Sears went belly up, too. Now it's merged with KMart and they gave up the symbol. Sprint was FON until late 2013.
Oops, I meant to show T Mobile rates. http://www.t-mobile.com/cell-phone-plans.html?nav=PhonePlans If you are really paying T-mobile $180 a month for 2 lines and aren't financing your phones you're really taking it in the ass. Something doesn't add up. Maybe it's time for Mrs Crane to take over the bill paying.
The $180 includes payments on two iPhones. You are arguing what my bill is? I see it every month. Geez.
So you are financing your phones, lol. So that $180/month includes payments of the phones in the bill. You're scaring me, you confuse 3G service with 3gigs of data, then you suddenly have more than 3gigs of data, then you are financing your phones, then you bought them outright, and now suddenly you're financing your phones again. Seriously, you need to let an adult take over bill paying duties. This is fun!
It is you that are confused. You ask how big my data plan is, and I responded with the amount. Where you get that anyone is selling 3G network anymore is rather stupid. If you were trying to be funny, not so much. I said I was financing the phones many posts ago. There's no "suddenly" except for your comprehension. Even with POTS too, you had to finance your phones. Buy them our rent from the phone company. Splitting the phone companies did no good. The prices for services went up. The Bells have merged into 2 or 3 giant companies. It's moronic to repeat past failures thinking this time it's going to work. Sanders wants to repeat them and has no regard or clue about the harm it will cause. Two writers, at least, at the WaPost caught it, and analysis pieces across the political spectrum conclude Sanders botched that interview, raised a lot of concern about his actual worthiness for office, and that killed his chances to do well in the New York primary. He was behind by less than 10 points in the previous polls and lost by 30. You claim to not be a democrat, but I'm sure you'll post some of the Sanders talking points anyway. It was such a huge gaffe that the election is basically over. Instead of the media focusing on the brain dead 27,000 at his rally, they talked about his gaffes.
3G is different than 3 or 6gigs of data. TWO...DIFFERENT...THINGS. So what is it with your plan? If you're really paying $180 for 2 lines and not financing your phones that is really high. If you are financing your phones that's not an accurate comparison to the cost of a land line. You're the one jumping all over the place, I'm just having fun with it. As far as Sanders goes I've said many times that I don't agree with him on many things but I appreciate that he's in the race. There is nothing scary or communist or will make this country socialist in what he is saying. You make these wild over-exaggerations and then want to argue about them.
Lead is poisonous. CO2 is not until 60,000 PPM. The atmosphere is ~400 PPM. Talk about your apples to oranges comparison. Do you need me to explain the abbreviations?
The image you posted said, "None of the last environmental predictions in the last 45 years have come true." You are correct, lead is poisonous. It was predicted that by removing lead from gasoline we would reduce lead levels in the environment. There have been many correct predictions concerning the environment over the last 45 years, I just went with one even you could understand. Now, knowing how you like to build strawmen and post multiple articles without really reading them, lets see if I can nip your rant in the bud. I'm not saying that all environmental predictions are correct. I'm also not saying there haven't been many that were/are wrong. You're the one who posted the image saying none were true. I am saying that the image you posted is factually wrong. This is fun!
I've always known you don't really read the articles you post but you don't even read a couple of lines of text in the image you posted?!? Psst.. no where in that image does it mention Global Warming.
It came from an article published today. I read it earlier. Handy in response to the BINGO image which doesn't mention "global warming." These kinds of failed predictions makes me question the same sort from the same sources. Get a life. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/22/seven-earth-day-predictions-that-failed-spectacularly/ I'm afraid to use big words or abbreviations. You're so easily confused.
Regardless, the OP isn't about global warming, specifically. It's about an increasing number of peer reviewed papers that are being rescinded because they are plagiarized, contain concocted or altered data, and other sorts of fraud. In all areas of science, public and private. If jlprk wants to make it into a global warming thing, he's probably right that some of those papers are also frauds. I didn't bring it up. If crandc wants to make it about religion, she has that right. The OP had nothing to do with religion or any religious sources. They use big words at NYU, I hear. http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/weinberg.html
Confucius reverse-said that a sentence is worth a thousand pictures, so I'll try: Denny: Predictions by 1974 environmentalists didn't come true. Sly: That's because regulations were pased to make sure they didn't.
Denny: predictions the ice caps would be all melted by 2012 didn't come true. Many many of the "fire and brimstone, the earth is ending" ones never do. Denny: and that's one of hundreds of examples.
