The Last of Us 2 was Anti-Bombed as a response to the backlash from the controversial leaks, look at everyone trying to gain inclusivity and diversity points.
by Mercer Omara June 19, 2020
Get the Anti-Bombed mug.Cherrys her name. She likes cherries. She eats cherries. Cannibalism, I think so. Cancel cherry for eating my dog
Ayo have you heard of the gal named Cherry?
Yea, Redcherry_bomb and Poisonedgamer123 are very in love, but it is platonic.
Oh
Yea, Redcherry_bomb and Poisonedgamer123 are very in love, but it is platonic.
Oh
by Allukashugs January 15, 2021
Get the Redcherry_bomb mug.Related Words
When a person puts on the song Chocolate Rain on full blast on their friend's computer speakers and then immediately runs out of their friend's home.
by TheGreatSpritzingFuck August 27, 2010
Get the Chocolate Rain Bomb mug.by busch ice bombers September 29, 2012
Get the busch ice bombers mug.The phenomenon that happens in young hispanic women that have big tits and asses that get older and gain a great amount of weight.
by Blessie Stramson October 3, 2017
Get the tortilla time bomb mug.an atomic bomb is performed by climbing to the top of the stall and shitting (or attempting to shit) into the toilet from about 5 to 6 feet above the bowl
may also be called atomic dump
may also be called atomic dump
by pmoney May 13, 2005
Get the atomic bomb mug.The act of hijacking someone's Facebook status through posting a massive amount of random comments in a conversational format.
This requires at least two people, as solo Status Bombing just makes you look like a dick.
Status Bombing should not resemble 'spam' in any way. Comments should range from intelligent debates to deep philosophical exchanges. The more subjects you can encompass with a single bomb, the more glorious it is.
Bombs may include made up statistics and data, and all grammar and punctuation must be correct.
This requires at least two people, as solo Status Bombing just makes you look like a dick.
Status Bombing should not resemble 'spam' in any way. Comments should range from intelligent debates to deep philosophical exchanges. The more subjects you can encompass with a single bomb, the more glorious it is.
Bombs may include made up statistics and data, and all grammar and punctuation must be correct.
Example of a recent Status Bombing
Victim: "i wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges..?"
Bomber #1: "3.52 cm"
Victim: "oh ok thanx."
Bomber #1: "No problem."
Accidental enabler: "would there be less 'ocean' if there were no jelly fish??"
Victim: "ummm, dont get it?"
Bomber #1: "No, but the water level would be a bit lower."
Bomber #2: "You have to compensate for all the fish that those jellyfish would have killed, so removing the jellyfish might make the ocean levels rise slightly."
(Now it's on)
Bomber #1: "If you want to get technical, you must consider the socio-economic ramifications of pirates on shipping vessels off the Somali coast, and their proportional fish vs. jellyfish impact ratio."
Bomber #2: "Since part of the reason for the uprising of the Somali pirates is due to the overfishing of foreign vessels off their coast, it could be said that, since the pirate vessels are quite small in comparison to that of the foreign fishing boats, an increase in pirate activity would lead to a small increase in ocean levels."
Bomber #1: "It goes deeper, though. The decrease in available fishing water for Chinese fishing vessels (the most prolific) has lead to increased fishing and production in the yellow sea. This, in turn, has led to vast environmental changes, sparking mass spawning of giant Nomura's jellyfish (surveys suggest many billions of the 220kb behemoths). This by far outweighs any fish volume related water increase. All the fish in the Yellow Sea are being eaten, leading to a small decrease in water levels. However, this is outweighed by the aforementioned increase in jellyfish, thus leading to a large increase in global water levels.
Bomber #1: "Besides, it's impossible to 'get rid' of jellyfish anyway, killing or netting them causes them to release millions of self-inseminating eggs."
Bomber #2: "Why not just put sterilizers in the water that only affect the aforementioned cnidarian? Or perhaps one which affects both jellyfish and people? Over the long term, it would cause a rapid decrease in China's population, thus reducing the need to fish in the first place (and thus reducing their carbon emissions, allowing the planet to recover slightly)."
Victim: "AAAA SHUT UP!!"
Bombers to each other: "Status Bombing kicks ass."
Victim: "i wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges..?"
Bomber #1: "3.52 cm"
Victim: "oh ok thanx."
Bomber #1: "No problem."
Accidental enabler: "would there be less 'ocean' if there were no jelly fish??"
Victim: "ummm, dont get it?"
Bomber #1: "No, but the water level would be a bit lower."
Bomber #2: "You have to compensate for all the fish that those jellyfish would have killed, so removing the jellyfish might make the ocean levels rise slightly."
(Now it's on)
Bomber #1: "If you want to get technical, you must consider the socio-economic ramifications of pirates on shipping vessels off the Somali coast, and their proportional fish vs. jellyfish impact ratio."
Bomber #2: "Since part of the reason for the uprising of the Somali pirates is due to the overfishing of foreign vessels off their coast, it could be said that, since the pirate vessels are quite small in comparison to that of the foreign fishing boats, an increase in pirate activity would lead to a small increase in ocean levels."
Bomber #1: "It goes deeper, though. The decrease in available fishing water for Chinese fishing vessels (the most prolific) has lead to increased fishing and production in the yellow sea. This, in turn, has led to vast environmental changes, sparking mass spawning of giant Nomura's jellyfish (surveys suggest many billions of the 220kb behemoths). This by far outweighs any fish volume related water increase. All the fish in the Yellow Sea are being eaten, leading to a small decrease in water levels. However, this is outweighed by the aforementioned increase in jellyfish, thus leading to a large increase in global water levels.
Bomber #1: "Besides, it's impossible to 'get rid' of jellyfish anyway, killing or netting them causes them to release millions of self-inseminating eggs."
Bomber #2: "Why not just put sterilizers in the water that only affect the aforementioned cnidarian? Or perhaps one which affects both jellyfish and people? Over the long term, it would cause a rapid decrease in China's population, thus reducing the need to fish in the first place (and thus reducing their carbon emissions, allowing the planet to recover slightly)."
Victim: "AAAA SHUT UP!!"
Bombers to each other: "Status Bombing kicks ass."
by JimbotheBomber May 10, 2009
Get the Status Bombing mug.