-6
1.
Margery 3 year s ago
#40 "Run you little b*tch or I'll tell mom what a loser you are" 
2
2.
Marie 3 year s ago
#21 Welcome to Fangorn Forest.
0
3.
Benjy 3 year s ago
#44 somebody got their numbers wrong
2
4.
Pokey 3 year s ago
Benjy,
They are probably measuring from the base, not height above sea level. Everest peak is about 15K ft above it's base, which is about 14K above sea level; Mauna Kea is about 13K ft above sea level, but its base is more than 25K feet /below/ sea level. About 40K overall for Mauna Kea vs 29K for Everest.
They are probably measuring from the base, not height above sea level. Everest peak is about 15K ft above it's base, which is about 14K above sea level; Mauna Kea is about 13K ft above sea level, but its base is more than 25K feet /below/ sea level. About 40K overall for Mauna Kea vs 29K for Everest.
0
5.
Nap 3 year s ago
Hey Izi, when I clicked to upvote #33 it went from 6 votes down to 5 and it's showing a negative symbol next to the number. Just thought I'd give you a heads up something might be wonky in the code.
2
7.
Abiel 3 year s ago
Bibendum: The Michelin Man.
0
8.
Fay 3 year s ago
Abiel,
Also got the cigar part right too!
Also got the cigar part right too!
0
9.
Vangie 3 year s ago
Margery, YOU are the loser.
They are probably measuring from the base, not height above sea level. Everest peak is about 15K ft above it's base, which is about 14K above sea level; Mauna Kea is about 13K ft above sea level, but its base is more than 25K feet /below/ sea level. About 40K overall for Mauna Kea vs 29K for Everest.
Thanks for your feedback. We will check and fix the issue.
Also got the cigar part right too!