Her name is Palin.
She plans on running for president next term.
My mom says if she wins we're moving to Canada.
Now i can finally get that Canadian bacon and try it! I hear its good.
Her name is Palin.
She plans on running for president next term.
My mom says if she wins we're moving to Canada.
Now i can finally get that Canadian bacon and try it! I hear its good.
Uh no.
Josef Stalin, ruler of Russia during WWII.
An unstoppable force cannot exist if an immovable object exists. (And vice versa, of course.)Originally Posted by SandSpur
lets pretend it is possible tho, the force would do nothing but bounce off the objectOriginally Posted by SandSpur
sig by pedro and soewut
Wrong, when they collided, the Unstoppable force would neither stop, nor reverse in direction, the unstoppable force would keep pushing on the immovable object. And the Immovable Objection would sit there and take it like a little b$*(&.Originally Posted by Deathnote202
When I hear her I have wings.
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/985/konnor.png
Made by the Epic Spurrer of Sand Sandspur
that means the force would either stop, or the object would move
sig by pedro and soewut
Because of the way it's going, the unstoppable force isn't technically stopped, it's still moving and using energy. An Unstoppable force is something that has unlimited energy to run on, The Unstoppable force would still be forcing it's way against the immovable object, thus using energy, meaning it technically has not stopped, while the immovable object has not moved.
When I hear her I have wings.
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/985/konnor.png
Made by the Epic Spurrer of Sand Sandspur
Something cannot keep going into something without going through it (thus moving it) but you have to realize that it's a paradox, neither can exist at the same time. There simply is no answer.
the object shatters into 54273464257425875686846596479498 tinny unmoveable pieces, the end
sig by pedro and soewut
That wouldn't be an immovable object then.Originally Posted by Deathnote202
![]()