any sort of evidence. PAges like the one posted are trustworthy because someone who knows what they`re talking about added the information and then cited their reference for anyone who wanted to see where it originated from.
0
Reply
Female 2,120
@shadowtube
No, he had a disease that caused some of his skin to lose its pigmint. He decided that instead of living with weird mis-colored patches, he would bleach it so he was all one color.
0
Reply
Male 4,004
Yes Shadowtube, a "Star Trek Nerd" changed your vandalism on a Wikipedia article back. In no way could it have been one of the thousands of Wikipedia moderators.

If you ever seriously surfed Wikipedia, you would see that there are tiny numbers next to most factual assertions, those are the links to the reference the article is citing. Of course, the source of the quote has to be a credible source; at least much more credible than the word-of-mouth you`ve received.

How many drug prevention programs have they run in your school? Did any of them ever say "Drugs are so black they made Michael Jackson white"? Doubtful, in fact, you could probably check Wikipedia and not find a single mention of drugs turning anyone`s skin white (including Caucasians, since he was paler than us).

Saying Wikipedia is wrong because the changes are public, is like saying the dictionary is wrong because it`s a bunch of old men in a room who decide what words me
0
Reply
Male 779
Not funny anymore.
0
Reply
Male 813
shadowtube you`re 13, you don`t know anything.
0
Reply
Male 31
I always thought that colors should be named after something in nature. Just like those Stretch Marks.
0
Reply
Female 23
lol i want these crayons
0
Reply
Female 1,181
no crap, gorgack2000, although that doesn`t explain why he went to such extremes. and since you`re such an avid michael fan, how do you explain the many, many surgeries he had to get a white person`s nose?
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Neat...
0
Reply
Male 3,756
Michael Jackson and anal bleach are the same color.
0
Reply
Male 131
@gorgack

If wikipedia says its true. Then it DEFINATELY is true.
0
Reply
Male 612
Pink should be titled "Two in the..." and brown should be titled "...and one in the..."
0
Reply
Male 253
@gorgack2000 okay, first off, don`t believe everything off wikipedia, its a load of bull- wait, are we allowed to swear on comments? oh well, now listen, i once changed it to say star trek was made in 1710, but some star trek nerd corrected it. Now to the main part: By "Medical Condition" do you mean disease? if you do, your completely wrong, MJ took a LOT of drugs, and (somehow) it lead to the whitening of his skin, not a Disease.
0
Reply
Male 4,680
Michael Jackson actually had a medical condition which changed his skin white.

And before you call bullsh*t here`s the wikipedia article about it.
0
Reply
Female 1,515
gangrene is my favourite colour!
0
Reply
Female 654
heve you ever had pink eye? its more like mommys strecth marks but itchier
0
Reply
Female 901
LOL the michael jackson one is pure win XD
0
Reply
Male 894
anal bleach? wuh fugg..
0
Reply
Female 1,677
He might also have a chance at being hot if he wasn`t a corpse.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Michael Jackson would actually be hot if he kept his skin color and just straightened his hair.
0
Reply
Female 536
mommy got those bright red stretch marks from giving life to you, ungrateful whelp :P
0
Reply
Male 2,688
Why no "BP oil spill brown"???

Oh wait... It`s because this post is FuuKIN OLD...
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Navy blue balls?

Oh my...
0
Reply
Male 2,748
i would use these so hard!!
0
Reply
Male 1,299
Scientist have determined: 76.8% of these are entertaining.
0
Reply
Female 2,352
Hmm Michal Jackson 2008 and Anal bleach are the same. .
0
Reply
Male 633
The first one doesn`t make much sense.
0
Reply
Male 519
lol second to last one is funny
0
Reply
Male 25,416
Crayons true to life, i think is what you were meaning!
0
Reply
Male 20,178
Link: The Realist`s Crayon Set... [Pic] [Rate Link] - Ohh, that fourth crayon down is brutal... but true.
0
Reply