@wrmieforgor: Replying to @hi im davis Uhhh meow? #rainbowgoobers #zapthedog #wrmieforgor #zenithcore #heat❌ #heat❌🚫 #cringe #art #animation #androidanimals✅ #emojianimals✅ #artist #emojicats #androidanimals #fypage #fypシ゚viral #viral #dabloons #skibiditoilet

👾 wormie! . • ° <3 [30k+]
👾 wormie! . • ° <3 [30k+]
Open In TikTok:
Region: US
Thursday 31 October 2024 01:02:49 GMT
66806
1048
36
64

Music

Download

Comments

chezzburgur.1.1
Greetings! I am Chezzburgur 🔥 :
dude, it won't work. i watched it like 50 times already over and over following every little stem, and I get the same thing, either it shows my of in transparent, or where the box is it's transparent. i watched slow, fast, paused, looked in comments, EVERYTHING and it wont work.
2025-09-23 05:58:43
0
sillytorin
Simon (Torin) :
heyy can you do a tutorial on the chainsaw face turning black? (if yk yk)
2025-03-02 04:19:49
2
ccheesecakeeyy
࿐ཽ༵༆༒𝒄𝒉𝒆𝒆𝒔𝒆𝒄𝒂𝒌𝒆༒༆࿐ཽ༵ :
Oo can i use it one of my vids pls:3(im gonna watch ur all vids dont mind if i do)
2025-05-28 22:36:58
0
bissho_c22
Bissho :
THX
2025-09-08 12:41:23
2
sia_devil
It’s Sia. |30k+| :
Too many tuts in one hour
2024-10-31 01:34:27
5
red.olivs._
✮˚.⋆𝕊𝕜𝕦𝕝𝕝𝕪 ⋆.˚✮ 🔜??? :
What do you have aligh motion installed on?
2025-04-01 18:25:00
0
iffy8381
IF :
meow
2024-10-31 01:06:26
1
lilybellcookiefan69
Tisha’s left armpit hair :
Woahhhh
2024-10-31 02:14:35
1
ayeshanasersheisthebest
‼️🐛CRAWLIPEDE🐛‼️ :
Game name?
2025-01-06 08:04:38
0
._cecilyxzfortigers
✦・┊꒱ᵏᵃᵗᵉ〃✩.˚⊹ :
Wowza a lot of tuts thanks
2024-10-31 02:12:15
1
snowinmybootsz
౧᷼౧᪲ ᐯꪖ𐓣𝘪łℓ𝚊 𝑆ᥴ℮ɳꪻ℮𝖽 ❀ᮬׁ‥ :
you should make a YouTube channel about tutorials or just like your process of making edits
2025-02-01 14:20:12
1
zyyanx00
DarkcatLOLL :
SIGMAAAA!! :D
2024-10-31 01:06:49
1
robloxacc287
Emma :
this makes my life way easier 😭
2024-11-03 04:02:52
1
dreamcoreanddandyfan
добрая Мейми :
Thank you
2024-10-31 01:16:38
1
whats_up_bro89
💙Solar🐶 :
I got this HELP LOL
2025-09-07 07:19:25
0
._am0r4_3
֮ϐׁᨵׁׅׅꩇׁׅ֪݊ ֮ϐׁᨵׁׅׅ ꩇׁׅ֪݊ SCP :
@Shellvy aqui
2025-06-22 01:56:28
0
toxic_sprout_star_time
🌼✰ᯓSDLLAEDHYᯓ✰🦕 :
👍
2025-04-13 10:37:18
0
purevanillacookie94
🧈Butter🧈fandom✅ :
😁
2025-02-27 00:52:45
0
.ozzyoi._.malozzy
.༺ღ༒ᨵׁׅׅzׁׅ֬zׁׅ֬ᨮׁׅ֮ᨵׁׅׅι༒ღ༻. :
😂😂😂
2024-11-18 04:56:39
0
ajklhs2
emojicat ❌ :
😁😁😁
2024-11-16 12:33:19
0
no.name.guy.dude
~{!!!Meqout!!!}~ :
😂😂😂
2024-10-31 11:19:56
0
mylene.cabayao
💢🥊🎀 XxboyxX🎀🥊💢 :
how tut?
2025-06-29 03:18:45
0
jestertwotime_
Чизкейк :
You can tutor on a transfusion stick, which kills?
2024-11-01 11:02:45
0
tangerinestickmanalt
Tangerine Stickman(ON HIATUS) :
i will abuse this method
2025-02-28 05:51:30
0
To see more videos from user @wrmieforgor, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

Based Crown Castile and Aragon ! [🇪🇦🇻🇦] Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers such as Skewes's number and Moser's number, both of which are in turn much larger than a googolplex. As with these, it is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain an ordinary digital representation of Graham's number, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume, possibly the smallest measurable space. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number-and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers of the form However, Graham's number can be explicitly given by computable recursive formulas using Knuth's up-arrow notation or equivalent, as was done by Ronald Graham, the number's namesake. As there is a recursive formula to define it, it is much smaller than typical busy beaver numbers, the sequence of which grows faster than any computable sequence. Though too large to ever be computed in full, the sequence of digits of Graham's number can be computed explicitly via simple algorithms; the last 10 digits of Graham's number are ...2464195387. Using Knuth's up-arrow Graham's number is notation,Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be valid. #europe #fyp #v #history #nationalistedit
Based Crown Castile and Aragon ! [🇪🇦🇻🇦] Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers such as Skewes's number and Moser's number, both of which are in turn much larger than a googolplex. As with these, it is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain an ordinary digital representation of Graham's number, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume, possibly the smallest measurable space. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number-and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers of the form However, Graham's number can be explicitly given by computable recursive formulas using Knuth's up-arrow notation or equivalent, as was done by Ronald Graham, the number's namesake. As there is a recursive formula to define it, it is much smaller than typical busy beaver numbers, the sequence of which grows faster than any computable sequence. Though too large to ever be computed in full, the sequence of digits of Graham's number can be computed explicitly via simple algorithms; the last 10 digits of Graham's number are ...2464195387. Using Knuth's up-arrow Graham's number is notation,Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be valid. #europe #fyp #v #history #nationalistedit

About