If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   On Jupiter's moon Io, there is an ocean of liquid hot magma 30 miles deep, several supervillain hideouts   (io9.com) divider line 51
    More: Interesting, oceans, magma, Mariana Trench, UC Santa Cruz, volcanic rocks, electrical current, Galileo, liquids  
•       •       •

1925 clicks; posted to Geek » on 13 May 2011 at 2:16 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-05-13 02:20:33 PM  
why do they make this shiat up? they can't possibly know how deep a pool of magma on one of Jupiter's moons is. There is just no farking way.

from TFA - "Looking at the shape of Jupiter's magnetic field gathered from Galileo, they surmised that warps in that field must have been caused by an enormous magma ocean beneath Io's surface."

Might have well said that Jesus lives on a houseboat on that pool of magma, since they basically just guessed.

Maybe they are right. But they DON'T know for sure.
 
2011-05-13 02:24:48 PM  
frepnog

Hey, if they can fake those moon landings so well, how are you gonna call them on the depth of magma on a make-believe moon of a pretend planet that God DID NOT MAKE!?!

/had nothing useful to say
 
2011-05-13 02:25:05 PM  
I saw a turtle.
 
2011-05-13 02:26:20 PM  
So, like Earth?
 
2011-05-13 02:27:41 PM  
What about Europe?
 
2011-05-13 02:29:51 PM  
frepnog

Ok. I'll play. Let's say for shiats and giggles they're "making it up". Ok. Why? What's to be gained?
 
2011-05-13 02:32:18 PM  
Volcano hideouts are not covered by insurance...

pics.livejournal.com

/hot
 
2011-05-13 02:32:20 PM  
It wouldn't surprise me, since the surface is covered with active volcanoes. All that molten crap has to come from somewhere.

/not clicking on any more Io9 links.
//DNRTFA
 
2011-05-13 02:33:24 PM  

indarwinsshadow: frepnog

Ok. I'll play. Let's say for shiats and giggles they're "making it up". Ok. Why? What's to be gained?


ok, maybe i misspoke. Maybe they aren't making it up, per se, but they are pretty much just guessing. What's to be gained? Hell, I don't know. Since humanity isn't likely to ever go there, or to any other planets for that matter (barring perhaps Mars someday, but there is really no point to that either) I guess nothing.
 
2011-05-13 02:36:33 PM  
Good job using a point of comparison that changes the units. Actually, better job switching randomly between miles and kilometers throughout the article/headline. And why is the depth of a water ocean on Earth's surface a relevant comparison to a magma "ocean" beneath Io's crust?

This article is a train-wreck of fail.
 
2011-05-13 02:41:07 PM  

frepnog: What's to be gained? Hell, I don't know.


Then maybe think twice before posting instead of assuming you know how others think. It's a free country, but freedom of speech doesn't protect from embarrassment.

What's to be gained is that, with a hypothesis, other scientists can focus their observations to either validate or disprove the hypothesis. This hypothesis was put forward due to observations of distortions in Jupiter's magnetic field near Io, but it was made from general observations by a probe that has seen been destroyed. If we send another mission to Jupiter, one possible item on the agenda is to take a closer look at the magnetic field distortion and compare it to results predicted by the hypothesis. The closer the data matches the hypothesis, the stronger the evidence the hypothesis is correct. If some anomaly is observed, the hypothesis is either refined or abandoned.

This is how science works.
 
2011-05-13 02:44:13 PM  

dragonchild: This is how science works.


Magnets?
 
2011-05-13 02:47:44 PM  
frepnog

No worries. I get that way sometimes myself. Better to ask any question than no question at all right?
 
2011-05-13 02:48:34 PM  
Does this mean we've already cured cancer? Oh good, as I think I'm coming down with a slight head cancer right now.

/oh and Liquid Hot Mag Mah because no one else did
 
2011-05-13 02:49:52 PM  

H31N0US: Magnets?


Um. . . yes.
 
2011-05-13 03:01:12 PM  
wigglingmytoes.files.wordpress.com
 
2011-05-13 03:01:51 PM  
i.imgur.com

gotta do everything around here
 
2011-05-13 03:03:25 PM  
goddammit
 
2011-05-13 03:12:07 PM  

HighZoolander: Good job using a point of comparison that changes the units. Actually, better job switching randomly between miles and kilometers throughout the article/headline. And why is the depth of a water ocean on Earth's surface a relevant comparison to a magma "ocean" beneath Io's crust?

This article is a train-wreck of fail.


I still don't know why they used the word "ocean" to describe it.
 
2011-05-13 03:14:15 PM  
Still no word from Europa, then?
 
2011-05-13 03:17:08 PM  

AddictedToFoobies: Still no word from Europa, then?


Just something about not landing there.
 
2011-05-13 03:29:38 PM  

dragonchild: frepnog: What's to be gained? Hell, I don't know.

Then maybe think twice before posting instead of assuming you know how others think. It's a free country, but freedom of speech doesn't protect from embarrassment.

What's to be gained is that, with a hypothesis, other scientists can focus their observations to either validate or disprove the hypothesis. This hypothesis was put forward due to observations of distortions in Jupiter's magnetic field near Io, but it was made from general observations by a probe that has seen been destroyed. If we send another mission to Jupiter, one possible item on the agenda is to take a closer look at the magnetic field distortion and compare it to results predicted by the hypothesis. The closer the data matches the hypothesis, the stronger the evidence the hypothesis is correct. If some anomaly is observed, the hypothesis is either refined or abandoned.

This is how science works.


i am far from embarrassed. based on basically nothing, they decided that well it must be an ocean of magma. well, I need a little more than "well, the magnetic fields" to buy into it. the fact is this - THEY HAVE LITTLE TO NO farkING CLUE what is actually happening beneath the surface of that moon. Guessing is fine, but building an entire conjecture of 30 mile deep magma oceans is really reaching, dontcha think?
 
2011-05-13 03:39:30 PM  

AddictedToFoobies: Still no word from Europa, then?


Nope, just a random hypothesis created at UCLA about magma, minerals, and its effects on magnetic fields and what this might hypothetically mean about data points concerning Io. Nothing really, without lots of testing, which is unlikely. Basically nothing about Europa, you could even say there's nothing in here about Io either, just a maybe.

In true Io9 form, sticking to lazy reporting, they managed to start a science related article with a 'Now we Know' and ended it with 'they surmised.'

\never liked io9 for this reason.
 
2011-05-13 03:44:24 PM  

frepnog: Guessing is fine, but building an entire conjecture of 30 mile deep magma oceans is really reaching, dontcha think?


Honestly, it depends on what the data showed, and I'm hardly qualified to make the connection between a magnetic field reading and the hypothesis. Which is why there's a peer review process.

But magnetic field distortions providing evidence of an ocean of magma honestly isn't a stretch. The makeup of the magma would determine how conductive it would be, and its motion would distort the magnetic field. They know it's under the crust because the crust itself doesn't convect enough to create the field distortion. Magma is far more likely than saltwater for a tortured planet like Io. The strength and shape of the distortion can also provide clues to the depth, leading to an estimate of 30km below the surface.

The general idea of an subterranean ocean of churning magma on Io isn't that big of a stretch. Hell, Earth has one, basically. The only real issue here is the 50km thickness figure in TFA. Depending on the makeup below Io's crust, that figure could be way off.
 
2011-05-13 03:48:33 PM  

dragonchild: frepnog: Guessing is fine, but building an entire conjecture of 30 mile deep magma oceans is really reaching, dontcha think?

Honestly, it depends on what the data showed, and I'm hardly qualified to make the connection between a magnetic field reading and the hypothesis. Which is why there's a peer review process.

But magnetic field distortions providing evidence of an ocean of magma honestly isn't a stretch. The makeup of the magma would determine how conductive it would be, and its motion would distort the magnetic field. They know it's under the crust because the crust itself doesn't convect enough to create the field distortion. Magma is far more likely than saltwater for a tortured planet like Io. The strength and shape of the distortion can also provide clues to the depth, leading to an estimate of 30km below the surface.

The general idea of an subterranean ocean of churning magma on Io isn't that big of a stretch. Hell, Earth has one, basically. The only real issue here is the 50km thickness figure in TFA. Depending on the makeup below Io's crust, that figure could be way off.


well... ok then. anything is possible.
 
2011-05-13 03:51:30 PM  
I guess this pretty much ixnays the possibility of life there. Darnitsomuch!
 
2011-05-13 04:10:36 PM  
So on Io, there's a hot time in the old town EVERY night?


/Recently read Galileo's Dream, so of course I know everything there is to know about this. :)
 
2011-05-13 04:25:41 PM  

StoneColdAtheist: I guess this pretty much ixnays the possibility of life there. Darnitsomuch!


We still have Europa, which may or may not have oceans underneath its ice-crust. Oceans warmed by Jupiter churning Europa's magnetic center.
 
2011-05-13 04:30:25 PM  

frepnog: dragonchild: frepnog: Guessing is fine, but building an entire conjecture of 30 mile deep magma oceans is really reaching, dontcha think?

Honestly, it depends on what the data showed, and I'm hardly qualified to make the connection between a magnetic field reading and the hypothesis. Which is why there's a peer review process.

But magnetic field distortions providing evidence of an ocean of magma honestly isn't a stretch. The makeup of the magma would determine how conductive it would be, and its motion would distort the magnetic field. They know it's under the crust because the crust itself doesn't convect enough to create the field distortion. Magma is far more likely than saltwater for a tortured planet like Io. The strength and shape of the distortion can also provide clues to the depth, leading to an estimate of 30km below the surface.

The general idea of an subterranean ocean of churning magma on Io isn't that big of a stretch. Hell, Earth has one, basically. The only real issue here is the 50km thickness figure in TFA. Depending on the makeup below Io's crust, that figure could be way off.

well... ok then. anything is possible.


Hyuk! I'm frepnog! And I just now vaguely realized through my dense skull that science works by inference! Hyuk, but instead of realizing this and respecting it, I'm going to stand on my non-existent legs and claim that scientists are doing something wrong!
 
2011-05-13 04:44:22 PM  
That's Incredible.

www.evillairs.com
 
2011-05-13 04:44:47 PM  

frepnog: Guessing is fine, but building an entire conjecture of 30 mile deep magma oceans is really reaching, dontcha think?


Seems like a glorified solve for x mathematical question given that the moon's volume, the details of its magnetic field, etc. can be determined.
 
2011-05-13 04:53:19 PM  

frepnog: why do they make this shiat up? they can't possibly know how deep a pool of magma on one of Jupiter's moons is. There is just no farking way.

from TFA - "Looking at the shape of Jupiter's magnetic field gathered from Galileo, they surmised that warps in that field must have been caused by an enormous magma ocean beneath Io's surface."

Might have well said that Jesus lives on a houseboat on that pool of magma, since they basically just guessed.

Maybe they are right. But they DON'T know for sure.


"It doesn't make sense to me, so scientists can't know what they're talking about!"

This is why we can't have nice things.
 
2011-05-13 05:10:54 PM  
www.filmbuffonline.com

Will meet said supervillains at high noon
 
2011-05-13 06:24:49 PM  

frepnog: why do they make this shiat up? they can't possibly know how deep a pool of magma on one of Jupiter's moons is. There is just no farking way.

from TFA - "Looking at the shape of Jupiter's magnetic field gathered from Galileo, they surmised that warps in that field must have been caused by an enormous magma ocean beneath Io's surface."

Might have well said that Jesus lives on a houseboat on that pool of magma, since they basically just guessed.

Maybe they are right. But they DON'T know for sure.


You're right, they don't know for sure. But, CSB time.

Before the Voyager (I think) satellite went by Jupiter, we basically had no detailed knowledge of the Jovian satellites. I mean, they'd been looked at as far back as Galileo, but we had absolutely no idea about their composition, their structure, etc. We just knew that they were rocks that orbit Jupiter in specific ways. However, shortly before the Voyager fly-by, an astronomer (I forget who it was) published a paper claiming that Io (the moon in question here) should have extensive vulcanism. He based this on the physics of the orbit (the orbit is eccentric, so the distance between Io and Jupiter changes as Io goes around Jupiter). Essentially, everytime Io goes around Jupiter, it gets a little stretched and a little compressed. This deposits energy into the moon, which keeps the interior liquid and can cause vulcanism. So, there was a prediction of vulcanism which was subsequently confirmed (spectacularly) by the images Voyager captured.


Now, it may be the case that we don't understand how lunar magnetic fields are generated. I don't know since I don't study that sort of thing. But to say that it's guesswork is not really doing the modern study of astronomy justice.
 
2011-05-13 06:55:03 PM  

frepnog: well... ok then. anything is possible.


torusXL: Hyuk! I'm frepnog! And I just now vaguely realized through my dense skull that science works by inference!


Dude, the guy conceded. If we all were capable of doing such, the world would be a much better place. I just happened to be the one who knew better today.

I'm no expert on astrogeology, though, so while I think I know this stuff better than most, I was all lubed up in case a real expert like BA showed up.
 
2011-05-13 08:19:34 PM  

mavexe: AddictedToFoobies: Still no word from Europa, then?

Just something about not landing there.


Deadwing: Will meet said supervillains at high noon


Everything you need to know about Jupiter you can learn from Peter Hyams films.
 
2011-05-13 08:39:14 PM  
Is Buddy Holly still on Ganymede?
 
2011-05-13 09:26:25 PM  
Dammit, now I have to move my secret lair to somewhere else more secret.
 
2011-05-13 09:54:14 PM  
www.wingmakers.co.nz

www.nasa.gov



scienceblogs.com
 
2011-05-14 12:38:42 AM  

mavexe: AddictedToFoobies: Still no word from Europa, then?

Just something about not landing there.


I heard we're golden for everything else though.
 
2011-05-14 12:49:02 AM  

dragonchild: frepnog: What's to be gained? Hell, I don't know.

Then maybe think twice before posting instead of assuming you know how others think. It's a free country, but freedom of speech doesn't protect from embarrassment.

What's to be gained is that, with a hypothesis, other scientists can focus their observations to either validate or disprove the hypothesis. This hypothesis was put forward due to observations of distortions in Jupiter's magnetic field near Io, but it was made from general observations by a probe that has seen been destroyed. If we send another mission to Jupiter, one possible item on the agenda is to take a closer look at the magnetic field distortion and compare it to results predicted by the hypothesis. The closer the data matches the hypothesis, the stronger the evidence the hypothesis is correct. If some anomaly is observed, the hypothesis is either refined or abandoned.

This is how science works.


AND everybody gets more grant money.....
 
2011-05-14 01:29:54 AM  

bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money


You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?
 
2011-05-14 02:01:29 AM  

oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?


The way I hear it, without atheist scientists and their grant money, the illegal drug trade, prostitution, gambling, and the porn industry would all collapse overnight. Las Vegas would become a ghost town overnight, without all the scientists there blowing their grant money all over the place.
 
2011-05-14 02:02:08 AM  
/overnight
 
2011-05-14 02:47:01 AM  

oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?


Christ. You mean it comes and craps all over science threads, now?
 
2011-05-14 10:14:01 AM  

oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?



HighZoolander: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?

The way I hear it, without atheist scientists and their grant money, the illegal drug trade, prostitution, gambling, and the porn industry would all collapse overnight. Las Vegas would become a ghost town overnight, without all the scientists there blowing their grant money all over the place.


Elmo Jones: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?

Christ. You mean it comes and craps all over science threads, now?



LOL! Well, that one little sentence fragment "AND everybody gets more grant money" certainly got several people upset. Must be because it is waaaay too "on the mark" and pushes a few too many buttons.

Why yes, I in fact do have a pretty good idea how much grant money gets tossed around. I'm on the advisory boards of two foundations which each "toss out" several million apiece each year to various scientific endeavors. To that end, each of the advisers has to have a fairly good idea of the overall scope of the publicly (government) and privately supported "grant industry."

And, yes, scientists have been known to (GASP ZOMFG!) create scientific controversy out of little more that supposition and thin assumptions to scrabble for grant money. Pretty normal, actually. "Scientists" don't live in a vacuum and they only have a few sources of money to, you know, put food on the table and pay the mortgage. In no particular order of importance these are:
a) government research grants via DARPA, USDA, and many other entities
b) salaried research positions in private corporations
c) open and closed grants from foundations and "patron" individuals
d) salaried research positions in private universities
e) salaried research positions in public universities

There are, of course, thousands of these, and there is a quite complex "science" in itself to the process of applying for and winning grants. There are people who make a really good living working with scientists and companies to obtain grants for them.

This is really nothing new, of course. There have been "grants" and patrons since the Renaissance and classical times. Archimedes didn't have a private self-funded lab; he worked for a patron. And he was not above flamboyant demonstrations and even tricks to get funding.

And so it is today. This particular research draws extremely tenuous conclusions from just tiny bits of data (whoa: volcanos; whoa: magnetic line shift). I sense a move to create at least two ferociously-competing camps of scientists with different theories of what is happening there. And it will, of course, require several year's funding to figure it all out.

THAT'S the way it works, kids.
 
2011-05-14 11:34:47 AM  

bookman: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?


HighZoolander: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?

The way I hear it, without atheist scientists and their grant money, the illegal drug trade, prostitution, gambling, and the porn industry would all collapse overnight. Las Vegas would become a ghost town overnight, without all the scientists there blowing their grant money all over the place.

Elmo Jones: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?

Christ. You mean it comes and craps all over science threads, now?


LOL! -- and similarly intelligent, big-sounding talk


My father is an actual scientist. I know how he gets paid. I've shadowed him and seen how he works. I understand a good deal about how science actually functions, and how science makes sense of the natural universe. What do you base your assertions on?

I seriously doubt that you sit on any foundations, it's clear you don't understand science, and you don't seem to really know how most educated professionals make a living in the real world.

Based on your argument, everything that anyone does that could benefit them personally in any way is inherently suspect and we can never accept anything that any employable person says. Yet you find no irony in delivering this tripe by means of demonstrable technology developed by those same suspect classes, based on the theories of those who came before them.
 
2011-05-14 12:59:59 PM  

Sylvia_Bandersnatch: bookman: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?


HighZoolander: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?

The way I hear it, without atheist scientists and their grant money, the illegal drug trade, prostitution, gambling, and the porn industry would all collapse overnight. Las Vegas would become a ghost town overnight, without all the scientists there blowing their grant money all over the place.

Elmo Jones: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?

Christ. You mean it comes and craps all over science threads, now?


LOL! -- and similarly intelligent, big-sounding talk

My father is an actual scientist. I know how he gets paid. I've shadowed him and seen how he works. I understand a good deal about how science actually functions, and how science makes sense of the natural universe. What do you base your assertions on?

I seriously doubt that you sit on any foundations, it's clear you don't understand science, and you don't seem to really know how most educated professionals make a living in the real world.

Based on your argument, everything that anyone does that could benefit them personally in any way is inherently suspect and we can never accept anything that any employable person says. Yet you find no irony in delivering this tripe by means of demonstrable technology developed by those same suspect classes, based on the theories of those who came before them.


I am an actual scientist, and I know how I get paid, and I concur with this post.

If bookman really does sit of the boards of any foundations (and in a previous thread, he was a used book seller with self-claimed degrees in political science, philosophy, and something else that was not science), he certainly seems to have a low opinion of the scientists he funds and their work (because he seems to have a low opinion of all science, and doesn't appear to know a damn thing about it).

He is a successful troll though, and does seem to know an awful lot about Archimedes, so that's maybe useful somehow.
 
2011-05-14 01:19:39 PM  
sharetv.org
Ha! Ol' Buffalo Butt doesn't know that I have him on ignore.
 
2011-05-14 06:35:25 PM  

HighZoolander: Sylvia_Bandersnatch: bookman: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?


HighZoolander: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?

The way I hear it, without atheist scientists and their grant money, the illegal drug trade, prostitution, gambling, and the porn industry would all collapse overnight. Las Vegas would become a ghost town overnight, without all the scientists there blowing their grant money all over the place.

Elmo Jones: oldebayer: bookman: AND everybody gets more grant money

You do realize, I hope, how incredibly much "grant money" is being tossed out, willy-nilly?

Christ. You mean it comes and craps all over science threads, now?


LOL! -- and similarly intelligent, big-sounding talk

My father is an actual scientist. I know how he gets paid. I've shadowed him and seen how he works. I understand a good deal about how science actually functions, and how science makes sense of the natural universe. What do you base your assertions on?

I seriously doubt that you sit on any foundations, it's clear you don't understand science, and you don't seem to really know how most educated professionals make a living in the real world.

Based on your argument, everything that anyone does that could benefit them personally in any way is inherently suspect and we can never accept anything that any employable person says. Yet you find no irony in delivering this tripe by means of demonstrable technology developed by those same suspect classes, based on the theories of those who came before them.

I am an actual scientist, and I know how I get paid, and I concur with this post.

If bookman really does sit of the boards of any foundations (and in a previous thread, he was a used book seller with self-claimed degrees in political science, philosophy, and something else that was not science), he certainly seems to have a low opinion of the scientists he funds and their work (because he seems to have a low opinion of all science, and doesn't appear to know a damn thing about it).

He is a successful troll though, and does seem to know an awful lot about Archimedes, so that's maybe useful somehow.


Wow. Seems a lot of people are spending a lot of time putting words in my mouth.

>>>>I seriously doubt that you sit on any foundations,

That is your prerogative. I really don't care what you think.

>>>>it's clear you don't understand science,

Really? Throw some more crap at the wall and see if it sticks.

>>>>and you don't seem to really know how most educated professionals make a living in the real world.

Really? Throw some more crap at the wall and see if it sticks.

>>>>Based on your argument, everything that anyone does that could benefit them personally in any way is inherently suspect and we can never accept anything that any employable person says.

That is not what I said.

>>>>I am an actual scientist, and I know how I get paid, and I concur with this post.

So how DO you get paid? Unless you're working for Darth Vadar at a Secret Volcano Island Base somewhere, it is probably one of the choices I presented:
a) government research grants via DARPA, USDA, and many other entities
b) salaried research positions in private corporations
c) open and closed grants from foundations and "patron" individuals
d) salaried research positions in private universities
e) salaried research positions in public universities


>>>>If bookman really does sit of the boards of any foundations (and in a previous thread, he was a used book seller...

What? You think it is impossible to do both? NEWS FLASH: Most of the members of boards of directors, advisory boards and councils, etc. also have day jobs. Mine happens to be owning a running a medium-sized (4,000-6,000 books per day) Internet bookselling business. Since it largely runs itself (now, after a sweat equity period of 60+ hours per week) I have time to get involved in the above.

>>>> ...with self-claimed degrees in political science, philosophy, and something else that was not science)...

Business Administration.

>>>>... he certainly seems to have a low opinion of the scientists he funds and their work (because he seems to have a low opinion of all science, and doesn't appear to know a damn thing about it).

And you arrived at that conclusion.... how?

Wow. Paranoia and thin skins all around...

Done here.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report