-
Posts
14,579 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Ramius
-
A peer-reviewed study about Wikipedia's accuracy
Ramius replied to Orton's Arm's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
What in the hell are you talking about? And you do flip-flop. All the time on your supposed "knowledge". We could do a post by post breakdown of you wavering and changing what you said. The reason? Because you dont understand what you are saying or any of the multitude of errors you have made along the way. But now, bakc to your intelligence, you have flipped back from your previous post. Now you are saying environment doesnt play a role in determining phenotype when in the previous post you said it did. (or more likely, you just posted a quote from darwin, showing that the environment greatly effects phenotype. which you misunderstood. hence the reason for your flip-flopping) The difference with you and most others is, that most others know the limit fo their knowledge. You dont. You see yourself as much more knowledgeable than you can ever hope to be. For example: I dont a lot about economics, hence the reason i sat on the sidelines and watched GG spank you in that discussion. -
A peer-reviewed study about Wikipedia's accuracy
Ramius replied to Orton's Arm's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Again, another one liner to try and cover up the fact that you have entirely no !@#$ing clue of what you are talking about. -
A peer-reviewed study about Wikipedia's accuracy
Ramius replied to Orton's Arm's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
So wait. Now you are flip-flopping yet again and finally saying that environment DOES affect genetic expression, like i have been saying all along? -
link?
-
At the very least, i hope willis990 got a reacharound from soprano along with this rumor.
-
its broken
-
link?
-
A peer-reviewed study about Wikipedia's accuracy
Ramius replied to Orton's Arm's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
once again, all bluster, no fact nor evidence. Just because oyu dont have the slighest clue of how darwinism or genetics work, you try to cover it up by not supporting your own opinion, and then claiming that other people dont know that they are talking about? But thats right, you DO know what you are talking about, because according to you, intelligence is determined by 100 genes, and if the heritability is .80, a person will get 80 intelligence genes from their parents. -
A peer-reviewed study about Wikipedia's accuracy
Ramius replied to Orton's Arm's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
No. He's not. If you had even the slightest shred of intelligence about biology and genetics, (which you have proven time and time again that you dont), you'd understand why your above statements are completely and utterly wrong. You've spectacularly displayed again and again that you have no idea how genetic information is passed on or expressed in organisms. Furthermore, you have showed no comprehension of the underlying mechanism of the passing of genetic information. Couple this with your complete lack of basic math understanding, and you have the holcombs arm perfect storm of idiocy. But heres the caveat. You dont have the slightest clue about biology or genetics. So you take your incorrect statement, pass it on as truth, and then use these falsehoods to support your other incorrect assumptions, and continue this self-propagating idiocy. -
B'gals LB Nicholson assigned to chain gang
Ramius replied to stuckincincy's topic in The Stadium Wall Archives
I wonder what his buddy Fred Rouse (the other guy who was with him) got. Rouse was a promising prospect at wR his freshman yr, but after this, he got booted from the team. The best part is how they got caught. Rouse, the WR, wore #1. At bookers apartment, they found a fair of seminoles WR gloves with #1 stitched on them. -
Ding ding ding. Crayonz has his first winner of the day.
-
This post right here captures the essence of what is wrong with the Bills fan base. We have a great optimistic post about the Bills future offense, and the "we have the worst defense" choads feel the need to piss all over everyone else's posts.
-
further the discussion. I asked you to provide a feasible explanation on how to expand the power grid. you have yet to do so. I'll add it to GG's list of open ended questions that you refuse to answer, because you cant.
-
A peer-reviewed study about Wikipedia's accuracy
Ramius replied to Orton's Arm's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
yawn. more of your useless bull sh--. -
Somebody please explain the difference between
Ramius replied to eball's topic in The Stadium Wall Archives
I believe you can guarantee the roster bonus. Either way, we are arguing semantics. Guaranteed money can be spread out over a few years/payments as opposed to a one time shot. The player is going to get his total amount of guaranteed money, regardless of the form it comes in. -
Somebody please explain the difference between
Ramius replied to eball's topic in The Stadium Wall Archives
yah you seem to be on the correct track. Signing bonus is the amount of money the player gets for signing the contract. If a player gets X dollars as a signing bonus, when he signs the contract, ralph gives him a check for X dollars. Guaranteed money is split up as you said above, but i dont think it includes 1st year salary. Its comprised of signing bonus, roster bonuses, perhaps workout bonuses, etc. Basically, guaranteed money as opposed to a signing bonus is a way of still giving the player a large amount of guaranteed money, but not having to pay all the money in one shot up front. Its basically a payment plan to pay the player his guaranteed money. -
saw a few mins of the show, and then spent the next half hour trying to figure what poster on here that the character was based off of.
-
I'm going to try the holcombs arm approach with a journal, such as nature or science. I'll submit an article claiming that cell X and chemokine Y are a cure for cancer. When they ask me for proof, i'll claim "Cell X cured something else before, so why not cancer?" I will then tell them that THEY need to prove ME wrong, even tho i have zero evidence to back up my statements.
-
Again, you dont let us down, and continue your streak of unparalleled idiocy.
-
Hell, i'd be satisfied with him showing even the slightest little bit of critical coherent thought. He could even show he's thinking by saying something like..."we can expand the power carrying capacity of the grid by switching and using superconductors to carry large amounts of electricity around the country." Now, while that technology is a step forward, and may be the way of the future, its not exactly feasible at this point in time. But at least a statement like that would show some type of critical thought, and that he's actually considering some of the new technologies being developed. But then again, this IS holcombs arm we're talking about. Critical thought and a coherent arguement arent his strong points.
-
well, use your self-proclaimed genius to show how it could feasibly be done. You say it can be done, but dont back up your opinions with even the slightest shred of evidence. Its simple. Come up with a coherent, well thought out plan to feasibly expand the power grid. Dont just say it can be done because it was done before.
-
Newsflash,. einstein: In science (something you arent overly fond of), when one is proposing a new idea, you do NOT simply state, "this is my arguement, prove it wrong" You must first PROVE your arguement feasible before you toss it around like gospel. Funny you should call for him to provide evidence, because you have yet to supply any of your own. Until you can come up with a coherent method and/or idea of how your solution will work in the future, it holds about as much merit as kelly holcomb has SB rings. ZERO! GG doesnt have to prove your steaming pile of monkey crap idea wrong, becuse you have yet to show how it could possibly work in the first place.
-
Sometimes homework IS too stressful. Especially when it involves something complicated like currency exchange.
-
All because of coaching. Booker will surprise some people this year.
-
Is there actually a reason why the drinking age is 21
Ramius replied to taterhill's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
21 drinking age is BS. If you at 18 are going to put your ass on the line in the military to defend our freedoms over here, then i should have the right to buy you a beer when you get back.