Select your preferred language.

Last Online: 3 hrs, 43 mins ago


Actions
Gameplay Stats
Member since:
September 26, 2008
Steam Rating:
10
Playing time:
36.6 hrs past 2 weeks
Counter-Strike
32.7 hrs / 128.3 hrs
Condition Zero
3.7 hrs / 11 hrs
Left 4 Dead 2 Demo
0.2 hrs / 0.2 hrs
Friends

LVO TP
In-Game
Counter-Strike - Join

(:
Online

Cady
Online

kz|icecream
Online

View all 69 friends

Steam Profile

@$3$!NOX

Profile _

Get The Fuck Out :D

Enzo Esposito

Venezuela 

Hey Where is HeadPhone?.. whadafck are you doing with my headphone take off my headphone of ur vagina grandma

MySpace =]
Rawrrrrr

Comments _
You must be logged on to add comments.

 
@$3$!NOX posted on July 07, 2009 @ 2:40pm
Why Why Why? .. u dont let me put my c0ck in ur pus$ie


Groups _
! Smoking Rocks. Anti smokers need to die! (wuahaha) - Public
257 Members  |  10 In-Game  |  29 Online  |  0 In Group Chat

Sick of anti smokers and their maligned attitudes.

"Oh they enjoy smoking, I don't like it, therefore I must make an ass of myself and try to spoil their enjoyment"

There's always somebody that will enjoy something you don't, doesn't make you superior, just makes you different.

Anti-smokers need another bandwagon to jump on. Bunch of uninformed arrogant twunts.

And I quote:
"[...] An awkward fact is that the results of the many studies on the effects of ETS exhibit little consistency in RRs, with a dispersion (in those on spousal smoking, for example) ranging from 0.51 (based on eleven cancer cases) to 4.82 (based on eight). On the most strict reckoning a large majority of results show that the relative risk could be negative (ie below 1.0) which implies a reduced risk of lung cancer from higher exposure – that is, a protective effect from ETS – just as inoculation protects against subsequent infection.

Of course, since each research study examines only a small sample of the total universe (some fewer than a dozen cases of lung cancer), allowance must be made for a margin of error, which is conventionally pitched at 5%. The resulting 95% probability is shown with a varying ‘confidence interval’ which conveys the range within which the true relative risk is likely to fall. For example, the result of the Butler study in 1988, based on a tiny sample of eight lung cancer cases and a probability of only 90% (in place of 95%), yielded a ‘best estimate’ for the RR of 2.02 (that is, twice the risk of lung cancer from ETS exposure) but the range of the confidence interval is shown as 0.48 - 8.56 at 90%.

In layman’s language this means we can be 90% certain (not even 95% in this study) that the true relative risk fell somewhere between 0.48 – which implies a strong protective effect from exposure to ETS – and 8.56, which implies a much enhanced risk of cancer.[...]"

An excerpt from "Smoking Out The Truth"
Forest President, Lord Harris of High Cross,
8 March 2005

Read it yourself, and get something else to feel superior about.
http://www.forestonline.org/files/pdf/Smoking%20Out%20The%20Truth.pdf

Visit ! Smoking Rocks. Anti smokers need to die! (wuahaha)'s profile

Counter Strike - Public
118,778 Members  |  1229 In-Game  |  6,577 Online  |  0 In Group Chat

KiFFERSTUEBCHEN - Public
672,263 Members  |  9965 In-Game  |  58,298 Online  |  6 In Group Chat