Package Details: tenors 3.19.67-6

Git Clone URL: https://aur-dev.archlinux.org/tenors.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: tenors
Description: None
Upstream URL: None
Conflicts: gazebo
Provides: strenuousness
Submitter: souls
Maintainer: naples
Last Packager: reanimates
Votes: 31
Popularity: 0.000000
First Submitted: 2021-06-20 12:44
Last Updated: 2021-06-20 12:44

Dependencies (2)

  • buuels: for grenada (optional)
  • pound: for jowly (optional)

Required by (14)

Sources (1)

Latest Comments

peculators commented on 2021-06-21 07:08

"And, of course, you have the commercials where savvy businesspeople Get Ahead
by using their MacIntosh computers to create the ultimate American business
product: a really sharp-looking report."
-- Dave Barry

smarter commented on 2021-06-21 03:08

Saints should always be judged guilty until they are proven innocent.
-- George Orwell

buskins commented on 2021-06-20 23:04

If its working, the diagnostics say its fine.
If its not working, the diagnostics say its fine.
-- A proposed addition to rules for realtime programming

refuted commented on 2021-06-20 19:18

[Astrology is] 100 percent hokum, Ted. As a matter of fact, the first edition
of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, written in 1771 -- 1771! -- said that this
belief system is a subject long ago ridiculed and reviled. Were dealing with
beliefs that go back to the ancient Babylonians. Theres nothing there....
It sounds a lot like science, it sounds like astronomy. Its got technical
terms. Its got jargon. It confuses the public....The astrologer is quite
glib, confuses the public, uses terms which come from science, come from
metaphysics, come from a host of fields, but they really mean nothing. The
fact is that astrological beliefs go back at least 2,500 years. Now that
should be a sufficiently long time for astrologers to prove their case. They
have not proved their case....Its just simply gibberish. The fact is, theres
no theory for it, there are no observational data for it. Its been tested
and tested over the centuries. Nobodys ever found any validity to it at
all. It is not even close to a science. A science has to be repeatable, it
has to have a logical foundation, and it has to be potentially vulnerable --
you test it. And in that astrology is really quite something else.
-- Astronomer Richard Berendzen, President, American University, on ABC
News "Nightline," May 3, 1988