@dondoodat*_"people do go out of their way to be offensive"_* but it is a choice to take it, but why would you allow some one else's utterances to control & manipulate you into relinquishing your joy & happiness in life, that would be silly, a sign of a lack of wisdom in society of nurturing love, compassion & kindness.
@@veganath It's not a choice to take offense. In our society, emotions affect people's decisions, so using pure computive logic to blame others for being troubled by jokes that are intended to be 'on the edge' is illogical.
@@ottomatedcylinder533 *_"It's not a choice to take offense"_* I have done volunteer work at mental health institutes, question, if you visit a mental health institute and an institutionalized person starts calling you names, accuses you mother of being a pr05titut3, etc would you take offense, would you allow this person to control & manipulate you?
As a nurse in casualty in UK a man came in saying because of the current drought he decided to peel his potatoes in the bath and one slipped up his bottom, suspicious enough but it was strange after we removed it that there was a second potato…
My nurse friend in ER had a guy come in with the handle of a pot up his bum. Excuse… locked himself out with no keys so climbed in kitchen window and fell on the pot handle which was in the sink. I believe it 🤣🤣🤣
This reminds me of the man who had the same problem but with a spud! His classic excuse was "Well, I was peeling the potatoes in the bath (while naked and in the bath as well!).
I have wondered for a while now, who is/was the ultimate human being. Gandhi, Newton, Einstein, Armstrong, Hendrix, Jackson, Mandela, Lennon, Presley etc. etc. Weighing up all the evidence I have now came to the conclusion that it Ricky Gervais.
How to make a billionaire. 1 Take tens of thousands of grossly underpaid employees 2 Add tens of millions of grossly overcharged customers Voila, a billionaire
The only misconception that EVERYONE makes is, as Ricky does here, and many scientists, and many theologians also, is to frame God as "Supernatural". God is the very definition of "Supremely natural". The "kingdom is within us", and God is not in some separate dimension from us because of his reputation as creator. To me God is the ideal archetype of all that is natural, and if life for any organism is conscious, it must be " natural" because if anything were thought of as " unnatural", it could not have any connection or extention from God.
There was no misconception (which by the way is the wrong word by definition since you cannot prove he’s incorrect)… what he stated just didn’t exactly align with what you personally believe, but have absolutely zero proof of
@@tylercarrell And one holding what is from my point of view, a misconception, has absolutely no proof or evidence to validate his assertion either. It's called expressing your view of a subject, and in so doing it would be disingenuous to be dishonest. If I believe that another's concept of something is mistaken, and I differ in my framing of the same issue, I have a perfect right to claim that in my opinion they have the wrong view of it...( what's called a " misconception") I'm under no obligation to offer any proof of my point of view being " correct", snd theirs being incorrect. If a circle of people look at an object on a table at the centre of the same circle, they will all see a different angle of the object, and may even interpret their view of the same thing as if it were not that very thing, but something else entirely. Still others among them may claim that though they see different sides of the object, they agree that it is a small statue, and that though others present may think it is a vase, they say that to them this conclusion is mistaken,.... a "misconception". There is no need to offer evidence for this, unless you intend to try and force others to agree with your view via legislation or coercion. Those who claim things like God are supernatural, are unable to provide any strong evidence to support this opinion or what we all should think, I'm pleased to say, and I have a perfect right to say what I suggest may be going on in potential mistakes in some people's perceptions of emerging patterns in these murky spiritual matters, and this is not calculated to cause ridicule, judgement, or marginalisation of anyone's petty egos as we discuss these highly hard to define symbologies. Just because my personal experience is used to gain understanding of these things, does not disadvantage my empirical approach or another's more pragmatic one, or limit either of us from expressing contrary summations which may require us to intuit that one or the other has a "misconception" ... ( the appropriate word to express this idea)! It is possible to say that you think someone is wrong, without causing any implied insult in the process, surely it is, or we've lost the sbility to discuss and work with those of an oposite opinion, and that is worse than having no opinion. You're free to disagree, that's why you replied to my comment; so all I'll say is, I don't bother trying to proove my views, and those who dissagree with me, maybe such as yourself, have, as far as I know, no proof to offer from their side as to what's natural, or what's supernatural, seeing that proof and evidence are " concepts that we share, simply because they exist iherently in the "natural" world anyway, unlike spiritual allegory and symbology which nobody will dispute inhabit our inner world and exist despite our inabilty to measure them. So agree, disagree, or put forth your own field in honesty and humility, otherwise no one will ever learn anything beyond themselves. We don't have to agree, unless we're planning a product PR launch, and it's unhealthy to be combative, because, just remember WAR is an acronym for "We are right!".😊
@@chrisgmurray3622so to sum up, God is perfectly “natural”… as in part of nature. But there’s no need to offer “proof” of that because we’re free to disagree on what is “natural” because there’s no evidence to work with? Is that what you are saying?
Funny, religious people have always claimed that the existence of a god cannot be tested purely because it's supernatural, and science only applies to the natural world.
@@BenjaminGooseSteady on 😊 your statement does not offer an opportunity for a religious response, you are saying, once we believe something we can find all the evidence that our belief is true, regardless of any alternate scientific reality. Kind regards Tim
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
![Johnny Depp & Ricky Gervais on the Graham Norton show [2/3]](/img/n.gif)
As they say. "People don't give offence. But, a lot of people decide to 'take' offence" Love this man.❤❤
Thats not true, I often give offence.
Oh, no. I definitely give offense to people i cannot respect.
@dondoodat*_"people do go out of their way to be offensive"_* but it is a choice to take it, but why would you allow some one else's utterances to control & manipulate you into relinquishing your joy & happiness in life, that would be silly, a sign of a lack of wisdom in society of nurturing love, compassion & kindness.
@@veganath It's not a choice to take offense. In our society, emotions affect people's decisions, so using pure computive logic to blame others for being troubled by jokes that are intended to be 'on the edge' is illogical.
@@ottomatedcylinder533 *_"It's not a choice to take offense"_* I have done volunteer work at mental health institutes, question, if you visit a mental health institute and an institutionalized person starts calling you names, accuses you mother of being a pr05titut3, etc would you take offense, would you allow this person to control & manipulate you?
A giant of comedy!
The video cut the joke off, but my favourite part is one of the other bullet points in that leaflet that said, “why not come out of a window?” 😂😂😂
Actually, the condom on the sauce bottle makes perfect sense. After all it was a condement bottle!
Always learn something new from Ricky
As a nurse in casualty in UK a man came in saying because of the current drought he decided to peel his potatoes in the bath and one slipped up his bottom, suspicious enough but it was strange after we removed it that there was a second potato…
My nurse friend in ER had a guy come in with the handle of a pot up his bum. Excuse… locked himself out with no keys so climbed in kitchen window and fell on the pot handle which was in the sink. I believe it 🤣🤣🤣
Me too!
This reminds me of the man who had the same problem but with a spud! His classic excuse was "Well, I was peeling the potatoes in the bath (while naked and in the bath as well!).
Immediately, I thought of HP sauce… “The only sauce I dare give father!”
What a funny guy, not sure why some call him aggressive or rude, perhaps they have some insecurities or some kind of issues
The last bastion of comedy it would seem. Please never stop making comedy
except for dave chapelle, bill burr, john mulaney, jim jeffries and and anthony jeselnik?
In the mid seventies I was told, by a nurse, of a man coming to emergency with a bottle stuck up his backside.
Happens all the time(honestly)
Thank you Ricky for telling the truth.. Don't let the woke gits grind you down. ❤
I am going to start saving leaflets now 😂
I wanted to hear the other 7
0:57 Did the math, and correct me if I’m wrong but that equates to 178 dollars an hour, hey, i’ll take that any day of the week
I’m so confused, what are you expecting out of making this comment? Praise for saying you’d be willing to work in a sweatshop?
@@icantthinkofausername7712Some people try to be sooo edgy that it doesn't even come off as funny🤷🏻
@@Retrospective908 God, you’re right. Real idiots, they are.
When was this filmed? Does anyone know? Is it recent?
I think it’s an old one based off his looks tbf
That was filmed in 2002
I have wondered for a while now, who is/was the ultimate human being. Gandhi, Newton, Einstein, Armstrong, Hendrix, Jackson, Mandela, Lennon, Presley etc. etc. Weighing up all the evidence I have now came to the conclusion that it Ricky Gervais.
Where was this lifted from?
Well, at least the saurce bottle wasn't a live Gerble. Apparently they're a bugger to remove.
Brilliant - and soo politically correct 🤣
❤
"Freedom of speech" Which country is that ??? NOT the UK !
How to make a billionaire.
1 Take tens of thousands of grossly underpaid employees
2 Add tens of millions of grossly overcharged customers
Voila, a billionaire
He just Got his friend fired
lazy ? i married a pregnant girl.
Democracies
By the creeps
Of the monies
For the greed
Representative AOC has hit the nail on the head.
?
Incredibly random
Terrible suit and why no collar?
Triggered?
@@MikeTheBike58 you were
The only misconception that EVERYONE makes is, as Ricky does here, and many scientists, and many theologians also, is to frame God as "Supernatural". God is the very definition of "Supremely natural". The "kingdom is within us", and God is not in some separate dimension from us because of his reputation as creator. To me God is the ideal archetype of all that is natural, and if life for any organism is conscious, it must be " natural" because if anything were thought of as " unnatural", it could not have any connection or extention from God.
There was no misconception (which by the way is the wrong word by definition since you cannot prove he’s incorrect)… what he stated just didn’t exactly align with what you personally believe, but have absolutely zero proof of
@@tylercarrell And one holding what is from my point of view, a misconception, has absolutely no proof or evidence to validate his assertion either. It's called expressing your view of a subject, and in so doing it would be disingenuous to be dishonest. If I believe that another's concept of something is mistaken, and I differ in my framing of the same issue, I have a perfect right to claim that in my opinion they have the wrong view of it...( what's called a " misconception") I'm under no obligation to offer any proof of my point of view being " correct", snd theirs being incorrect. If a circle of people look at an object on a table at the centre of the same circle, they will all see a different angle of the object, and may even interpret their view of the same thing as if it were not that very thing, but something else entirely. Still others among them may claim that though they see different sides of the object, they agree that it is a small statue, and that though others present may think it is a vase, they say that to them this conclusion is mistaken,.... a "misconception". There is no need to offer evidence for this, unless you intend to try and force others to agree with your view via legislation or coercion. Those who claim things like God are supernatural, are unable to provide any strong evidence to support this opinion or what we all should think, I'm pleased to say, and I have a perfect right to say what I suggest may be going on in potential mistakes in some people's perceptions of emerging patterns in these murky spiritual matters, and this is not calculated to cause ridicule, judgement, or marginalisation of anyone's petty egos as we discuss these highly hard to define symbologies. Just because my personal experience is used to gain understanding of these things, does not disadvantage my empirical approach or another's more pragmatic one, or limit either of us from expressing contrary summations which may require us to intuit that one or the other has a "misconception" ... ( the appropriate word to express this idea)! It is possible to say that you think someone is wrong, without causing any implied insult in the process, surely it is, or we've lost the sbility to discuss and work with those of an oposite opinion, and that is worse than having no opinion. You're free to disagree, that's why you replied to my comment; so all I'll say is, I don't bother trying to proove my views, and those who dissagree with me, maybe such as yourself, have, as far as I know, no proof to offer from their side as to what's natural, or what's supernatural, seeing that proof and evidence are " concepts that we share, simply because they exist iherently in the "natural" world anyway, unlike spiritual allegory and symbology which nobody will dispute inhabit our inner world and exist despite our inabilty to measure them. So agree, disagree, or put forth your own field in honesty and humility, otherwise no one will ever learn anything beyond themselves. We don't have to agree, unless we're planning a product PR launch, and it's unhealthy to be combative, because, just remember WAR is an acronym for "We are right!".😊
@@chrisgmurray3622so to sum up, God is perfectly “natural”… as in part of nature. But there’s no need to offer “proof” of that because we’re free to disagree on what is “natural” because there’s no evidence to work with? Is that what you are saying?
Funny, religious people have always claimed that the existence of a god cannot be tested purely because it's supernatural, and science only applies to the natural world.
@@BenjaminGooseSteady on 😊 your statement does not offer an opportunity for a religious response, you are saying, once we believe something we can find all the evidence that our belief is true, regardless of any alternate scientific reality. Kind regards Tim
Mr know it all, thinks he's right about everything and thinks everyone else is stupid, can't stand him
Ah will you have a laugh for once, no one’s gonna kill you for laughing at a joke
Idk this one aint funny
Never heard of this guy before. Is he normally funny? Didn’t even let out a single chuckle this whole video
This one was not very good