Ferrouswheel

Sure! I'm just finishing up another trade right now. Should be done in a few minutes.

I'll see you on - thank you ^^

i thought that is said with not without... you can cmt for a freebee to make up for it

hey man im sorry, i deleted that post. i was wrong but from my point of view i thought you were just being a dick. i am sorry and i know that im the dick ><

dude i did get it right. ingrain(1/16)+ aqua ring(1/16)= 1/8
leftovers(1/16)+ raindish/rain(1/16)= 1/8
making a grand total of 25% + leech seed
how was that wrong?

Sure, would you be available to trade later today?

It looks perfect! Is there anything in my thread that you would be interested in for it?

thanks man.

ev'd is fine

I'll take that one anyways then.

Now is good to trade if ready. I'll go on wifi momentarily.

Done!

Thank you for Gengar! :)

Ah, ok, i'll be there in a second :P

Ok i'm on Wi-Fi. (Pearl FC, yes?)

Ok I'm ready :) Could we do this quick? I have to go in ~5 minutes :P

Hello, could I pick up that Gengar in 15 minutes? Be right back ;p

Yes, I want your Mence. But I can't trade today, sorry.

When a thread is stupid enough that it does not deserve a lock. Examples include troll threads and threads that link to illegal content.

same here thanks again :)

Yeah, I'd say that geography knowledge is one of the least measures of intelligence. You simply don't use it every day and therefore you're more liable to forget it rather than retain it like...math, for instance. But it's definitely a better measure than English, as being able to read should be something most people in developed countries can do (although I'm again, not completely sure in America since a lot of people I know, even news anchors, use "like" "totally" and abuse conjunctions often) so geography def. places higher than that. For polls being skewed, I'm certain of that. I'm positive that they ask a question before asking any of these to make sure they get a certain kind of people to answer. Such as asking level of education and making sure plenty of them didn't have a lot (what was it...38% at high school level?). Or possibly asking how smart they think they are, or something along those lines. Not entirely sure, but I think that's something they (the pollers) would do.

Ah well, that may be right, of course. I'm sure it was well done (although I am very skeptical of your first poll). I just have a natural bias against polls, I suppose. Anyway, I would just feel better if they at least specified the term, you know? Like saying Texans as if it applies to all Texans when in reality they only tested voters. They could have at least said Texas Voters. But this is just me ranting. You're right, pretty much. :) Glad I chose to VM you, btw, as I've been VMing another guy for a while and you're quite a bit more intelligent :P

Didn't see that at all o.O Oh, under the graph, I see it now. 800 voters, though. So saying "Texans" is already an inaccurate claim. I'm sure that in a population of 24,782,302, there are at least 100,000 voters. 800 / 100,000 = 8 / 100 = 2 / 25. It's really not that big of a section of Texas at all, probably. If this is not the case, the case being there are at least 100,000 voters (probably way more, even), there are a lot of children in Texas. Which is why I am against studies like this altogether. There are few polls and surveys that I even trust, and this is certainly not one of them.

My problem with that one was that they just said 1/3 of all texans, said 1/10 texans, they never cited how many people they actually tested; they only cited who did the testing. "Most of the Texans in the survey" doesn't imply that they tested all Texans. I'd go on a limb to say they didn't test even 50% of them. Without raw data available, and merely results, the survey is unbelievable. I could survey my 3 brothers, all 3 could say that Dinosaurs lived with People, and I disagree, and then I could say "Most of the Kentuckians in the survey believed this" while no one actually knew the number. I'm sure it's in that book they mentioned, but I'm also sure that it's not actually representative of Texas like it was made out to be.

Well, firstly, that was in May 2006, nearly 4 years ago. Secondly, " 510 young Americans" is not very good for a survey, especially when you made the claim to Americans. Over 380 million people live in America and probably a good 60% of them are over the age of 18. A poor survey and poor facts, and they must have been really young if they couldn't identify China. Everyone can tell which one is China because besides India and Russia it's twice / thrice as big as the other countries.