****Fresh random image thread (with rule addition)Every post MUST contain an image!****

Status
Not open for further replies.
3522gzk.jpg
 
Last edited:
2012-02-14110021.jpg

Was it a document explaining time travel?
Never mind 12 minutes, he goes back and relives a whole day at the top of the list. Wish I could do that when I've got looming deadlines.
As much as I wish I had the ability to time travel, somewhat disappointingly, the inconsistencies are due to the view being sorted by name, which puts the folders at the top, and I named my final document '...V16 FINAL', which put it 'alphabetically' before '...V16'.

Or perhaps that's just what I want you to think...
 
I don't even...

The most that will happen is some of the water will be turned into gas due to being boiled. That does not separate the covalent and hydrogen bonding in the molecule. You'd use electrolysis for that.


It's talking about the oxygen dissolved in the water not the oxygen that makes up the h2o



62062d82jw1dki834cgbvj.jpg
 
Ah, that's correct. I had forgotten about that. Although I wasn't aware it made that much of a difference in tap water, as I was under the impression that high O2 concentration in water led to quick oxidation of metals, and so they kept it low. Guess you learn something new everyday.

act1_h2ochart.gif
 
since when was buying stolen goods that were presented as legally obtained made illegal? surely the punishment should go to the seller, not the buyer who had literally no idea it was stolen?

(although it wouldnt surprise me if unwittingly buying stolen goods was illegal)

vSzB1.jpg
 
Last edited:
since when was buying stolen goods that were presented as legally obtained made illegal? surely the punishment should go to the seller, not the buyer who had literally no idea it was stolen?

(although it wouldnt surprise me if unwittingly buying stolen goods was illegal)

If you had no idea that the goods were stolen (and no reason to suspect otherwise) then in theory at least your title to them should be unchallenged since it would be unfair to penalise you for anothers wrongdoing. However if you're buying mp3s for £0.10 and everywhere else is selling them for £0.99 then you've got to be asking questions about the legitimacy of your purchase - I don't care how nice you think the dodgy seller is, they're not going to regularly sell below market price out of the goodness of their hearts, the reason they can consistently undercut the market is because they don't have the same overheads as the rest (i.e. legitimacy).

Who's%20a%20good%20bowl.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom