zapatos

Who in the fuck do you think you are?!?! Did you consider a disability might not allow me to use Youtube successfully? So you mean in 12 years when we are at "peak mission capability" of the AB? That's when they'll no longer be functional? Now you are just being asinine.

No thanks. So when you said I'd be "100% wrong", you meant I'd be 100% wrong in about 20 years. I can't tell you how shocked I am to learn that a statement I made about our current military capability won't be accurate 20 years from now. Perhaps you overstated things just a bit.

Got anything besides Youtube? When will they be gone?

Hmm. I thought we were still building them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer

The problem is that you speak with a confidence that doesn't match your level of knowledge, and you are intransigent with respect to your mistaken beliefs. I suspect you will find very few places that will accept your style of discussion.

Although for some, it is eat, mate, and eat your mate.

One of the many problems is that you are equating mass and volume, which means that YOU are saying that Volume is "just, and only the weight of a substance at sea level on earth, translated to inertia needed to move a certain amount of the substance at a certain velocity over a specific time

To me, "Bill" means "pompous". Doesn't it get tiring getting your jollies by swimming against the current all day long?

I don't believe any of your questions actually answer the question I asked. You are the one who brought up gender in the conspiracy thread, not me.

This falls right in line with Alex's concerns. If there is no more evidence to support your view of gender and sexual orientation than there is to support the 'dozens' of genders and sexual orientations others believe in, how can you tell which is the 'truth' and which is the whacked out conspiracy?

The reason conspiracy theories fail is that they don't have the same level of evidence as the scientifically supported, generally accepted 'truth'. Is there a scientifically supported, generally accepted 'truth' to the 'real' genders and sexual orientations that you are referring to?

So what do you think happened at Sandy Hook and Boston?

Can you make your case here, providing evidence, that these events were not what they seemed?

Sorry, what bombing?

Have you found a conspiracy theory that turned out to be true?

That's not what the article said. The article said the government requested one private company to remove a handful of tweets on one narrow topic. I fail to see how that equates to a country disallowing dissent. As far as I can tell you are railing against an issue that doesn't actually exist.

Is anyone here arguing against that? Do any democratic countries disallow dissent?

There is a better way.. I propose that we proactively fight to undo our contribution to climate change and convert solar and wind power to electric generation wherever possible. Or so it seems to me (:-

Mass and matter are not the same thing. Mass can change.

Hmm. Good reasoning. That makes me feel better about the possibility of nuclear war. Its duration will be short compared to the life of the earth. The number of nuclear weapons is limited. Either we explode them all or leave some of them in their silos, and our planet will recover; with or without us.

Everyone thinks it is inevitable. You seem to have not heard that there is concern that humans are impacting climate change and that as a result are due to suffer some self-inflicted harm.

You seem to be arguing for perfection. I think our limit may be 'best effort'.

Is Catholicism considered a more reasonable manifestation? Catholics drink wine and eat hosts not as a symbol of the body and blood of Christ, but as the literal body and blood of Christ. Seems pseudosciency to me. Surely that is a testable claim.

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits

I think that is more of a goal than a requirement. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/harold-meyerson-the-myth-of-maximizing-shareholder-value/2014/02/11/00cdfb14-9336-11e3-84e1-27626c5ef5fb_story.html