Keep fucking that [del]child[/del] chicken.
So how many degrees bent at the knee still counts as standing? 15 degrees? 30?
This is complete crap- you’re defining the word “standing” just to fit your ridiculous fumbling of the facts. Is a middle linebacker (if you know American football) standing with knees bent waiting for the ball to be snapped “squatting”? Because he might definitely have lowered his waist level by a foot or so- and I don’t think anyone would call it a squat.
You’re ridiculous, and you keep losing- over and over and over again.
My view continues to be that there is no evidence at all of a Joe Paterno cover up and that what McQueary described is not persuasive evidence of rape.
I’ve said this approximately 4,872 times now.
And you retards keep engaging him. I’ve changed my mind and now think SA has totally won the game. He’s kept you fucktards frustrated and annoyed for 11 months and 5085 post. At this post I’m considering you shit for brains as trolls for keeping this going.
Why does it have to be a cover-up, instead of just, say, turning a blind eye, taking rock-bottom-minimal action (if that) and hoping the problem goes away?
Heck, given the amount of time that did pass before Sandusky got arrested, it’s not even that bad a strategy, if one wants to be cold-bloodedly amoral about it and indifferent to the suffering of children. On a strict actuarial analysis, the odds might have been good that Sandusky would have the good graces to quietly die of a heart attack before his activities became public and embarrassing.
Don’t know, doesn’t matter.
I’m defining standing as most people understand it.
I don’t either. I think they’d call it a crouch.
No u. 
This is what happens when people call SA a pedophile. 
You’re proudly taking endorsements from Drunky Smurf, now?
That’s sad… and kinda funny.
Thank you for at least answering my question rather than ignoring it. Unfortunately, dodging it is almost as bad.
That’s not what I asked you about. You brought up the Paper Towel Tube test. You continue to be proud of that fact in this thread. So own up to the conclusion you have to have reached based upon this.
Your conclusion is that anal sex between a tall person and a short person is physically and logistically impossible. It’s the only thing that can be drawn from the two pieces of evidence you’ve presented on the subject. Well, the other conclusion is that you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about, but, what are the odds of that being the case?
I have never stated the conclusion that you have just attributed to me. If you can’t pose your question honestly, I’m not going to respond.
You just did. And yes you did.
Colour me also confused as to how “disproving” anal sex between Sandusky and the boy cannot be generalized as a claim that anal sex, if done standing and with partners of different heights, is problematic.
Is there something specific to Sandusky or the boy that has been assumed but not elaborated?
Yes, you did. Here, let me repeat yourself:
To repeat
- In order for a man of 6-4 to have sex with a person around 4 foot-11, you couldn’t stand straight up. You would have to bend your knees enough to be what an outside observer would call squatting.
This is what you said above.
-
Due to the conclusive proof of the Paper Towel Tube Test, a man who is 6-4 could not squat and simultaneously have sex with a person approximately 4 foot 11.
Therefore: -
, anal sex was and continues to be impossible. Not just that one night in the shower. Every time, everywhere.
Wait, even on Mars, where gravity is less?
Also confusing is how “proof” that Sandusky didn’t anally penetrate the boy would be in any way exculpatory for Paterno anyway, as though Holy Joe came to that conclusion by performing his own paper towel tube experiment, and as though he were any less obligated to report the incident to police if Sandusky were merely fondling an underage boy in the shower whils slapping his schlong on the kid’s butt cheeks.
Please, this thread is no place for logic.
Even on Uranus.
No I didn’t, and no I didn’t.
You people continue to experience other than straightness in your thinking.
But since you’re here, and you’ve several times expressed concern over my, uh, delusions or whatever in this thread, may I direct your attention to post #5122 above.
Early in the thread and long before I had any kind of understanding of Sandusky or the shower room incident I entered the thread with the idea in mind mostly to suggest that due to Joe Paterno’s longstanding reputation for integrity and good works that people hold off on condemning him until actual evidence should arise to indicate his guilt.
I was set upon instantly and accused of everything from taking up for him because he was a conservative (something I didn’t know and had given zero thought to at the time) to being a throw back to the old days when child abuse was tolerated and covered up to protect the men and to hell with what it did to the children, to being a likely pedophile enabler to being an unquestioned pedophile myself.
Now, anyone who knows me would laughinly and strongly tell you that I love children a great deal. Apart from my family they are my favorite people in the world. I have a long history of loving relationships with my daugher and neices and all their friends, and all during the time they were growing up there was never a hint of sexual impropriety with any of them or any of their friends, largely owing to the fact that such a thing never occurred to me, nor would it. The very idea makes me furious. Additionally, just to show that I’m an equal sex kid appreciator, I chased a guy once who while stopped behind me at a stoplight turned and began pounding on the boys in his back seat with his fists in an attempt to get his license number only to lose him in traffic.
So to come into a thread where people have so idiotically and hysterically lost their frigging minds be met with all these vile and insulting accusations for doing nothing more than suggesting we wait until we have evidence before we condemn someone (a concept in which as a police officer I would hope you see value) infuriated me and given that as the thread progressed and it became more and more apparent that these people didn’t know what they were talking about I became more and more determined to rub their noses in that fact and prove them wrong.
And so as events have unfolded and I have been proven right in my contentions that no evidence has surfaced to show that Joe Paterno was anywhere near guilty of the abominations he was being accused of at the time…and that the crime which McQueary testified to was not in fact the horrific and painful crime the thread’s posters were trying to accuse Joe Paterno of knowing about and callously and uncaringly covering up for never in fact happened, and that the suppositions they were so hysterically and stupidly jumping to were flat out wrong, and that it was they, not I, who were and are the egregious offenders in this thread.
Well, Sandusky was acquitted of rape, therefore Paterno is a saint, in Starving Artist’s universe.
If the squat’s too flat, you must Nihil Obstat.
Obviously this was during a long-ago time when cats walked the Earth.
Wait a tick - they still do!