[QUOTE="MannyDelgado"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"]That just means we can see further in space. Give it 20 years and another, better telescope, the universe will magically age another 100 million years.Nibroc420Not how it works I'm sorry, with better telescopes we will realize we were wrong, and the universe is actually X years old. I suppose saying it would "magically age" could confuse a few people.I know exactly what you meant; you were wrong
MannyDelgado's forum posts
Oh good - I had to hand in a report on dark matter last week, and I would've been f*cked if those results did something crazy like ruled out the kind of dark matter I was writing about
[QUOTE="MannyDelgado"][QUOTE="JohnF111"]Numbers are a man-made construct therefore there cannot be a number that equates to the exact value of God.JohnF111>2013 >not a mathematical platonist laughingwhores.jpg Use sentences and words please.Ah, I see you lack the requisite memes
Numbers are a man-made construct therefore there cannot be a number that equates to the exact value of God.JohnF111>2013 >not a mathematical platonist laughingwhores.jpg
[QUOTE="ionusX"]indeed it is a VERY small fraction something more along the lines of a graph flip is required to correct your view. some people man.. "some people man"? Dude, I'm just saying what I see.... and what I see is they act feminine, or I can tell they are gay a mile off. Like I said, maybe it's Australia, I'm just going off what I see.When you see a gay person, either a) they are not camp, in which case you do not identify them as gay or b) they are camp in, which case you identify them as gay and camp; consequently, your figure for the number of camp gays is subject to sampling bias[QUOTE="rhoads90"] You don't know anything. What you see on movies and tv is not the case. I would say 80% of gay people I meet in life and clubs are not feminine.FelipeInside
[QUOTE="MannyDelgado"]
:cry:
GD1551
Still nitpicking, don't really care.
If you write off everything you don't agree with as 'nitpicking', you can't be reasoned with, so I'm done wasting my time on you. Perhaps you'll grow up to be less retarded than this - I hope for your sake you're a late bloomer.[QUOTE="MannyDelgado"]
I hate to break it to you, but 'the norm' is a totally different concept from 'stuff for which there exists a practical justification' - something which you'd probably know if you weren't a child, which vindicates my previous speculation about your ageGD1551
I hate you break it to you, but you just typed a whole lot of nothing and are essentially nitpicking.
Yep OK, insofar as 'nitpicking' is pointing out the meaning of a phrase you used (or rather misused, in a clumsy attempt to salvage the wreckage of your cretinous original argument) does not even loosely resemble what you seem to think it does, I nitpicked the sh*t out of youE-, must try harder
Do you think that being ginger is deviant? Only ~1.5% of the population has it, you know.[QUOTE="MannyDelgado"][QUOTE="GD1551"]
The reason I used reproduction in the first place was to prove my point that sex between a man and a woman is the natural way. Since you love definitions I'll link you one deviant "deviating or departing from the norm" Clearly this is a departure from the norm, and thus can be labelled as deviant behaviour.
GD1551
Nope, in my case the norm is the norm because there is a practical reason why it's the norm i.e reproduction. Natural hair colour cannot count as deviant behaviour.
I hate to break it to you, but 'the norm' is a totally different concept from 'stuff for which there exists a practical justification' - something which you'd probably know if you weren't a child, which vindicates my previous speculation about your age
Log in to comment