so are you admitting that HPV does cause deaths? or are you just trying to move the goalposts?
hilarious. i guess since the gangster disciples use a star of david as their symbol that jewish kids can't wear those around their necks either. come to think of it, the latin GDs use a cross as well.
that isn't 'skinny' at all. that's pretty much ideal for a male of that height and an average build.
That's funny, googling "SSC Texas ring" brings up pages of links all about the superconducting supercollider. Nothing about any sports complex.
gravity is just another form of control! it's the liberals trying to keep us close to 'mother earth'. it's bullshit Gaia-ism if you ask me.
dude, this is supposed to be a tech site. if you can't figure out what "SSC" refers to in regards to "a giant ring in texas" you need to have your head examined.
i dunno, maybe you're 13 years old. in which case congratulations on discovering the internet! please be careful.
i work from home. i haven't 'commuted' for years and years. i don't drive. my kid gets jogged into school. i garden and buy food from the farmers' market which is about 200 feet from my house, and the rest comes from a store at the end of the block. i don't go on vacation places.
so i guess in spite of not considering myself to be a "greenie", i have earned the right to call you a fucking retard.
congratulations! you're a fucking retard.
read the sig. he's either retarded or it's a real honest-to-god shtick.
get him some building permits quickly
and more importantly, look the other way if the whole thing explodes killing a dozen people.
all he has to do is promise to load up the location with a few thousand pounds of explosive fertilizer and texas will give him a huge tax rebate.
the "SeaFox Home For Retarded People".
he's referring to the SSC. it was kind of a big deal.
skimming the article, they seem to talk of very long terms. like thousands of years, not 100.
there doesn't appear to be anything in the article about the GWP of CH4 over a 100-year window. perhaps you can show it to me, given that you accused the fact of being "BS".
Methane degrades into CO2, in fact, so in simulations I did (Archer and Buffett, 2005) the radiative forcing from the elevated methane concentration throughout a long release was about matched by the radiative forcing from the extra CO2 accumulating
what's a 'long release'?
both of whom are one-termers.
did i seriously need to add sarcasm tags to my post?
Or, if you prefer Wikipedia as a source
from your link:
methane's Global warming potential (GWP) for 100-year time horizon: 25.
which is exactly what i said.