LOL!!
You're right - it's terrible!
the medical nurse at a convent, requests a meeting with the mother superior, the priest and the archbishop.. "and why have you requested this meeting, my child?
" asks the mother superior.. "reverend mother, there is a case of syphilis in the convent.".
"well, thank god for that - i'm sick to death of the chardonnay.".
LOL!!
You're right - it's terrible!
.
http://trunks.secondfoundation.org/files/psychic.swf
I've had a few goes. It looks like its based on some sort of mathematical probability and/or possibility - all the times I tried, it came up with the symbol for no.36 even if I focussed on a different symbol.
Over to the mathematicians for a more detailed explanation!
after witnessing the aftermath of katrina and what she did to the unprepared evacuees, mozz and i decided it was time to put together our emergency evacuation plan.
we started by simply going to www.redcross.org.
there is a search engine on the top right side of their website and i entered "emergency disaster plan".
Thanks Andi it's an important point and I'll check out the link later.
I was listening to a radio programme last Saturday where they were discussing how unprepared we are for large scale disasters in the UK, simply because they are so rare here. Many homes don't even have the basics - a first aid kit, bottled water etc, let alone a complete plan.
I think the media are going to try raising awareness as we're supposed to have a really bad winter this year.
i'm not looking fwd to going to the grocery store this evening.
i imagine that by now, most of what we should have on hand will be empty shelves in the stores.
we're gonna try and get some shtuff in here and begin cooking tomorrow.
(((()))) be safe all you guys over the pond.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html
here are my results...... 1. jehovah's witness (100%) 2. church of jesus christ of latter-day saints (mormons) (94%) 3. mainline to conservative christian/protestant (78%) 4. orthodox quaker (73%) 5. seventh day adventist (59%) 6. mainline to liberal christian protestants (59%) 7. baha'i faith (55%) 8. eastern orthodox (53%) 9. roman catholic (53%) 10. orthodox judaism (51%) 11. .
jainism (49%) 12. liberal quakers (49%) 13. hinduism (46%) 14. theravada buddhism (46%) 15. mahayana buddhism (45%) 16. christian science (church of christ, scientist) (43%) 17. islam (40%) 18. sikhism (36%) 19. unitarian universalism (34%) 20. neo-pagan (33%) 21. new age (32%) 22. new thought (28%) 23. taoism (27%) 24. reform judaism (26%) 25. secular humanism (26%) 26. scientology (23%) 27. nontheist (18%) .
Methinks I am one spiritually sick puppy
1. | Bahá'í Faith (100%) |
this show was broadcast yesterday [mon' 19th august].
it is fantastic and will resonate with so many here.
if you can listen to this while working or have 30 minutes to spare then click the link below, you will not be dissapointed!.
Thanks nicolau. I listened to it yesterday but forgot to post! It is worth listening to.
There was one part I found hilarious - the first interviewee (the old lady) comparing the sudden realisation that she wasn't a Catholic with having an orgasm.
Hmm, can't say that was my experience - wonder if I should rejoin and leave again to check I got it right...
let's play!!!!!!
do you have any free online gamelinks that do not require much downloads and so forth.. check out this one...it's addictive.
http://www.shockwave.com/sw/content/bookworm.
http://www.specialbus.com/
Awww shera, ya beat me to it!!
I'm still trying out all the games and recommending it to everyone - one of my customers told me off last week cos her hubby is now totally hooked!
.
i went to comet yesterday and bought a new tv, it cost 1300 so ofcourse we handled it with utmost care all the way home.. when we got it home we took it out of the packaging to discover a huge crack all the way down the screen.. so i phoned up the customer service helpline and was put through to the store we bought it from, and spoke to the most unhelpfullest people on the planet, they denied all responsibility but eventually agreed to send an engineer round to fix it tomorrow.. then today i got a phone call from their repair department saying that the engineer was booked in error and that i should contact phillips, the makers of the tv.. so i phoned phillips and they said i should contact the store for a refund or exchange.. so i just phoned the store back and spoke to one of the muppets from the office who again denied it was their fault and said she will speak to the repair department again and call me back.. does anyone know what i can do about this or what i'm entitled to?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/watchdog/guides_to/consumerlaw/index2.shtml
SALE OF GOODS
Together with the law applying to services, these are the only laws that every consumer should really know by heart.
While laws concerning sale of goods date back 100 years, the only phrase you need to memorise is 'The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended)'.
The 'as amended' is important because it refers to laws which have extended the basic 1979 Act and using the phrase tells the trader that not only do you know basic consumer law, you know it has been amended too.
The Sale of Goods Acts lay down several conditions that all goods sold by a trader must meet. The goods must be:
'Satisfactory quality' covers minor and cosmetic defects as well as substantial problems. It also means that products must last a reasonable time. But it does not give you any rights if a fault was obvious or pointed out to you at point of sale.
'As described' refers to any advertisement or verbal description made by the trader.
'Fit for purpose' covers not only the obvious purpose of an item but any purpose you queried and were given assurances about by the trader.
If something you buy from a trader does not meet these conditions, you are entitled to a full refund if you return the goods soon after purchase. Otherwise you are first and foremost entitled to have the goods repaired or replaced.
If these remedies are inappropriate, then you are entitled to a suitable price reduction, or to return the goods and get a refund (reduced to take account of any wear and tear).
The Act covers second-hand items and sales. But if you buy privately, your only entitlement to your money back is if the goods are not 'as described'.
If goods which are expected to last 6 months, do not do so it will be presumed that the goods did not conform to the contract at the time they were bought, unless the trader can prove to the contrary.
In all other situations, it is for the consumer to prove his/her own case (i.e. that the problem existed at the time of the contract). This will prove more difficult, the longer you have had the goods. Subject to this, a consumer has six years from the time he/she buys something in which to make a claim.
You only have a relatively short period to get a full refund. After this time, you will be deemed to have 'accepted' the item. If it then turns out to faulty, you will have to claim compensation - see Enforcing the Law
Ellie, you're entitled to reject the tv as unfit for purpose - go back to the store and say 'I am rejecting the tv as unfit for purpose/unsatisfactory under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 as amended' This should mean that you can ask for your money back if you wish as well!
Don't accept repair - that's your right, you're better off getting a replacement because you don't know what else may be broken.
If they still refuse to replace it, report them to your local trading standards office - the council should be able to help you with that (not sure whether officers are employed by the council)
the message remains the same.
reform your lives or be chastised.
from the comments i have read about god's supposed non-existence in this forum, it seems that we will only learn the hard way.
Someone please tell me it hasn't happened -
defd + hibiscus = kenneson
who is your favorite bible character and, or, account and why?
I just believe that there are stupid people here who write stupid comments.
Hibiscusfire - my comment was not stupid, I'm not stupid, I don't appreciate being called stupid without good reason.
That word is actually a blasphemous use of the word Jesus where I live at least - I guess not where you live ok.
If you have nothing constructive to say -