The article states that it's never been found again, which is the fact I am correcting. How often or how many times it's been found is irrelevant.
Fact is it's not that rare or tough to find. The times that it HAS been found aren't the only places it exists. If people want to find it, they can easily.
The article proves how rare it is and I keep explaining the same shit. You are out of your depth and obviously can't understand the article, so stop derailing.
Yes, it does. Since you are too fucking retarded to read the article you produced, just read the quoted part above and you should be able to gather why ( if above a room temp IQ).
Your history screams SHILL and you are not going to last much longer antagonizing everyone and offering nothing.
Yes, it does. Since you are too fucking retarded to read the article you produced, just read the quoted part above and you should be able to gather why ( if above a room temp IQ).
Your history screams SHILL and you are not going to last much longer antagonizing everyone and offering nothing.
The bacteria is not rare. It wasn’t found only once. If you say my article proves you right you have to say exactly how, because it doesn’t. It tested out its own soil samples. It didn’t test samples all over the world to determine whether or not it was rare. The samples that they tested were within a (relatively) small area of the world.
I’m sorry if you’re the author of this blog post and are upset that I called out the things about it that are wrong. I’m just setting the record straight for anyone who reads it and gets the wrong idea. I offer my own research and facts as rebuttals to posts like this.
Ill let you have the last word, because unless you actually have an argument I’m not really interested. So yeah, I am halfway out the door on this thread.
The article states that it's never been found again, which is the fact I am correcting. How often or how many times it's been found is irrelevant.
Fact is it's not that rare or tough to find. The times that it HAS been found aren't the only places it exists. If people want to find it, they can easily.
The article proves how rare it is and I keep explaining the same shit. You are out of your depth and obviously can't understand the article, so stop derailing.
In what way does the article prove how rare it is?
Until you prove you read the article you produced, fuck off, you are halfway out the door already.
Yes, it does. Since you are too fucking retarded to read the article you produced, just read the quoted part above and you should be able to gather why ( if above a room temp IQ).
Your history screams SHILL and you are not going to last much longer antagonizing everyone and offering nothing.
Yes, it does. Since you are too fucking retarded to read the article you produced, just read the quoted part above and you should be able to gather why ( if above a room temp IQ).
Your history screams SHILL and you are not going to last much longer antagonizing everyone and offering nothing.
Look man I’m not gonna fall for that.
The bacteria is not rare. It wasn’t found only once. If you say my article proves you right you have to say exactly how, because it doesn’t. It tested out its own soil samples. It didn’t test samples all over the world to determine whether or not it was rare. The samples that they tested were within a (relatively) small area of the world.
I’m sorry if you’re the author of this blog post and are upset that I called out the things about it that are wrong. I’m just setting the record straight for anyone who reads it and gets the wrong idea. I offer my own research and facts as rebuttals to posts like this.
Ill let you have the last word, because unless you actually have an argument I’m not really interested. So yeah, I am halfway out the door on this thread.