Since you are an archeologist-kinda guy and also from the Pacific Ocean, is it your big dream to discover remnants of the lost continent, Mu?
…no? Not to be abrasive, but… I’m rather more interested in discovering things that exist. You can’t “lose” a continent; there would be geological evidence for it.
Hey you pokéstupid why do you think Australia and NZ are stupid countries? Your usa not america isn’t the center of the world, its the center of xenofobics like u
You misunderstand, gentle reader. I’m from New Zealand (I thought my use of the phrase “back home in New Zealand” would render all confusion impossible, but clearly not…). I was calling the United States ridiculous and backward (tongue firmly in cheek, of course… well, mostly).
What would happen if you threw a pokemon at a pokeball?
…why would you…? How…? What?
I mean… I guess the same thing as would happen normally. Right? Unless you have to, like… arm the Pokéball first somehow, like it doesn’t work unless you hit the button before you throw it. I don’t know. But… why?
And if you answer “for science” then so help me I will throw you at a Pokéball!
Go over to Slowflake’s blog and tell him to unban me.
Theoretically a sound notion, with just a few minor flaws:
1) I have no idea who Slowflake is.
2) I can think of no reason he would pay any attention to me whatsoever.
3) This is frankly none of my business.
Er… does it matter?
I sort of think the distinction is totally academic; to my knowledge, there are no real-world animals that just persist in a natural state of being on fire, so I’m not sure whether a real-world biologist, presented with a creature like that, would react by calling it ‘bioluminescent’ or by coming up with a new word altogether. I mean… if I’m being called upon to settle a bet or an argument or something… OED says bioluminescence is “the biochemical emission of light by living organisms,“ and, well… fire is a chemical reaction, all right, so I guess I’d say "yes, they are.”