Conor McGregor commissions $66,000 hyperrealistic sculpture of himself for 30th birthday

[DopeZach]

If I was a very rich man I'd go there and talk to one of the people and be like "I'd like to purchase that sculpture of God." They'd be like umm that's McGregor and then I'd be like yeah he is God. They'd kick me out for being a weirdo crazy guy

 

[Southpaw_27]

Reminds me of that part in dodgeball where White Goodman has that big painting of himself in his office

 

[MysticGOD]

If I was a very rich man I'd go there and talk to one of the people and be like "I'd like to purchase that sculpture of God." They'd be like umm that's McGregor and then I'd be like yeah he is God. They'd kick me out for being a weirdo crazy guy

I wouldnt if i was selling it
However, if i was to sell the statue i would probably demand something like you need to give blowjobs to the statue atleast once in a week

 

[ralek4grammy]

Did those men not alter the course of history and changed the bum lives of millions for better or worse?

Yes they did. Whether they're war mongers or not is immaterial. This world runs on money and power, it's no coincidence that men of great power and wealth are the ones with the greatest influence on history. The only difference between Conor and these other names is he's not rich and powerful enough...yet, and he lives in the 21st century and can't just march into the favelas on horsebacks because there're laws and shit.

They did, but how does that address my point that you are nitpicking? For example, there have been more scientists with great impact over millions of lives throughout the history, then warlords...with the same reach. My point still stands.

As for Conor...please. He's an entertainer and, among fighters, a quitter. Let's keep some perspective, shall we? Chaplin >>> Conor, as an entertainer; many of the old school fighters showed more heart than him. Not sure whether you are serious, or I'm witnessing trolling greatness.

 

[ralek4grammy]

Reminds me of that part in dodgeball where White Goodman has that big painting of himself in his office View attachment 404883View attachment 404885

LOL, that's it, man, good one!

 

[LouisBolanos]

They did, but how does that address my point that you are nitpicking? For example, there have been more scientists with great impact over millions of lives throughout the history, then warlords...with the same reach. My point still stands.

Who are these scientists you speak of?

You can count the scientists with the global impact of someone like Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan on the fingers of your hands. You're talking the elites among the elites on the level of a Sir Issac Newton, people who were incredibly famous, influential and rich. Einstein was a millionaire in the 1950s, that's 8 digits in 2018 money. His estate pulls in tens of millions in royalties every year. Stephen Hawking is worth tens of millions. Issac Newton during his time was 10x bigger than Stephen Hawkings. The vast majority of no name scientists who live moderate lives only make incremental contributions to science and have nowhere near the influence on the world compared to world class mass murderers like Genghis or Hitler. You have shit for points.

As for Conor...please. He's an entertainer and, among fighters, a quitter. Let's keep some perspective, shall we? Chaplin >>> Conor, as an entertainer; many of the old school fighters showed more heart than him. Not sure whether you are serious, or I'm witnessing trolling greatness.

Charlie Chapin was one of the richest and most powerful men in Hollywood, and one of the most famous people in the world, so your only argument is against Conor being one of the most influential athlete is...that Conor isn't rich and famous enough? Do you not see how dumb you sound? You want to argue against Conor being one of the most influential due to his wealth and fame, and you come up with an example of someone of even greater wealth and fame. Oh the irony.



Chaplin was one of the most influential entertainers in history because he was one of the richest and most famous people in Hollywood. Conor is the most influential athletes of our time because ___I'll let you fill in the blanks. You're influential when you're rich or famous or both. Conor is the richest and most famous MMA fighter ever. Therefore he's also the most influential.

 

[ralek4grammy]

Who are these scientists you speak of?

You can count the scientists with the global impact of someone like Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan on the fingers of your hands. You're talking the elites among the elites on the level of a Sir Issac Newton, people who were incredibly famous, influential and rich. Einstein was a millionaire in the 1950s, that's 8 digits in 2018 money. His estate pulls in tens of millions in royalties every year. Stephen Hawking is worth tens of millions. Issac Newton during his time was 10x bigger than Stephen Hawkings. The vast majority of no name scientists who live moderate lives only make incremental contributions to science and have nowhere near the influence on the world compared to world class mass murderers like Genghis or Hitler. You have shit for points.



Charlie Chapin was one of the richest and most powerful men in Hollywood, and one of the most famous people in the world, so your only argument is against Conor being one of the most influential athlete is...that Conor isn't rich and famous enough? Do you not see how dumb you sound? You want to argue against Conor being one of the most influential due to his wealth and fame, and you come up with an example of someone of even greater wealth and fame. Oh the irony.



Chaplin was one of the most influential entertainers in history because he was one of the richest and most famous people in Hollywood. Conor is the most influential athletes of our time because ___I'll let you fill in the blanks. You're influential when you're rich or famous or both. Conor is the richest and most famous MMA fighter ever. Therefore he's also the most influential.

Norman Borlang, Nicolas C. Paulescu, the Wright brothers, Bell, Marie Curie, Henri Coanda, Edward Jenner, Tesla, Edison, Tim Berners-Lee, Martin Cooper, Gutenberg, James Dewey Watson, Francis Crick and Rosalind Franklin, Robert H. Goetz and Michael Rohman, Edwin Armstrong, Charles Goodyear, and one can go on and on and on. So much for counting "on the fingers of my hands". Any major contribution to medicine that is not of very recent development saved or bettered millions of lives. Some of these guys became rich after making these inventions. They were influential because of their contributions, which attracted (sometimes) wealth and recognition (during their lifetime). But not always.

My purpose wasn't to offer Chaplin as a "poor but talented guy" as a counter-example, but simply name a much better entertainer, with broader reach, just as I named mentally tougher fighters. How come you didn't debate assertions from the mighty $'s point of view when I nominated fighters, in which case you seem to have understood my point, yet you twist my argument back to money when it comes to the other category, "entertainers"? I may have not been clear enough when I transitioned from a point to another, I'll reluctantly give you that. However, I hope I did make that distinction clear this time.

Bottom line: the other guys you try to somehow compare with him are in a class of their own, they come from another dimension. Unless Conor's contributions somehow equate Alexander Fleming's.

And, in closing: FWIW, I am not a Conor "hater". I simply view him as a retired fighter (athlete, if you wish) and, based on his many out-of-cage incidents, an immature person. I wish he'd be back in the cage, but I am not holding my breath. He can do as he wishes. However, in the grand scheme of things, he's more hot air, today, than anything else, and not worthy to be mentioned among the people you try to place him with.

 

[LouisBolanos]

Norman Borlang, Nicolas C. Paulescu, the Wright brothers, Bell, Marie Curie, Henri Coanda, Edward Jenner, Tesla, Edison, Tim Berners-Lee, Martin Cooper, Gutenberg, James Dewey Watson, Francis Crick and Rosalind Franklin, Robert H. Goetz and Michael Rohman, Edwin Armstrong, Charles Goodyear, and one can go on and on and on. So much for counting "on the fingers of my hands". Any major contribution to medicine that is not of very recent development saved or bettered millions of lives. Some of these guys became rich after making these inventions. They were influential because of their contributions, which attracted (sometimes) wealth and recognition (during their lifetime). But not always.

A list of scientists you copy and pasted from somewhere is not an argument. The vast majority of names on that list have nowhere near the influence of world class mass murderers like Hitler and Genghis, and plenty of names on that list are also rich as fuck. Marie Curie having similar global influence to Genghis and Hitler? Are you high? Edison wasn't rich as fuck? Are you stupid? If you're gonna copy a list of names from somewhere, at least do some basic research so they actually support your argument, not mine. What a load of horseshit. Ask around and see if anyone has heard of Julius Cesar or Adolf Hitler. Now ask around and see how many people know 9 out of 10 people on your list.

My purpose wasn't to offer Chaplin as a "poor but talented guy" as a counter-example, but simply name a much better entertainer, with broader reach, just as I named mentally tougher fighters.

Charlie Chaplin was more influential because he was richer (inflation adjusted) and more famous than Conor, it has shit to do with mental toughness or anything else. There were plenty of no name fodders in WW1 and 2 who were mentally way tougher than Chaplin, but didn't have a fraction of his influence because they were poor and not famous. Money, power and fame are what gave Chaplin his influence. Want to disprove me? The go ahead, show me a Hollywood entertainer from Chaplin's era with greater influence than him, who was poor and way less famous than Chaplin. Go on I'll wait.

How come you didn't debate assertions from the mighty $'s point of view when I nominated fighters, in which case you seem to have understood my point, yet you twist my argument back to money when it comes to the other category, "entertainers"? I may have not been clear enough when I transitioned from a point to another, I'll reluctantly give you that. However, I hope I did make that distinction clear this time.

Money and fame are the only category that matter for entertainers. The most influential entertainers are always the richest or most famous, or both. How much heart a fighter has doesn't mean jack shit, like I said, there're countless soldiers who fought on the battlefield with amazing toughness that have zero effect on history, because they weren't rich or famous. They just end up as bodies on the battlefield.

Bottom line: the other guys you try to somehow compare with him are in a class of their own, they come from another dimension. Unless Conor's contributions somehow equate Alexander Fleming's.

Bottom line: the guys I mention were influential because they were rich, powerful and famous. Conor is the richest, most powerful and most famous MMA fighter alive. He is by definition the most influential MMA fighter.

 

[ralek4grammy]

Copying and pasting is for ignorants that do not know their history. I did have to look up some of those names, honestly, but as I am not a product of today's educational system, less than you'd think.

Unless you can be bothered to at least read a Wikipedia article on Marie Curie's accomplishments and their impact, I'm preaching to the deaf, and I'm not inclined to waste my time doing so. I'll refrain from lecturing you on how important in the global economy some of the stuff you minimize are; I'm not here to educate you, nor anyone else. You fully possess the means to enlighten yourself.

An exercise in futility ensues every time when your discussion partner mixes concepts, and fails to follow a train of thought "A" to "B".

By all means, have fun contemplating the aesthetics of that work of art. I'll thoroughly cleanse my eyes with some silent contemplation of "The End of the Trail".

I bow out.

 

[MilesAbove]

lol, making a statue of yourself.

 

[recondojoe]

It was a gift from a fan actually.

 

[fractal]

Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder with a long-term pattern of abnormal behavior characterized by exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, and a lack of empathy.

You just described everyone on this forum.

 

[Ufc1son]

How about a statue of Conor getting choked out by Nate,screaming for big John to save him.

 

[Fungoose]

Conor's statue could even beat the entire UFC roster.

Punching Conor’s statue is still easier on the hands than Romero.

 

[KYS]

Plot twist: sculptor is a troll.

 

[Darkart]

Actually that is pretty cheap for a statue of that size and quality, normal pricing in stone is 10-15x that easily.

 

[dns2344]

He’s only renting it from the person who owns it.

 

[1AM]

Haven't read the whole thread, just wanted to point out it's a gift for he's birthday.

https://www.pedestrian.tv/sport/conor-mcgregor-sculpture/

What do you buy for the man who has everything, including the ability to obliterate a man’s spine with a devastating strike from his shinbone? An enormous statue in his likeness, of course!

For his 30th birthday, MMA fighter Conor McGregor will receive a “hyper-realistic” sculpture of himself from Lithuanian artist Edgar Askelovic – better known by the name Aspencrow – which is valued at around $90,000. Finally, his rig will be captured in the only mode that can truly respect it.

It honestly looks pretty sick:

“It is an honour Conor has accepted this as a gift from me,” said the UK-based artist. “He is a phenomenon of our time – not just a smart athlete, but also a visionary.”


The sculpture, which is appropriately named Atlas, will be unveiled at an art gallery in London on the 14th of July, McGregor’s 30th birthday.

Aspencrow says that the striking form of the sculpture, which features McGregor entombed in stone, can be interpreted in a number of ways:

It’s up to you what you see in it. You can see him as a prisoner, or a God, or just as a person. I like Conor McGregor – he’s a great guy. I feel he’s my soulmate. Some of the decisions he makes might not be correct, but none of us are ideal.

The artist admits that he hasn’t actually spoken to McGregor directly, but has been communicating with him through a friend.

“That’s how I got the information that he knows about the sculpture, and that he accepts it,” he told the BBC. Communicating with the artist who has immortalised you in marble through a third party, refusing actual face-to-face contact? A true alpha move folks.

If you’re in London at that time for whatever reason, the sculpture will be on display at the JD Malat Gallery from 14 July to 30 September.

 

[Kobra420]

He’s only renting it from the person who owns it.

I wonder how much @MescalineDreams charges for a day's rental?

 

[MCS]

Is Eugene Victor Tooms back from the grave?