8 results for "d34ddeb0ea378d440a1ddb6d2c63a1b9"
>>520492850
there there, keep going son, the fog in your head leading to your words is temporary and this too shall pass.
>>33530755
>>82225872
Don't abort yourself my little specimen.
>>512643332
>It's just what the bible says, that is what I go on.
sorry for being rude but that's just retarded
>>511426923
I'm totally forgetting about Epstein
>>510637554
Have you ever heard of panspermia? It's the idea/belief that life originated from gay niggers from outer space.
>>40654517
Blockchain + AI + Box Computer + Holding company
There is a maximally strong argument for A, and not for B, because B is a source of infinite free energy just by using the rules of the portal.

Imagine the object is a super-heavy object, like a mountain. It's at rest relative to the most things. Relatively zero effort was spent to accellerate the zero-mass orange portal, wheras at the end, the mountain-sized object flying out of B could be harnessed to turn a crank, which lifts the portal back up for another whack at further accelleration.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B19nlhbA7-E

Therefore, A can be the only answer that doesn't violate the conservation of energy, because B can be simply re-arranged into a source of infinite free energy, assuming both of the portal's apitures are 100% efficient and zero mass.