Dave 20's Liked Comments

Why bother capturing them? It would be much more efficient and safer to just kill them on sight. It's the best way to deal with an invasive species like that.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Something similar happened outside my house once. A cop pulled a car over on the street by my house, and I watched as the driver failed his sobriety test. About the time he was handcuffed, another car pulled in behind the cruiser and the driver got out & argued with the cop, presumably about letting the first guy go. That guy got and failed the sobriety test, and was stuffed into the back of the cruiser with his buddy. Meanwhile, the girlfriend of the first guy had been sitting in the passenger seat of the car, but now the car was about to be towed, so the cops shooed her out and on her way. She saw the lights on at my house & came knocking at my door, looking for a place to sleep. I told her to get lost, so she proceeded to try & break into my garage. I alerted the cops who were waiting for the second tow truck, and girlfriend got handcuffed & hauled away.

That was an interesting night.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Art? I don't think so, Tim.

I'm surprised he was allowed to keep the fat after the procedure. I recently lost two teeth when a tumor on my jaw was excised for biopsy, and lobbied hard to be able to keep the teeth, but wasn't that wasn't allowed.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The visceral hatred expressed in comments like SquidCap's make me laugh, and it tells me Rand must've been right on. What's scary is seeing so many of the outlandish leftist ideas portrayed in the book coming true today.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
  1 reply
A 16oz glass of water has a 16oz impact? Not likely, unless you're drinking straight out of the ground. If it's treated at all, it's about a 2-to-1 ratio of water used to get potable water. And if it's been purified by reverse osmosis (most bottled water, and many home water purifiers) it's more like 4-to-1.

And like others have said, water is used over and over and over again; it doesn't go away easily. I read once that the water flowing through the Thames has been drank many times over. Ewww.

Also, aren't we gaining a bunch of fresh water with the melting ice caps and glaciers? Global Warming Bonus!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
"Slower than a goldfish." Ummm... That's what most people would call a lame comparison, especially considering that the goldfish has a serious home-field advantage in the water.

Nice try, anarchy, but those examples aren't going to enjoy the cash quite as much as Mike will.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
@Neatoramawontsendmeapassword: "Okay, Dave. Let’s keep burning oil. I’m sure the athletes in China right now who have to wear face masks due to the pollution will be very glad you’ve decided this for them."

Internal combustion engines is the least of the problems China faces when it comes to pollution.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
@sparge: "but what does the greenhouse effect have to do with abiogenesis of petroleum?"

The current drive in politics is to wean us off petroleum-based energy, and the global warming — or is it global climate change now? — "crisis" is driving that. The peak oil theory — we're going to run out of oil someday — is being used to reinforce the need to move away from oil. So if the abiogenic petroleum origin hypothesis is true, we're not going to run out, which removes one of the scare tactics from the global warming crowd's arsenal.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Another aspect of the abiogenic petroleum origin hypothesis you mentioned in #2 is that it's an ongoing process. The thing that caused Russian scientists to look into it in the first place is that oil wells that were thought to have been depleted would suddenly go back into production.

It's even happened in wells in the US, but the theory still gets pooh-poohed by scientists here because they seem to be so sold on the "carbon emissions = death of the planet" thinking.

Just think; if #2 is true, #10 is moot.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
No bean; first it got the anti-Jesus blogspam. Simple chronology to follow.

And for the record, if Alex's information is correct, the title of #10 is at best misleading. "Christianity" didn't kill the ancient Olympics, it was Emperor Theodosius I who did it "in part to institute Christianity as a state religion." That statement implies that there were other reasons for doing away with the games.

Yet another case of using a dramatic headline to instigate the inevitable flame war that followed. A not-so-neat bit in an otherwise neat post.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Ach dammit; all you gun hating maniacs sicken me. And you really believe what you’re spewing around. You really do believe it. I am deeply saddened by the lack of autonomous thinking ability displayed in the US nowadays

Take that fluff. If you don't like the 2nd Amendment, then change it. Or at least try. And good luck with that.

Praise the Lord & pass me another clip!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The one in the Guinness bottles is more interesting; it's called the Rocket Widget, because it looks like a little rocket. The first time I bought a six-pack of bottles I thought something had come loose in the dispensing line at the factory; sad to say, my first thought was "product liability lawsuit". Instead I wrote a post about it on my buddy Deane's site, Gadgetopia. (wow! that was 3 years ago!)
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.


Page 1 of 2       next

Profile for Dave 20

  • Member Since 2012/08/04


Statistics

Comments

  • Threads Started 647
  • Replies Posted 0
  • Likes Received 20
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More