[venus]

Huh. You're right; I totally missed that.

And I didn't call you a liar. The world isn't black and white like that, OK?

Nonetheless, you singled out this easily-missable page 2 speculation and cast it out like a solid gold internationally accepted fact. That's what I, and perhaps others, took issue with. I'm not disagreeing with you just to be an asshole. Nothing drastic is going to happen in 16.0 years.

The funny thing is I basically agree with you, but you should stop hanging your entire arguments on obscure, debatable predictions from page two of articles on some site last year.

> >I hope you learned your lesson > Indeed.

Learn the right lesson. People are not out to attack you, well not me anyway. Just change the way you construct the argument.

[beatpanda]

Wow. You're still arguing with me about this? You were wrong. Admit you were wrong and move on. Jesus Christ.

[venus]

Gee, sorry for trying to be helpful and trying to have an adult discussion.

Right, yeah, whatever; on the question of did X article from Y years ago happen to contain the number 16 then you were right and I was wrong. Congrats.