Tuxstir Posted August 16, 2016 Share My 8 year old son knows what those are.Apparently your son is as old as Sh-it then.... P.S how old is Sh-it anyway...... Edited August 16, 2016 by tedibear Fruity and Ed-Zulu 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTBeer Posted August 16, 2016 Share Apparently your son is as old as Sh-it then.... P.S how old is Sh-it anyway......depends if you step in it or hit it with the mower. It's a scientific fact that mower sh-it is much older (and hence more powdery) than under-foot sh-it, which is always squishy. Hairy, Wannabe and Ed-Zulu 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splat Posted August 16, 2016 Share depends if you step in it or hit it with the mower. It's a scientific fact that mower sh-it is much older (and hence more powdery) than under-foot sh-it, which is always squishy.The mower variety is usually white and easier to see.The underfoot stuff is a bit more camouflaged Wannabe 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren_G Posted August 16, 2016 Share Piston ZA, Milkman, Lurch the stalker and 6 others 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piston ZA Posted August 16, 2016 Share She's a real world Rajesh Koothrappali . Thing is even, scientist's cant agree on Global warming ... They generally do-Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ Edited August 16, 2016 by Piston ZA Captain Fastbastard Mayhem, dman2 and Blackbeard 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pants Boy Posted August 16, 2016 Share They generally do-Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ Changes the numbers a little ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanievb Posted August 16, 2016 Share low profiles ekse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted August 16, 2016 Share Changes the numbers a little ...Yeah, but the inactive publishers aren't exactly using proper data, and ... don't publish. So there can't be any review of their work. It does change the numbers, but then it also really doesn't. Piston ZA 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piston ZA Posted August 16, 2016 Share Changes the numbers a little ...Yes, but those are the ones that count. You aren't going to go get information on climate change from other scientists such as engineers or medical scientists for instance, just like I wouldn't want to know if this bridge is strong enough or this medication is safe and effective from a climate scientist. Scientists aren't just one big bunch of nerds in white coats arguing in labs over different issues. There are different scientists specialising in different fields. And you listen to the ones who specialise and publish in peer-reviewed journals specific to the field. Edited August 16, 2016 by Piston ZA Captain Fastbastard Mayhem 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJR Posted August 16, 2016 Share Yes, but..........................And you listen to the ones who specialise and publish in peer-reviewed journals specific to the field..................as opposed to the ones on Twitter? KenG and Captain Fastbastard Mayhem 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skott5 Posted August 16, 2016 Share Captain Fastbastard Mayhem, sawystertrance, Fruity and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piston ZA Posted August 16, 2016 Share .................as opposed to the ones on Twitter? or the ones on Facebook, not sure which ones are worse. Captain Fastbastard Mayhem 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuxstir Posted August 16, 2016 Share or the ones on Facebook, not sure which ones are worse.Well any application/social media thing... which by extension of using it your know as a TWITThink must be the bigger of 2 evils... Edited August 16, 2016 by tedibear GBguy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forkie Posted August 16, 2016 Share Reminds me of this http://byrini.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/blob.gifwhich in turn reminds me of something else entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skott5 Posted August 16, 2016 Share That's tidy .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now