User Controls
Posts by gadzooks
-
2019-07-17 at 6:13 AM UTC in This allure.
Originally posted by Nil Saw her again, we railed meth together and hung out for a few hours, she was all fucked up on down and dressed like a slut for a party, telling me i'm not her type but asking me for back massages, telling me to stay in the living room while she changes with the door open[y not just close it??]
I feel like there are a lot of potential warning signs that could be unpacked here and delved into in depth, but at the end of the day, a well-drafted list of pros vs cons will ultimately have very little influence on how you end up proceeding.
I've had my share of unhinged broads in my life, and no amount of logic or reason can intervene once the psychological id makes up its decision. All I can really recommend is try to keep your wits about you as best you can.
One recent woman I was involved with, for example, strategically asked me immediately following an hour long sex session to help her kill a dude. Even in such a moment of weakness, I still had certain uncrossable limits. We ultimately compromised, however, and I ended up driving her to the house so she could fire a few warning shots in the area surrounding her target's house.
Her tactical thottery was effective. At the end of the day, I still did something I never would have otherwise done had I not met her.
But the whole thing was one long learning experience. You involve yourself with a few chicks like this and you gradually build up a tolerance. It may actually better equip you for when the REALLY crazy one comes along. -
2019-07-17 at 4:13 AM UTC in My GF is Trying to Oppress Me and it's Kinda Sexist.
-
2019-07-17 at 2:37 AM UTC in What do you think is beyond the universe?
Originally posted by iam_asiam68 It does match the Pew Research Poll findings:
The Pew Research Center poll of scientists also found that levels of religious faith vary according to scientific specialty and age. For instance, chemists are more likely to believe in God (41%) than those who work in the other major scientific fields. Meanwhile, younger scientists (ages 18-34) are more likely to believe in God or a higher power than those who are older.
According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power.
I guess that's kind of interesting, but not really relevant at all to the question of Intelligent Design vs any other theory.
Chemists, for example, aren't really in an academic position to be making factual claims about the existence of God and/or gods. The same applies to biologists and even physicists to a degree. Theological explanations regarding scientific origins are not necessary to explain the majority of scientific theories. -
2019-07-17 at 2:20 AM UTC in What do you think is beyond the universe?
Originally posted by iam_asiam68 OK, I will add another comment from this same Dr so you can see as a Scientist, he does not believe in Evolution.
Dr. Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project, followed Clinton to the podium stating, "It is humbling for me and awe inspiring to realize that we have caught the first glimpse of our own instruction book, previously known only to God."8
So this dude believes in God... I mean, that doesn't really affect anything. His theological beliefs don't represent those of all genetic scientists, nor do the beliefs of any of these scientists have any bearing on truths beyond the scope of what they're studying. -
2019-07-17 at 2:08 AM UTC in What do you think is beyond the universe?You're kinda going off into some strange tangents in your previous reply, but to start with I'll address the following...
Originally posted by iam_asiam68 All of your answers can be found by the man in charge of Mapping the DNA Genetic Code:
Dr. Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project (that mapped the human DNA structure) said that one can "think of DNA as an instructional script, a software program, sitting in the nucleus of the cell."5
This analogy you're referring to is only meant to explain how DNA works, not delve into any speculation beyond simple transcription/translation and the production of proteins in biological systems.
Anything else abstracted from this analogy is not treating the analogy in good faith.
The evolutionary origins of the particular strands of DNA we see today is the scope of an entirely different field. -
2019-07-17 at 1:06 AM UTC in I despise being a member of a capitalistic society...
-
2019-07-16 at 7:15 PM UTC in What do you think is beyond the universe?
Originally posted by iam_asiam68 Science has proven that it would literally be impossible for "Randomness" to program the cells within the DNA Code like they are.
Do you happen to have a source on that?
Originally posted by iam_asiam68 DNA is very much like your computer. It requires a programmer to input Data, Search Engines, etc…
The thing is, this doesn't seem self-evident.
As long as the information "evolves" in its complexity over time, then you can trace a path from extraordinarily simple information in nature (such as oscillations of micro and macro phenomena giving off waves - manifesting, for example, as the patterns of the tides we see as a result of the motions of the moon), to much more complex examples.
When you factor in the billions of years of time, and the enormous number of potential permutations that can arise during this time, it becomes pretty reasonable to expect much more complex information like we see in DNA/RNA.
Originally posted by iam_asiam68 DNA also requires a "Programmer" according to the Scientist who mapped the Genetic Code for DNA.
Even IF Watson or Crick or whomever said this, it can easily represent an example of the appeal to authority fallacy. Stating an opinion like that goes beyond the scope of explaining the structure and function of DNA. -
2019-07-16 at 6:24 PM UTC in What do you think is beyond the universe?
Originally posted by iam_asiam68 Let's revisit this statement one last time from You:
I mean, for all we know, there are thousands of planets just as intelligently populated as Earth.
Obviously, with all of the general Theories failing and having to be rethought, You surely are not claiming there are life forms on our planet that are intelligent. You clearly must be discussing Intelligent Design, since it's the only Theory not ever to be proven wrong!!
Okay, hold up a minute here, you've given me a lot to unpack here.
If I'm parsing everything here correctly (and let me know if I'm not), you're delineating a sort of history of paradigm shifts in all the physical and biological sciences, where we originally saw things in terms of a singularity of all physical phenomena, and then everything was based on the concept of randomness, and so on.
But in the end you conclude that Intelligent Design automatically logically follows as the most correct theory to explain everything.
The thing is, without even getting into the potential flaws in any foundations for an Intelligent Design type theory (such as proving that an intelligent designer actually exists, where they came from, etc), I still don't see any reasonable justification for preferring I.D. over any other proposed theory like The Big Bang and so forth. The stuff you mention regarding genetic randomization and so on has yet to be effectively disproven. Even if we have not seen any empirical examples of single-celled organisms transmuting into multicellular organisms in a petry dish does not automatically result in the underlying theory being wrong. It's been a while since I've done any reading into abiogenesis theory, but if I recall correctly, they were making some solid progress with one experiment (originally developed by Miller and Urey) where they successfully recreated a physical environment mimicking that in which life would have evolved millions of years ago, and they actually observed amino acids forming spontaneously. It might not be multicellular life yet, but it's a start.
And to be honest, I'm not sure I'm up for getting into each and every one of the finer points of either evolution by natural selection or abiogenesis theory.
Suffice it to say that I don't really think you can actually claim that Intelligent Design is any more correct a theory than The Big Bang, or whatever other theory is held to be the most valid in the scientific community at the current moment. -
2019-07-16 at 6:33 AM UTC in klonopin đĽđĽđĽ
-
2019-07-16 at 6:32 AM UTC in klonopin đĽđĽđĽ
Originally posted by frumbob đđŚđđŻđˇđŚ how much anxiety can you possibly have to be on 8mg/day
i was on 2mg/day xanax xr and 70mg/day vyvanse while smoking 5 grams of k2 every day. the whole period up to withdrawing in a psych hospital is a complete blackout. i have maybe 4 memories over 6months of this
Yeah it was kinda mind blowing they gave me that much. The initial diagnosis was "schizoaffective disorder." For all I know, it was accurate, but I've had other psychiatrists since with different diagnoses.
Also, this was back in 2005. Benzos weren't yet the full-blown boogie man they are now.
I like the anxiolytic effect that benzos provide, but the memory destroying effects outweigh any such benefits, so I generally try to find alternatives. -
2019-07-16 at 6:07 AM UTC in klonopin đĽđĽđĽI used to have an 8mg a day prescription for clonazepam... Let's just say that I don't remember much from that period of my life.
-
2019-07-16 at 5:55 AM UTC in Is 'slang' slang for sling
Originally posted by Ghost RANDALL THE RATTEX
funny you mention rattex. My friend originally sent me this clip because he says I make retarded catchp+hrases about Gonts and Rattoxed that aren't actually real words and I sound like the guy in the clip
It's officially become a real word in my books. I gotta use "gonts" more too. -
2019-07-16 at 5:50 AM UTC in Is 'slang' slang for slingLol fucking Recess...
For some reason the only character that I remember with any detail was the kid who just rattoxed everybody. That and the rest of them playing... kickball? baseball? Fuck I can't remember. -
2019-07-16 at 5:44 AM UTC in Getting drunk for free without drinking!
-
2019-07-16 at 5:34 AM UTC in Sport Meets the RunwayTalk dirty to me.
-
2019-07-16 at 5:31 AM UTC in Ask me anything: tru tru edition
-
2019-07-16 at 5:27 AM UTC in I just got hit by a car and broke my collar bone (it was caught on cctv too, footage here)I third that motion.
-
2019-07-16 at 5:07 AM UTC in If you click on this thread you are a fucking idiotI clicked.
No regrets. -
2019-07-16 at 4:55 AM UTC in What do you think is beyond the universe?
Originally posted by Japan-Is-Eternal See, this is why you are all normies and need to catch up to my God-like status.
You are still stuck on tiny little human ideals and notions, you need to go BEYOND that.
It's easy to know what is "beyond" your sense of the universe, more universe, but that's not what I was getting at ….
What I'm describing is, what forms of existence are there outside of a universe, outside of what we understand as reality.
The whole China doll thing, where there are layers and layers and layers and layers, does it ever end?
If there is a finite assortment of "things" that exist in any shape and form, then how can they exist inside their own bubble, how could they come to be from nothingness, surely there HAS to be something beyond that …
It's an extreme and total mind fuck
You're just basically talking about wild speculation. Philosophers, theologians, poets, and science fiction authors have been doing this very thing for thousands of years.
Find a way to prove any of your speculations and I'll be the first to help you submit your proposition for scientific publication. -
2019-07-16 at 4:49 AM UTC in What do you think is beyond the universe?
Originally posted by Japan-Is-Eternal Surely there is something beyond what humans understand as reality. This should be the most important scientific pursuit right now
Well, other than the work they're doing right now studying subatomic particles and how they interact, as well as developing imaging and photographic techniques that allow us to see as far as we can into space, what else could they really be doing? The edge of the universe is (in terms of human perception) inconceivably far away, so we can really only speculate what might be beyond it.
I mean, for all we know, there are thousands of planets just as intelligently populated as Earth out there between here and the outer physical boundaries of the universe... That's enough to keep us busy for years.
