~happyndinlove~

No, flirting is not harmless. It sends a signal to the person you're flirting with that you're interested and available, even if that's not the message you're trying to send.

if the person is with someone already, flirting = cheating..It's just that simple.

####### kind of porn do you like to watch?

Your questions are amongst the most profound that can be asked. What came before? What is the starting point?
No one has definite answers, and I won't pretend that I do.
But I can shed some light on this. I posted on this once or twice before on similar VJ threads, a search can bring them up.
Essentially, in classical Newtonian physics we think of a universe with 3 spatial dimensions and a 4th temporal dimension that in theory can extend to infinity both forward and back. In other words, you can imagine events taking place as far off in the past or the future as you like .. there is no limit to how far time reaches. This is a conception of the universe most of us are most naturally comfortable with. It corresponds to our perceptions of reality.
However, General Relativity has given us a significantly different perspective on the nature of time, space, and the universe. In essence all 4 dimensions (3 spatial, one temporal) are intricately interwoven into the fabric of the material universe. They both define the universe and are defined by it. Spacetime essentially defines geodesics (shortest line curves) between any two massive bodies interacting through gravitational attraction. What this means is that only when you have a universe populated with massive bodies (stars, galaxies, quasars etc.) can you even have spacetime as the "stuff" that gives structure to the shape and dimensionality of the universe. As bodies move with respect to each other, they literally warp spacetime itself.
So, to return to your questions of what came "before" , the way you need to think of this in the context of General Relativity is that the very notion of "time", of "before/after", only makes sense when the universe exists and spacetime exists. "Before the big-bang" there is no "time" or "space" at all.
Hope that helps.
As to the eventual death of the universe, a black hole suck isn't very likely.
The cosmological options are really two: (1) heat death (2) the big crunch.
Heat death means the expanding universe keeps expanding forever, smearing out the energy and matter of the universe over larger and larger geometries until eventually the energy density per any unit volume is so low that we're effectively at absolute zero kelvin throughout the universe - we've literally frozen to death.
The big crunch means that the expansion eventually slows, then stops, then reverses back into a contraction phase due to gravity. That assumes there's enough matter (visible and dark) to pull itself back together through gravity. In that scenario, we eventually contract everything back to a point singularity, as we were at the big bang.
The current physics, as I understand it, is that this is unlikely. Gravity is a very weak inverse-square-law force and there is simply isn't enough matter (including dark matter) to overcome the inertial force of the currently expanding universe. We're on our way to heat death in another 10-20 billion years or so, apparently.

I raised so many questions and they are ignored.
I will ask a simple question.
For those who have bird feeder, do you bring your bird feeder out in the spring or in the winter.?
PS. I love the kid !!! regardless.

I feel pity for those who lost the sense of humanity and the are of forgiving. Good luck nailing your nail.

Two ways to handle things in life:
We let our ego control us or we control our ego! I feel pity for a man when his ego dictates his life. The more your scratch your rash the more it will itch. (Ego in action)
My 2 cents!

Don't worry. That won't stop them from asking for even more money when you come to marry your rich Kano. Don't expect any gratitude then either, as you will be just doing your duty as a good daughter: "Don't forget us when you go to America!"

That's it?

No wait,ok ok, huh face

Wait wait,hmmm, angry face

Wait, c'mon, I can do this, sad face

Ouch, that hurt. Not!

Stereotypes are generalizations or assumptions that people make about the characteristics of all members of a group, based on an image about what people in that group are like.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Noq_oR1a0gs

VJ has it's very own Dr. Phil?

IMO, This thread is totally derailed.
TCO:
Why would you use this thread for an illegal's debate platform?
This thread is about the murdering of a Pinay by her (monster) husband...it seems pretty callous that you would seize an opportunity to spew anti-illegal's rhetoric on this thread....you have been posting your opinion regarding illegal's on various threads...most if not all of the threads (where you are doing this) have nothing to do with illegal aliens....here's an idea.....Start a (new) illegal alien thread!
btw....good to see that you are (at least attempting to) reading. Keep it up! It might open your mind to ideas you haven't thought of or been exposed to.

some of what was been posted are sterotypical generaliztions, not facts. some of us can tell the difference.

I'm probably going to open myself up to a a few ricks of flaming but, here goes.
First, may I ask a question Please?
When has "war" ever been about anything other than economic growth or religion? (scratch Helen of Troy off the list please )
Second, In response to your statement.
Ying-Yang. With "war has come many inventions, improvements in technology, sociological change (good and bad), inter-mixing of race, improvements, for some, in quality of life, and on and on.
Evolution, Sociology and Humanity might respond;

Go take a look at OT.

That was a good try. Reverse psychology doesn't often work on me.
Let me make this a little more clear for you.
I enjoy the P&R content.
I am not someone else's sock puppet. I don't post in P&R with any profile other than "Vi-Jay".
The first post I wrote in P&R was in the Kobe Bryant slur thread.
I have not used any other profile in P&R and I have never interacted with you in the P&R forum before that day.
I choose to be anonymous so that I can express myself colorfully. Otherwise my wife would not allow my style of expression because she finds my use of profanity vulgar and my off color humor, crude.
Please let me be! You are starting to seem like a stalker.
A DFH stalker! It's creepy.

do you believe everything you see in the movies...

OK....I'm fine with that. I'm content to see his post gone.
Thanks for responding quickly.
How the mods gonna stop him from repeating his statement? This is not the first time he has made comments like this...? What's your advice?

OK....I'm fine with that. I'm content to see his post gone.
Thanks for responding quickly.
How the mods gonna stop him from repeating his statement? This is not the first time he has made comments like this...? What's your advice?

OK....I'm fine with that. I'm content to see his post gone.
Thanks for responding quickly.
How the mods gonna stop him from repeating his statement? This is not the first time he has made comments like this...? What's your advice?

OK....I'm fine with that. I'm content to see his post gone.
Thanks for responding quickly.
How the mods gonna stop him from repeating his statement? This is not the first time he has made comments like this...? What's your advice?

OK....I'm fine with that. I'm content to see his post gone.
Thanks for responding quickly.
How the mods gonna stop him from repeating his statement? This is not the first time he has made comments like this...? What's your advice?

IMO, This thread is totally derailed.
TCO:
Why would you use this thread for an illegal's debate platform?
This thread is about the murdering of a Pinay by her (monster) husband...it seems pretty callous that you would seize an opportunity to spew anti-illegal's rhetoric on this thread....you have been posting your opinion regarding illegal's on various threads...most if not all of the threads (where you are doing this) have nothing to do with illegal aliens....here's an idea.....Start a (new) illegal alien thread!
btw....good to see that you are (at least attempting to) reading. Keep it up! It might open your mind to ideas you haven't thought of or been exposed to.

Democrats seek to slash subsidies for 'Big Oil'
Democrats seek to slash $2B a year in subsidies for 5 largest oil companies
Andrew Taylor, Associated Press, On Tuesday May 10, 2011, 1:43 pm
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats running the Senate are seeking to strip the five biggest oil companies of tax breaks that pad their profits by $2 billion a year and instead use the money to help defray the spiraling budget deficit.
New legislation unveiled Tuesday by Sens. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., and Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, would cut off immensely profitable companies like Shell Oil and Exxon Mobil from subsidies such as a deduction originally aimed at boosting manufacturing. The bill would also close a loophole that effectively allows oil companies to shield themselves from taxes by deducting royalties paid to foreign governments.
The top five oil companies have booked profits of $36 billion in the first quarter of this year alone. The Democrats say that at those levels the big oil companies wouldn't miss the subsidies.
Republicans and a handful of oil state Democrats like Mary Landrieu of Louisiana are expected to filibuster the bill to death. An earlier version was opposed by seven Democrats on a filibuster vote in February, but Democratic leaders have now narrowed the legislation to permit smaller producers to continue to claim the subsidies.
The issue is back in the wake of comments last month by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, who said in a television interview that Congress "certainly ought to take a look at" eliminating the subsidies. He quickly backed away from the comments.
Democrats say getting rid of the subsidies is a no-brainer when the government is running deficits that require it to borrow more than 40 cents of every dollar it spends.
"If we can't do this. If we can't remove subsidies from these profitable big oil companies, then I don't know if we can ever get to the really difficult work that lies ahead," McCaskill said. "This ought to be the essence of low-hanging fruit."
Republican opponents say the companies would simply raise prices if the measure became law.
Menendez acknowledged that the legislation -- slated for a vote next week -- won't do anything about gas prices exceeding $4 a gallon in many places.
The measure would also eliminate the so-called oil depletion allowance for the five oil companies. That allowance permits producers a tax deduction comparable to the break given manufacturers for depreciation of the value of an investment in plants and equipment.
The other companies that would be affected by the legislation are BP, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips.
"It's a shame that this industry hasn't been appreciated for all of the good that it does," Landrieu said.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Would somebody please find that man and give him a real hard kick in the nuts?
and, Does anybody agree that Oil companies would "simply raise prices"?

There is the difference, between somebody that has a plan, and somebody that just complains about everything.