Wouldn't be profitable. Lots of smaller ships use more oil than one big tanker in the same way that lots of smaller cars use more gas than a bus. And the ships run on gas, which means more oild has to be refined to make gasoline, which means they make less money. Eventually, they'd stop bothering with oil because they couldn't make enough money off of it, then there would be NO oil, until we agreed to allow oil companies use the tankers again.
Thecomplaining thread. For depression.
#1396
Posted 19 December 2005 - 02:49 PM
Wouldn't be profitable. Lots of smaller ships use more oil than one big tanker in the same way that lots of smaller cars use more gas than a bus. And the ships run on gas, which means more oild has to be refined to make gasoline, which means they make less money. Eventually, they'd stop bothering with oil because they couldn't make enough money off of it, then there would be NO oil, until we agreed to allow oil companies use the tankers again.
#1397
Posted 19 December 2005 - 03:10 PM
"And the Evil that was vanquished shall rise anew. Wrapped in the guise of man shall he walk amongst the innocent and Terror shall consume they that dwell upon the Earth. The skies will rain fire. The seas shall become as blood. The righteous shall fall before the wicked! And all creation shall tremble before the burning standards of Hell!" - Mephisto
Kurgan X showed me this web comic done with Legos. It pokes fun at all six Star Wars films and I found it to be extremely entertaining.
<a href="http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/cast/starwars.html" target="_blank">http://www.irregularwebcomic.net/cast/starwars.html</a>
#1398
Posted 19 December 2005 - 08:08 PM
i think that makes the most sense.
you know, like all the rich assholes ho drives SUVs to work and clog the highways with one person per vehicle.
then when you ask them why they don't catch the bus, they say because the traffics so bad.
assholes. let's see how they feel about their logic when oil is delivered to them as innefficiently as they are to work.
Also: The Chefelf.com Lord of the Rings | RoBUTZ (a primative webcomic) | KOTOR 1 NPC profiles |
Music: HYPOID (industrial rock) | Spectrox Toxemia (Death Metal) | Cannibalingus (80s style thrash metal) | Wasabi Nose Bleed (Exp.Techno) | DeadfeeD (Exp.Ambient) |||(more to come)
#1399
Posted 21 December 2005 - 02:18 AM
You're just getting that now? We've had those ads for years. Actually, by you're description, I'd say you're seeing our castoffs.
JM's official press secretary, scientific advisor, diplomat and apparent antagonist?
#1401
Posted 21 December 2005 - 07:14 PM
Chyld is an ignorant slut.
- Campbell Bean (David Tennant), Takin' Over the Asylum, 1994
#1402
Posted 29 December 2005 - 12:49 PM
#1404
Posted 29 December 2005 - 09:47 PM
('But pay for the NHS' is an alternative)
Good point, I like that, should be called; National Holocaust Service, backed up by what is put into the cigars.
http://www.netdoctor...ctory_00508.htm
I have nothing against smoking, as I breathe in smoke everyday from incense sticks and for centuries, people rarely suffered from severe illnesses as they commonly do now. My main concern is what goes into a cigar, just like food. Recently they found that smokers are safer than the people breathing in the smoke. I'd say this is making gas camps out of people. Sadly from my experience on asking around, it appears these cigarette companies brain wash people into believing that this is how a cigar is meant to be made, as well as a warning label. I have never seen a healthy cigarette sold in a shop before, maybe from imports on sites.
If I want to smoke, will make my own using dry leaves, plants and filters or will buy from places that sell organic ones free of toxic.
Too much of one thing is not good as most know, but secretly adding toxic materials obviously known to damage health is unacceptable, worst of all with their brainwashing tactics.
Just my views on cigarettes.
This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 29 December 2005 - 09:49 PM
#1405
Posted 29 December 2005 - 10:00 PM
A solution I would use is to be specific to a point in an honest manner, but always add in fact and detail on non important information as the negative side and inconvenience, as if you were expecting more. Not sure if that would work in your case.
Do not know the real situation, but it sounds like they could not be bothered maybe for other reasons.
This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 29 December 2005 - 10:03 PM
#1407
Posted 29 December 2005 - 10:13 PM
A stove for what?
Or was that for someone else?
#1409
Posted 29 December 2005 - 10:33 PM
If that is the case, it is a bit patronising considering all the food she will be missing.
Well I do not go to many parties myself, only when buying of someone and seeing what food I can get.
This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 29 December 2005 - 10:45 PM