2006-04-08

Dropping Eaves Again

"Are we still in London?"
"That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. We're still in the airport!"
"You know I'm not as clever as you."

"I think I'm in heaven."

"Bitte darf ich ein Photo von Ihnen machen?"

"If we find your phone, we'll call you."
"You'll have my phone."

"Ha ha ha!"

"On this fish it says, 'Allergy advice: contains fish.' Isn't that stupid?"

"Daddy, do aeroplanes run on petrol?"
"No, honey. They use kerosene. It's like petrol."
"So they don't have to go to the petrol station?"
"The petrol station comes to them."

7 Comments:

Blogger The Paranoid Mod said...

Which reminds me of the Calvin and Hobbes strip where Calvin asks his dad how they decide on the weight limit on bridges.
And Calvin's dad tells him that they drive heavier and heavier trucks over it until it breaks and then rebuild it.

Makes perfect sense to me.

16:46  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: fish, I just ate some chicken that wasn't chicken, so I guess clarification never hurts. Also, when your product could kill a person, it's probably good to be as obvious as possible

23:22  
Blogger The Paranoid Mod said...

The one that always gets me in America is the "objects can appear closer than they are" stencil in car wing mirrors. Cos obviously people aren't used to mirrors and never noticed them in their driving tests.

Soon we'll be so ruled by liabilty waivers that I won't be able to speak without carrying a sign saying "Warning: Opinions may cause discussion and lead to warfare".

or something like that.

17:35  
Blogger Candace said...

Wow - that first one. . .

Cheese!! :-)

Bad Marcus (haha pic.)

19:39  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mod, I believe the phrase is "Objects may be closer than they appear." The way you have it worded...well, people really could be that dumb, but let's *hope* they're not allowed to drive.

22:30  
Blogger The Paranoid Mod said...

Either way, kk, it's still the stupidest thing I've ever seen. Although a sign on the outside of a hotel in San Francisco saying "this hotel may contain traces of hazardous and carcinogenic chemicals" comes pretty close.

And I so wanted to sue the Marriott chain, too.

17:07  
Blogger thisismarcus said...

Candace: Bad for smoking?

07:14  

Post a Comment

<< Home