The joke thread

[woznotwos]

[Grebfromgrebland]

Jokes about sugar are rare.

 

Jokes about brown sugar, well, demerara.

[Otis]

55 minutes ago, Parafox said:

Jokes about sugar are rare.

 

Jokes about brown sugar, well, demerara. 

 

What kind of cheese isn't yours?

 

Nacho cheese...

 

I'm here all week... 

 

15 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

Jokes about sugar are rare.

 

Jokes about brown sugar, well, demerara.

Literally 40 minutes apart

[What the Fuchs?]

Posh and Becks are sitting in front of the television watching the six o'clock news. The main story is a man threatening to jump off the Clifton Suspension Bridge on to the busy road below. 

Posh turns to Becks and says: "David, I bet you £5,000 that he jumps!" to which Beckham replies "£5,000? Done! I bet that he doesn't." 

So they shake hands on the bet and continue watching. Sure enough, the man jumps and hits the road below with a loud thud. Beckham takes £5,000 out of his back pocket and hands it to Posh. 

But she refuses. "I can't take your money, David," she says. "The truth is, I was cheating. I saw the five o'clock news, so I knew he was going to jump." 

"No, babe, fair's fair" says David. "That money is yours fair and square I was cheating just as you were. I saw the five o'clock news, too. I just didn't think he’d be stupid enough to do it again."

[Wolfox]

Three logicians walk into a bar. The bartender says "Do you all want something to drink?" The first logician says "I don't know." The second logician says "I don't know." The third logician says "Yes."

[jonthefox]

14 minutes ago, Wolfox said:

Three logicians walk into a bar. The bartender says "Do you all want something to drink?" The first logician says "I don't know." The second logician says "I don't know." The third logician says "Yes."

 

[Countryfox]

21 minutes ago, Wolfox said:

Three logicians walk into a bar. The bartender says "Do you all want something to drink?" The first logician says "I don't know." The second logician says "I don't know." The third logician says "Yes."

 

There is, on average, one really sh1t joke per page ....   but they don’t normally come this early ...  

[TiffToff88]

5 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

 

There is, on average, one really sh1t joke per page ....   but they don’t normally come this early ...  

Assuming that was calculated before @Wortho started his recent joke spree?

[Alf Bentley]

34 minutes ago, Wolfox said:

Three logicians walk into a bar. The bartender says "Do you all want something to drink?" The first logician says "I don't know." The second logician says "I don't know." The third logician says "Yes."

 

How does the third logician know that the other two want a drink, eh? Eh? Eh?! 

 

[Buce]

23 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

How does the third logician know that the other two want a drink, eh? Eh? Eh?! 

 

 

Because, if the first logician didn't want a drink, he would have answered 'no'; ditto the second logician; the third logician, knowing this, reasoned that the only reason they were unsure was that they didn't know what his answer would be, and since he was thirsty, the answer was 'yes'.

Edited 29 May 2019 by Buce

[Wolfox]

48 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

How does the third logician know that the other two want a drink, eh? Eh? Eh?! 

 

Listen to @Buce as he knows!

 

25 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Because, if the first logician didn't want a drink, he would have answered 'no'; ditto the second logician; the third logician, knowing this, reasoned that the only reason they were unsure was that they didn't know what his answer would be, and since he was thirsty, the answer was 'yes'.

The simple application of logic….   ROFL ? 

 

Edit @Alf Bentley I misread what you put!  He doesn’t!…. Now what would a logician drink? ? 

 

Edited 29 May 2019 by Wolfox

[Alf Bentley]

24 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Because, if the first logician didn't want a drink, he would have answered 'no'; ditto the second logician; the third logician, knowing this, reasoned that the only reason they were unsure was that they didn't know what his answer would be, and since he was thirsty, the answer was 'yes'.

 

Well, that's faulty logic by the third logician, then.

 

Unless he (or she) has an undisclosed source of information, the third logician doesn't know whether the first two answered "don't know" because they didn't know his answer or because they were unsure whether they wanted a drink themselves.

Or maybe the first logician knew the third would like a drink, but was unsure about the second? And the second logician was thirsty but was unsure whether they all wanted a drink as the reasons for the reply given by the first logician were unclear?

 

Whichever way you spin it, the conclusion reached by the third logician is unreliable in the absence of further information. 

 

[Beliall]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

How does the third logician know that the other two want a drink, eh? Eh? Eh?! 

 

 

37 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Because, if the first logician didn't want a drink, he would have answered 'no'; ditto the second logician; the third logician, knowing this, reasoned that the only reason they were unsure was that they didn't know what his answer would be, and since he was thirsty, the answer was 'yes'.

 

12 minutes ago, Wolfox said:

Listen to @Buce as he knows!

 

The simple application of logic….   ROFL ? 

 

Edit @Alf Bentley I misread what you put!  He doesn’t!…. Now what would a logician drink? ? 

 

 

4 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Well, that's faulty logic by the third logician, then.

 

Unless he (or she) has an undisclosed source of information, the third logician doesn't know whether the first two answered "don't know" because they didn't know his answer or because they were unsure whether they wanted a drink themselves.

Or maybe the first logician knew the third would like a drink, but was unsure about the second? And the second logician was thirsty but was unsure whether they all wanted a drink as the reasons for the reply given by the first logician were unclear?

 

Whichever way you spin it, the conclusion reached by the third logician is unreliable in the absence of further information. 

 

Guys, its just a shit joke

[Wolfox]

1 minute ago, Beliall said:

 

 

 

Guys, its just a shit joke

Illogical response…. The joke was, is and will continue to be funny ?

[Alf Bentley]

2 minutes ago, Beliall said:

 

Guys, its just a shit joke

 

No, it's not. It's at least two shit jokes now.

[Beliall]

Just now, Alf Bentley said:

 

No, it's not. It's at least two shit jokes now.

so the third one should be good then,, by that logic

[Alf Bentley]

1 minute ago, Beliall said:

so the third one should be good then,, by that logic

 

By that logic, if Wilfred Ndidi skies two long shots over the stand, his third shot should be goal of the season....

[Beliall]

10 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

By that logic, if Wilfred Ndidi skies two long shots over the stand, his third shot should be goal of the season....

How many third shots does he need!

[Buce]

58 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Well, that's faulty logic by the third logician, then.

 

Unless he (or she) has an undisclosed source of information, the third logician doesn't know whether the first two answered "don't know" because they didn't know his answer or because they were unsure whether they wanted a drink themselves.

Or maybe the first logician knew the third would like a drink, but was unsure about the second? And the second logician was thirsty but was unsure whether they all wanted a drink as the reasons for the reply given by the first logician were unclear?

 

Whichever way you spin it, the conclusion reached by the third logician is unreliable in the absence of further information. 

 

 

 

In terms of pure logic, you are correct.

 

However, it's a reasonable assumption that if the first or second logician were unsure whether they wanted a drink, they would have been more explicit with their answer, ie "I'm unsure if I do" because logic requires precise language, so on the balance of probabilities, the third logician orders three drinks.

 

Edit:

 

Of course, if the first logician really wanted a beer, he should have answered 'yes', knowing that if the premise of all three being logicians is true, then their answers will not contradict. In that situation, either the premise is false or all three say "Yes" and the first one gets the drink he wanted.

Edited 29 May 2019 by Buce

[Alf Bentley]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

In terms of pure logic, you are correct.

 

However, it's a reasonable assumption that if the first or second logician were unsure whether they wanted a drink, they would have been more explicit with their answer, ie "I'm unsure if I do" because logic requires precise language, so on the balance of probabilities, the third logician orders three drinks.

 

 

 

You think that it's a reasonable assumption that the first two interpreted the question to be whether ALL of them wanted a drink.....yet you assume that the third logician interpreted it to be asking whether HE wanted a drink?

Is that reasonable? If so, why do you make a different reasonable assumption about him, compared to the first two?

 

If it is reasonable to assume that the first two interpreted the question to be about all of them, surely it's reasonable to assume the same for the third?

In which case, he has to answer "I don't know", because he doesn't have decisive information about the first two.

 

Your response is illogical.

 

[Wolfox]

27 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

You think that it's a reasonable assumption that the first two interpreted the question to be whether ALL of them wanted a drink.....yet you assume that the third logician interpreted it to be asking whether HE wanted a drink?

Is that reasonable? If so, why do you make a different reasonable assumption about him, compared to the first two?

 

If it is reasonable to assume that the first two interpreted the question to be about all of them, surely it's reasonable to assume the same for the third?

In which case, he has to answer "I don't know", because he doesn't have decisive information about the first two.

 

Your response is illogical.

 

The information is decisive 

 

The question "Do you ALL want something to drink?

 

The first and second don’t know the answer the remaining two logicians…. They could therefore not confirm that they all want a drink…. They can only possibly respond one of two ways

 

1 -  I don’t know (if they do want a drink but don’t know the minds of the others)

2 - No - if they don’t want a drink (as his therefore answers the question as to whether they ALL want a drink,  as if one doesn’t, then it doesn’t tapply to all of them)

 

when the first two answer in the first way it affirms that they both want a drink…. The third also wants a drink, so, can answer yes and he has logically deduced that they all want a drink ? 

 

its the way I tell ‘em!!!

Edited 29 May 2019 by Wolfox

[Carl the Llama]

Would be an interesting logic puzzle if you stop after the first 2 and ask someone to work out how guy 3 responds.

 

Atrocious 'joke' though.

[Wolfox]

18 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Would be an interesting logic puzzle if you stop after the first 2 and ask someone to work out how guy 3 responds.

 

Atrocious 'joke' though.

Yes or No

[Beliall]

What if one guy had just downed a can of coke?

 

[What the Fuchs?]

What do Barry Manilow and David Beckham have in common?

They’re both f***ing useless singers.