Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,291 Excellent


About ilogikal1

Recent Profile Visitors

2,537 profile views
  1. Lies. And it's not even close.
  2. Don’t believe the narrative. https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/09/418611/time-restricted-eating-doesnt-work-weight-loss
  3. I think we all know the answer to this. However, he’s merely arguing semantics for the sake of it. I do agree that the car was in the care of the garage when it was re-stolen (his point). Which is entirely irrelevant to the OP for all of the reasons you’ve already stated. More than once. But mostly because from his perspective the car was in the care of the insurance company regardless of what they did with it. As you’ve said. More than once.
  4. Expectation: Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa. Realisation: Tracey Emin's Over and Out.
  5. Okay, finally, after 7 pages of rhetoric you've answered one question. We're finally getting somewhere. I'm not going to disgree with your interpretation of the narrative coming out out Israel - in fact, above-average-height-Col has eloquantly summed that up quite nicely as it happens - but rather I'm simply going to ask for your understanding of the following links? I've kept them as brief as possible to prevent getting distracted from the point; World Health Organisation's standpoint The British Society for Immunology standpoint It might be worth noti
  6. I don’t know what your height has to do with any of this, Col.
  7. Going back to your point about following the data and not the “emotional dogma”; present your data. Put up or shut up.
  8. So, no you can’t provide the data then? Well, what an unexpected outcome that is…
  9. You haven't answered a single question in this entire thread! Humour me. If it's such common knowledge, you shouldn't find it difficult.
  10. On the basis that there are instances of re-infection: Present your study(ies) to confirm your statements.
  11. Alright, I’ll say it; That popular opinion was wrong once does not equate to all popular opinions being wrong. The mere concept that one must lead to the other is textbook conspiracy theorists little-picture thinking. I will just say, you don't understand the situation in front of you and your post(s) confirms as much.
  12. I also thought UK Z’s had an 80 litre tank actually. Either way, the gauge is more of an estimate than an actual reading due to the way it works, shape of the tank and movement of the contents. It’s mostly related to the shape of the tank more than anything, unless it’s a cube (which most aren’t) on a flat plane (which depends on where the car is), it’s going to give a false reading one way or another. You also need to account for over a decade’s worth of gunk that’ll be sitting in your tank, effectively reducing the volume of fuel it can hold too (albeit not by that much
  13. That you don't know this - or rather, that you're pretending not to know this - tells everyone everything they need to know about your "research".
  14. Woah, hold up! If we applied that sort of thinking around here, no one would post anything (other than directing people to Alex for parts, of course).
  • Create New...