Thu Nov 14 20:56:16 CET 2002
we DO evolve for ... sake...
Matthew, have you read Lord of the Flies by William Golding? If not, it might be worth reading. It not American literature: just British. You'll love it.
Even if we are more than animals, the assumption that humans are beyond the state of being animalistic does not mean that humans and animals have nothing in common. Maybe I am naive, but why are you ignoring the fact that - we humans - procreate according to the same principles as all species on earth do: these very characteristics of survival of the fittest? When accepting evolution - and you do - you cannot at the same time ignore the consequences of such.
I find principles, ethics and such also very important in my life, but I keep testing them on the things I see myself and the conclusions I personally draw. These are in the context of a world that is never static. These discussions we have, and all other information about what is happening around me that reach me and start me thinking makes what I am, a unique person, not confined in a dogmatic framework that does the interpretation for me. This is how I stay in life and I respect everyone who thinks the same or differently. If one respects the other one could at least discuss openly instead of an anonymous statement along the line. If you (someone, just a non-suicidal, atheist gnyf etc..) do not want to do it, I see not much reason to accept them as people that take their own contributions seriously.
All the best,
JG
http://
Thu Nov 14 20:50:34 CET 2002
We not animals ????
Matthew, what the photon is that! We are, we were and we will stay animals for the rest of our life. It's not because we have more brain power then other animals that we are supreme beings according to them. We just evolved a bit more and that is it. And even evolved is a big word, because all kind of creatures evolved in a certain way, to for them the best way of living. I think you can say that the homo-sapiens sapiens is not evolving anymore like other creatures. But is already de-evolving (not that we will become monkeys again) but we rely too much on our own, and don't evolve anymore in a physical way like other creatures. If it comes one day to the point that we can not rely on any of our inventions, then you will see what kind of animals we are. The weakest and most helpless kind there is in nature.
Klaas
Thu Nov 14 20:32:14 CET 2002
Herbal Remedies..............
The fact that I can make moral judgements makes me more evolved than animals. If you're going to cuss or diss me then tell me who the fucking hell you are and challenge me for real. Are you saying faith is easier than thought? Try it. The pressure of modern society discourages faith so it is so much more difficult to believe. And yes, I can swear. A lot. So try me. I happen to be completely non-suicidal and I would say I am aetheist if you asked me. But this is because I am disillusioned with Protestancy. I have faith in a deity, God. So respect that. And respect my morals. I am not afraid to air my moral judgements under my own name, so be courteous and do the same. Especially if they're directed towards me. I think. A lot. Thats why I know suicide is wrong. Because I have thought about it, because ethically it is illogical and wrong. Weakness.... think about it.
M.
http://
Thu Nov 14 20:01:27 CET 2002
No answers from M.
What exactly makes you think humans are more evolved than animals? The ability to kill whole species without even noticing them? Thank you for your moral judgements then.
Seems you don't even bother to think, because it's so easy to believe instead.
just a non-suicidal, atheist gnyf
http://
Thu Nov 14 19:35:53 CET 2002
In Progress..........
An official cyber-reunion.........presenting.......
Phil, M., Katja, Ana R and Neil
http://
Thu Nov 14 19:23:23 CET 2002
Answers........perhaps...............
To our beloved NAP leader: Come to me for topics. I can think of interesting things for discussions. Lots of interesting things. You will not be lost for ideas. Just pick my brains.
Ok, ok, argumentation is not a word. Use 'rationalisation' instead, its better. Thanks!
The fact that homosexuality also exists in animals is not valid because we are more than animals. We have evolved beyond the state of being animalistic.
Answers then:
1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. Yes.
Simply put. No comment beyond that. I can't be arsed. This is just my opinion.
I have no capacity to this argument. You know my opinions. I will not be swayed. Moral judgements are the way I run my life. Principles, morals, ethics. Damn anything else. Goodnight.
M.
http://
Thu Nov 14 18:28:30 CET 2002
Matthew
You are now only giving moral judgements about homosexualism. Since you clearly do not look further than your nose is long, I'd strong advise you do look a bit further. You consider the ultimate goal of life, giving life to itself. Well, that is an opinion. Some others may have onother view of that. BTW, If homosexuals cannot give life themselves, they can still raise adopted children and therefore also have the joy of life. Please do me a favour and respond to the arguments I've given because now you're only repeating yourself.
So clearly do not know the symptoms is a depression. You want to die at that time simply because you don't see a way out. Some people become so suicidal that no matter how long you try to enjoy them or talk to them, they still are suicidal. You should read more biological/psychological stuff before you judge somebodies life. BTW, we are now not talking about healthy people depressed people are definitely not healthy in the medical definition.
The sun is yellow because science is doing tests that have proven the eye's main sensitivety is in the green yellow part of the spectrum. Science can "prove" these things by doig experiments, religion doesn't. Religion is based on belief and just believing anything because you are raised a certain way or have read it somewhere is for me no clear reason why something is true.
There were for sure some groups who didn't have a deity. In prehistoric times deities were the things mankind couldn't explain. As science grew, people could explain more and more and the role of god lessened (the role of god is smaller than 100 years ago) To quote a famous philosopher of the 19th century: "I didn't need god to explain the world." If I'm not mistaken this was LaPlace.
Necrophilia and canibalism are no part of this discussion. But I know one thing, if humankind would do it I'm sure everybody would consider it normal. BTW, have you never heard of that true story about those sportsmen who were in the mountain's when their plane crashed!? They had to eat to suvive and they had to for survival so your highly ranked moral code has a lower value when it come to pure survival
I cannot prove I'm gay or not gay. Perhaps the HUGO project will make it possible to detect homosexualism. Funny you mentioned FM because he admitted to his former wife that he always had some sort of gay feeling
About survival of the fittest: Suppose you are in a savanna where you ahve to run for your life almost every day. Well it is well known that heavier people are less capable of running fast, so their survival chances are lower in free nature. Does that mean we have to ban fat people!? Does it mean fat people are forbidden and have to loose weight!?simply because they choose to be fat!? If so, I thought you'd be more rational than that. BTW, this is no personal offence since I don't mind anybody's weight.
yigal
http://
Thu Nov 14 18:05:10 CET 2002
Questions
Before I spill out my questions, let me just mention my surprise that somebody thinks a list of dogmatic statements is
an argumentation.
Here we go. The main arguments brought up here against homosexuality are either (1) religous or (2) biological. Being an atheist I will not comment on (1), but I would like to ask the following questions regarding the argumentation that homosexual sex cannot produce off-spring and is therefore unnatural. I will not repeat the argument that homosexuality also exists in animals, although I think it's very valid, but rather would like to see how some of the arguments we heard also apply to heterosexual sex.
- Is heterosexual sex without the intent of procreation a sin and/or disgusting?
- Is heterosexual sex during the unfertile time of a woman a sin/and or disgusting?
- Is heterosexual sex between sterile partners a sin and/or disgusting?
Looking forward to your answers.
Jo:rg
http://
Thu Nov 14 18:04:19 CET 2002
NAP-leader
Too bad for u
yigal
http://
Thu Nov 14 17:21:02 CET 2002
Topics...
Hey guys, if you go on like this I won't find a hot topic
for the discussion game in the next camp!
your beloved NAP leader
http://
Thu Nov 14 16:59:38 CET 2002
No way...
I'm not in this. You may think its a cop out Yigal, but I'm just being logical. We should agree to disagree. Homosexual acts are disgusting and perverse, imious, whatever. But just because I would never commit a homosexual act means I should not discrimnate. But behind these acts is a principle. And (!) this principle is also thus disgusting. Gays have fruitless relationships. They cannot contribute the ultimate gift to humanity - life. They themselves cannot create life. Who cares whether being gay is genetic or not? The process that creates a gay mentality does not matter, the fact that homosexuality exists is wrong.
Suicide is the other issue we are considering, I believe. Suicide is in now way acceptable. Killing is wrong. In anyway. Killing others, killing yourself. Killing is wrong too. Pure and simple. No matter how bad life is, it always improves. Troughs and crests. That is the nature of the world we exist in, get over it. Taking your own life is admitting defeat. Cowardly, selfish. Perhaps when the only reason someone is still alive is because of a life support machine then they should be allowed to die naturally. But if a healthy 'normal' person is depressed then they should not kill themselves.
Yigal - if 2000 years ago I had written that the Sun was yellow, you would still be believing it today, why does age mean that peoples opinions or facts become less relevant? Answer me that. Immoral is not defined by society. It should be an ideal of your conscience...if you have one. Why does rationality mean the rejection of God? If all civilisations have a deity as their basis, then God must exist. If you take it to an abstract level then we have all these different perspectives but one principle at the core. The kernel of the matter is the important part. So rationally we should accept God. Because we arrived at his existence from many divergent paths. Kapeesh?
So, we wouldn't accept necrophilia? Just like we wouldn't accept cannabilism. But we did as a fashion. So, what if necrophilia becomes a fashion? Would we accept it. Think about it.
How can you prove your not gay? A DNA test? Go on demostrate how you can disprove your homosexuality. Freddie Mercury was married for 12 years, but he was gay. So, how do you really know if your gay or not? Damn, flaw? Maybe....
M.
Thu Nov 14 16:14:54 CET 2002
Hmmm
I doubt this is any improvement on the discussion Jeroen. BTW, read the last FIVE words this time. (hmmm, we both seem to forget eachother's famous last words...)
yigal
http://
Thu Nov 14 16:09:00 CET 2002
What was that funny definition?
To deny something is also not to admit that you have any connection with it. Oh no, wrong one, Sorry Yigal.
JG
http://
Thu Nov 14 13:17:31 CET 2002
Before anyone thinks I'm gay
I'm not... (as far as I know)
Yigal
http://
Thu Nov 14 12:36:13 CET 2002
hey "somebody"
I kindly ask you to better consider what you wrote. You offended more than one people. I understand that you think differently from some of us, I know that you learnt to say that our souls are empty and that you have to scary the "different". I also assure you that we won't accept necrophilia, as an empty soul is anyway a thinking mind. Something that I would like to add to the discussion is that nowdays morality is not only reserved to religious people: this means that it's changing, also with your veto. I would like to sign: "a voluptuous atheist", but I am just Roberto.
robbio
roberto@iayc.org
Thu Nov 14 12:12:16 CET 2002
That "somebody" person
It is clear that you have a very interesting point of view but since it is not allowed to post anonymous on this pinboard I suggest you reveal yourself so we can comment better. Indeed Jesus was perhaps not a fundamentalist, however it's followers are some of the time. The fact that god plays a smaller and smaller part in our world is because people are getting more rational. So far you are just quoting people and haven't formed any new opinion by yourself. BTW, nowhere in the OT it is written that homosexual activities are a sin. and even if it is written, it was written over two thousand years ago. Society changed a lot during those years.
Matthew, I rejected your arguments. However, by saying "it is wrong" and by saying "it is getting too personal" is the easiest way out. Come on, I knew you better than that. Rejoin the discussion. So far I haven't got any reaction from your side on my arguments yet.
BTW, immoral is something also defined by society. eg in Japan (and also ancient Rome) it was centuries ago (before christianity) totaly normal to have homosexual relationships. And Sorry Jeroen, indeed, I forgot those four words.
yigal
http://
Thu Nov 14 02:01:12 CET 2002
I meant in my writing Klaas. In my speech I may swear some, but I have stopped that. Fo real. The English language is fantastic. Ask Davide he agrees.
So why does 1 + 1 = 2?
If I worked for Arthur Andersen then I could make 1 + 1 = a profit.
M.
http://
Thu Nov 14 01:55:03 CET 2002
Other subject
Okay Matthew, cut the crap. You swear like hell, all the time. You have sweard like hell in 2001 and also in 2002. You're so full of swears in every sentence, that it is not normal anymore, I was already thinking that the english language was evolving back to the stone-age.
Okay ppl want to change subject, lets do that then ... anybody wondered why 1 + 1 = 2 ?
Klaas
Thu Nov 14 00:57:43 CET 2002
song
Light music late at night can help against headache! "The Times They Are A-Changin'" was just playing somewhere in my head, time to go to bed....
JG
http://
Thu Nov 14 00:41:24 CET 2002
Sorry..........
I never usually swear. I'm just a tad pissed off at some comments. And (!) I have a smegging awful headache.
M.
http://
Thu Nov 14 00:32:07 CET 2002
Just changing subject
Everyone seems to have so much to say about homosexuality. I
don't, but since I don't know what else to say, I'm singing
this song: "Everythings changing when I turn around, all out
of my control I'm a mobile"
someone who likes this song (not Neo 4 your information)
Thu Nov 14 00:10:00 CET 2002
Pieces, scattered pieces........
This is getting too personal and nasty. Suicide is wrong. Homosexuality is wrong. Love is special and eternal. Accept it. Fuck genes.
M.
http://
Wed Nov 13 23:42:21 CET 2002
paprika's, tostada's, cucumber and everything else....
We're talking about homosexuality? Probably also about religion, christianity ethics and morality by now. But ehm, please tell me, why should I be generalising?
Take care!
JG
http://
Wed Nov 13 23:03:09 CET 2002
those are words of a bigot
what the hell are you talking about? i know of a few people, good people, that have been brought up by parents of both sexes and i have to say they have never been ashamed of this and are actually practising 'heterosexual' activities so you can shut up and stop generalising. Oh yeah, and why the hell should we believe in religions, more specifically christianity, when they are being controlled by fat men that line their pockets with money and turn a blind eye when their own priests commit horrifying homosexual acts on little boys.
a free thinker
http://
Wed Nov 13 22:48:15 CET 2002
mmmm....
Genetically determined thing just bull shit? Get awake, science has advanced the last decennia just as it has advanced for centuries. Please read some recent scientific papers on the subject.
You say that in animals there are mutations and we are more than animals? Then what is so different in the way we procreate than the way e.g. monkeys procreate? No mutations? Never seen from birth on handicaped (in our environment) people? Never encountered or heard of very very very exceptionally bright or gifted people? (not always due to mutation!) Thank all-the-gods-I-do-not-believe-in that mutation exists for it can save a race from extinction when environment suddenly changes drastically.
Homosexuality is indeed not normal, SOCIOLOGICALLY (see my previous postings).
JG
http://
Wed Nov 13 20:55:12 CET 2002
ARGUMENTATION
I'm writing this for the second time. I'm starting to get bored.
But I have to say: My GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!!
It seems that you people consider religion a fairy tail which our ancestors wrote or told. So, I guess you consider all believers fanatics. Was God a fanatic, was Jesus a fanatic? Who are they to you? Yes, religion is becoming less influential but this is wrong. Not believing in God leeds to emptiness of the sould and mind. What is the meaning of life? Life without God is meaningless. This is why more and more people comit suicide. They have no purpose in life. For them life just ends at one point so why not end it earlier? Life without God means no hope. No hope for better. We do not have the right to take our lives. You probably think that killing people is wrong and imoral. Why not think the same about suicide? People who comit suicide are selfish and cowards. Why is that people think they have so many rights? What about obligations? Moral obligations not social ones.
Animals are mating only to have offsprings. But people tend to be sexually acitve for no reason. Just to satisfy their needs. In some way they are enslaved by those needs.
Homosexuality is imoral and not normal. I have read about this geneticaly determined thing but I think it's just bull shit. In animals yes, there are mutations. But we are more than animals. We are given the right to choose. And many people these days become homosexual because of fashion. Gay couples addopting children is even more imoral. What will those children think? That what their parents are doing is normal so they will probably do the same thing.Homosexuality was first an act of perversity. But nowadays it's increasing because of so much promotion. So many are militating for gay rights. Accepting homosexuality is not an act of tolerance. In this way we will soon accpet necrophilia. Yes, why not? Maybe some people enjoy this so they will ask for rights too? Where is this leading? To chaos.
Ai, I have to stop. There seems to be a problem with the net. I will come back for more argumentation. Or questions.
somebody
http://
Wed Nov 13 19:05:24 CET 2002
Y. agrees although he doesn't know ;-)
Yigal, please read first what I wrote to M. a few postings back: "I agree on your statement that homosexual relationships are fruitless IN TERMS OF PROCREATION". Don't miss these last but very crucial four words!
JG
http://
Wed Nov 13 17:53:55 CET 2002
Jeroen
I disagree with you that a homosexual relationship would be fruitless. It can be fruitfull if the couple decides to adopt children. They can't get children themselves but by adopting them another set of genes will survive which could be fitter than the rest.
yigal
http://
Wed Nov 13 12:39:10 CET 2002
PB statistics
Wow, this year the pinboard is awesome... About twice as big as any other year, and December hasn't started yet!
pinboard.html 546k
pinboard_2002.html 152k
pinboard_2001.html 200k
pinboard_2000.html 239k
pinboard_1999.html 76k
pinboard_1998.html 153k
pinboard_1997.html 50k
JG
http://
Wed Nov 13 11:58:02 CET 2002
and yes I do agree with you Yigal about suicide...
Philippe
Wed Nov 13 11:53:31 CET 2002
Darwin rules...
M: Yes, homosexuality IS part of nature and Darwin applies in this case. It occurs both among (other) animals and humans. The idea that homosexuality is identifiable as simply the choice of people who have the same gender is in my opinion a very simplification of a situation where more factors are involved. Researchers have identified years ago that there are genes that affect things like learning, memory, courtship and mating. In an research in 1992 an experiment on fruit flies yielded the result that abnormal expression of one gene causes male flies to court other male flies instead of female flies. This supports the idea that genetics are really involved here and that Darwin is applicable. Many virtually identical genes were found in humans, whose evolutionary line diverged apparently once from insects. Some years ago, molecular biologists started identifying the genes that play roles in human disorders (e.g. Alzheimer, Parkinson) and currently we have the human genome project.
Good point Neo! To be homosexual is not the same as to express homosexuality in the society, because homosexual behaviour is not sociologically normal. Homosexuals can indeed have children with a partner from the other sexe and thus pass their genes to future generations.
JG
http://
Wed Nov 13 11:51:43 CET 2002
oops some troubles with HTML, it looks like a poetry :)
Sorry if I occupy too much space, It wasn't done on purpose.
Big Phil
Wed Nov 13 11:49:31 CET 2002
a none genetic point of view
About Homosexuality again. People are free to live their lives as they want, so homosexuality doesn't disturb me.
No matter how different they feel, I still can't understand why some of them have to demonstrate everywhere.
Do heterosexuals demonstrate ?
I haven't heard about it yet.
Another aspect is the right to adopt children...
Could we have a discussion about it?
From my point of view it's as bad as divorces for children.
Now a little answer for you Mat...
As I have already told you,I'm convinced that perfection doesn't exist in mankind.
Then in the long run, to love someone is to accept the imperfection also.
Love is blind at first but sooner or later your eyes open.
If you feel a true love it's getting even better with opened eyes I guess.
I will be waiting for your answer Mat! :-)
Philippe
Wed Nov 13 10:11:08 CET 2002
Aaargh
My HTML code's aren't working well, please for can anyone correct it...
Yigal
http://
Wed Nov 13 10:10:23 CET 2002
M.
[B]If it was, you would be born with homosexuality. But you are not. [/B]
It is clear that you have never read any articles about psychology and biology about this subject. Homosexualism is almost for sure partially genetically determined and there are are many types of gay relationships. Some of them might be scary to you (leather gays!?) but some of them are as normal as any heteosexual relationship.
[B]Thus, gays are uninstinctive, outcasts, whatever term you want.[/B]
Just because monogame sex doesn't lead to children!? you probably have never seen a documentary about Bonobo monkeys. They have (homosexual and heterosexual) sex because of many different reasons and procreation is just one of them. If love is eternal as you suggest, you'll definitely have trouble finding a girlfriend because you have to seek among 3 biljon people. Small chance that you'll find the perfect one. However, it is possible to have a sustainable relationship with somebody less than perfect to your opinions.
About your opinion with suicide, you clearly have never spoken with anybody who was in such a deep shit that he couldn't see a way out. If life has no meaning to you anymore because the most interesting thing you can do is wink your eyebrows, why would it be so stupid to end life conciously than wait till your heart stops beating...
Yigal
http://
Wed Nov 13 01:36:42 CET 2002
Homosexuality.
I don't want to comment in depth at this moment, as that would be beyond my abilities given the amount of wine I've drunk, however I have one fact to give you.
Prior to approximately 1960, homosexuals were more likely to have children, as mostly they were married, and carried out their homosexual acts as extra-marital affairs.
The statistics are out there demonstrating this if you ever care to look.
Neo.
Wed Nov 13 01:17:27 CET 2002
42
Whassup JG! Whassup Johannes. Sorry Johannes, lame title, I know. All my discussions are good, you know that. When did you turn green? So how are you? Sorry to Erik also: PSV go out! Arsenal go through! Woohoo! So back to the discussion.....
Hey, keeping the atmosphere clean is pointless if there is no-one to enjoy the clean atmosphere, thus procreation should take precedence. It isn't necessarily the main aim and goal to survive. It is our most primal urge to survive. Instinct tells us to survive. Thus, gays are uninstinctive, outcasts, whatever term you want. But useless. Homosexual relationships are fruitless. Therefore can produce nothing to enjoy our clean atmosphere. The decision to have the right to divorce was made a long time ago. I do not believe in divorce. Love is eternal, or should be. Marriage these days is an abused thing. I speak from experience. My parents are divorcing right now. In principle divorce is so immoral and hurtful. But that is a whole other discussion, which I am not emotionally ready to start. So, is the human species special or not? This is the hardest thing to decide. Some of me says yes, some of me says no. Yes, we are special, a creation of God. But we seem so small and insignificant in comparison to the rest of the Universe. Hmmm.... something to consider.
No, homosexuality is not part of nature. If it was, you would be born with homosexuality. But you are not. You decide your sexuality. Thus gays are unnatural because they chose to be against the grain of society. They 'chose'. Conscious decision there. Not a thing that you are born with. Nature will not kill gays off because of the legacy that previous gays leave, in this case Darwin does not apply. Just because they do not procreate, does not mean that their kind will not exist. This is because of the essence of homosexuality and how you arrive at or become gay. We are ignoring one factor though, a major factor. Love. It will inevitably be down to this. Love rules so much. So gays are fruitless but they do experience love. That was an aside. Yeah, lets keep annoying the p-board. We keep so many people busy reading all this stuff.
Green Rules!
M.
Tue Nov 12 23:52:30 CET 2002
brilliant heading!
Green johannes (is it really that green, like cucumber? wow!). I don't now if it was your intention but your heading made me immediately think of the first part of .... ;-)
JG
http://
Tue Nov 12 23:41:25 CET 2002
homosexual = also natural
Hi M!
I agree on your statement that homosexual relationships are fruitless in terms of procreation, but that DOES NOT mean that homosexual relationships are unnatural, on the contrary! It's just a matter of chance of survival, or as Darwin put it: 'fitness'. The combination of genes that will create the individual that has the best ability to surive, these gene-combination are the best in its generation. Others can also be good, but the individuals with low fitness won't get the chance to procreate (not able to, succeed not or want not to find a partner to eventually mate with) or their children won't be 'fit' enough. Ergo: the weak individuals (or the ones that simply do not want to take part in the-rally-of-genes-over-each-generation) will die out. See? Nature will take care of this. This is exactly how this evolution happens with animals too (somebody already mentioned homosexual behaviour existing among animals).
So, the concept of homosexuality you seem to dislike is part of the essence of nature. Of course you can still dislike the concept..., but without natural selection (thus exclusion as well) we would not be annoying the IAYC pinboard right now :-)
JG
http://
Tue Nov 12 22:14:24 CET 2002
the meaning of life
Hey M.
nice discussion again, now about the meaning of life...
i feel a bit like literally preaching to the pope, as your statements resemble somehow a little state int he heart of italy (didn't you break up for you right to divorce??).
If you think that the main goal and responsiblity of mankind is to survive and spread that seems quite conservative to me...(are we something special in the universe or even in the realm of life?)
ok here is my view of the destination of humanity:
i think every generations main responsibilty is to create human living conditions for those alive and those to come, but not necessarily to be obliged to create a posterity. Just in case there is one (even of other biological species) we should treat or biosphere reasonably.
the green johannes
http://
Tue Nov 12 19:32:31 CET 2002
I'm innocent..............
I feel there is too much criticism aimed at me. I don't make the rules, I just say 'em. But a reply is expected, so I cannot disappoint. So, Yigal and Jeroen...here we go. This might take me a while. Sorry, I took so long JG. Pizza has priority. One last comment: Go Arsenal!
OK, so not only is suicide a sin, but it is stupid. Sure it may be your right to choose but why take your life? Does it not seem pointless? I think suicide is a very illogical concept in all perspectives, either religious or common-sensical. The decisions to call these acts sins was made a long time ago. What is a sin then? This perhaps needs defining. If something preys on a conscience, you are guilty, then it is a sin. If it is immoral then it is a sin. Then we have these predefined sins, like suicide and homosexuality. I just say these things, I don't invent them. But it is obvious to me that if life can be preserved then suicide should not be allowed.
Are you saying that moral laws become less relevant the longer we keep them? Morality is an issue that should be thought of as very important. Religion is a matter of faith. Faith, not necessarily irrational, maybe the realistic view that humans are insignificant. A love of God makes someone fanatical does it? English society is more liberal than you realise. If you experienced day to day life here as a young adult you would realise that. Sure, we do not allow weapons and other things that are destructive in nature but that is purely an issue of safety. You can say that religion is becoming less influential but that does not make it less fundamental.
OK, accepting homosexuality is wrong. Homosexual relationships are fruitless. They cannot produce offspring. Simple, the point of sex is to reproduce, create life. Homosexuals cannot do this. Is that clear enough?
Would it satisfy you if I decided to say I disliked or liked all gays? Here is my statement. I dislike the thought of homosexuality but I cannot discriminate. Thus I do not in principle dislike gay people just the concept of homosexuality. And (!) the few gays I know are not bad because they are gay.
Thank you 'somebody', thank you for your support. I will not reveal your indentity because I value the fact that you agree with me. He, he. 'Somebody' is not wrong. I dare Yigal, but I already devote too much time to these discussions. I do not fear your opinions, they after all only opinions. I have my own. I believe in mine. The fact of the matter is not that you have your opinion, but that you believe in your own opinion.
JG - good point. Society decides what is normal. But some things when viewed clincally are just wrong. Murder, is that right in any society, even if it is accepted? Oppression, is that right, even though a culture would (reluctantly) accept it? The South Sea Islands accept cannibalism, but cannibalism is still wrong. So how do we clincally view homosexuality? The whole point of humanity is to survive so this makes homosexuality wrong by any culture's definition because it does not allow humanity to evolve and survive.
I do not want a discussion of how different socities exist and how liberal/conservative they are. We should discuss homosexuality and not our views of this. Think of homosexuality from the point of your society but from the point of the whole of humanity. This gives you some truth.
I'm exhausted, I think some of this message makes no sense. If you want me to clarify, ask about specific points. Thanks again 'somebody'.
M.
Tue Nov 12 18:32:58 CET 2002
Jeroen
The Dutch society is not that open-minded. However, against homosexualism the Dutch are I think a bit more progressive than the English. Indeed, I favour a forum site or a chat site for open discussions.
yigal
http://
Tue Nov 12 17:45:02 CET 2002
You're normal ;-)
Y, actually I was hoping for a reply from M. With my argument I wanted to point out that it has not much use to fall back on unanalysed society norms as argument when discussing internationally. Never mind. Enjoy the open-minded, ehehehm, society in the Netherlands...
JG
http://
Tue Nov 12 17:21:10 CET 2002
I have this fancy info@iayc.org address, but it comes without
administrative access to the pinboard. Try proper HTML mark-up
the next time. And don't forget your closing tags. I have this
nightmare of the whole pinboard starting to blink...
Note to NAP leader: have a discussion game again :-)
Jo:rg
http://
Tue Nov 12 16:36:21 CET 2002
Jorg
I know that that quote stuff if not well readable. Plse change it. Normal is in a social meaning the average devided through the population.
Yigal
http://
Tue Nov 12 12:58:18 CET 2002
PB & homosexuality
Yigal, Better readable, for whom?! Not readable at all then for the rest of the PB visitors...
M,
[quote]If homosexuality is normal then people would accept it more readily.[/quote] Then what do you define by 'normal'? I tend to define 'normal' in this case mainly as being defined in the context of the society/culture you're living in. Consequently, the fact that people do not accept homosexuality more readily doesn't say a thing about homosexuality itself.
Have fun!
JG
http://
Tue Nov 12 11:48:35 CET 2002
argumentation
if somebody disagrees with me because of certain reasons let him/her give me some arguments instead of saying you don't agree with me. This is somewhat better... BTW, M. you can perhaps better e-mail me if you dare... makes the discussion a bit better readable.
Yigal
yigalherstein@hotmail.com
http://
Tue Nov 12 11:10:55 CET 2002
somebody is not wrond but somebody doesn't have time to explain what somebody wants to say. got to work.
somebody
http://
Tue Nov 12 11:07:47 CET 2002
Somebody else thinks somebody is wrong here...
somebody else
http://
Tue Nov 12 10:24:28 CET 2002
you are so wrong. I desagree with everything that you said.
somebody
http://
Tue Nov 12 10:13:01 CET 2002
M.
[quote]Mmhhmm....why is euthanasia not legal? Should we not have the right to choose to take our own life? Oh dear, suicide is a capital sin.[/quote]
Why would it be a sin? Because some people decided to call it a sin. Just like homosexuality btw.
[quote]Love is a beautiful thing, I will gladly attest to that. But are homosexuals being too lazy in some way by not trying to understand women? Why should we ignore religion Klaas? [/quote]
Let me give a answer to that. A religion is based on a belief which is a priori irrational. Since religion is becoming less influential by the day and since these moral laws were implied by some religious fanatics ages ago we can now say that they are outdated unless the society still wants to keep them for sociological reasons which are sometimes more rational. However, as in belgium as in the NL there are no socialogical reasons to accept these moral laws. Perhaps in the "conservative" English society there are still reasons....
[quote]If homosexuality is normal then people would accept it more readily.[/quote]
What would be the problem of that!?
[quote]I'm not entirely sure where we are going with this discussion now. Are we going to explore religion or homosexuality or are these two subjects implicitly linked? [/quote]
According to a couple of fundamentalists it is indeed coupled.
[quote]What is the nature of love then? Why do most people abhor gays then? I personally do not dislike gays. Why should I? Some of them are nice people.[/quote]
Yuck, I really dislike your quote here. Especially your last sentence. If "some are nice" it implies that some aren't purely based on the sticker you have put on them because of their sexual favour.
Yigal
http://
Tue Nov 12 00:33:56 CET 2002
*WOW*
A convert. Someone who realises the truth of love. YES!
M.
http://
Tue Nov 12 00:22:16 CET 2002
Love is...
Ignor my last few messages. Love exists it is eternal, I just haven't found it yet!
Neo.
Mon Nov 11 23:26:26 CET 2002
Phil, is God not perfect? Purity is perfection.
M.
http://
Mon Nov 11 23:22:43 CET 2002
Mat, nothing and nobody is perfect in this world... Perfection is something we can try to reach but it's out of this world.
Phil
Mon Nov 11 23:16:39 CET 2002
Reunion???
Hi there!!
Is there already something known about a possible occuring reunion somewhere in Europe?? If so, please pin these info onto this board.
Thanks!!
Q
Mon Nov 11 22:53:03 CET 2002
Oh My......(copyright Jess 2002)
What is beauty? Beauty is the epitome of all that is good. Honesty, wisdom, innocence. Beauty is a product of heart and mind and soul. It is the inner essence of a person. Aesthetics plays no role in beauty. Beauty is not just some perception. It is not just the result of chemicals and bodily functions. Are we machines? That's a whole new issue. We are not though. We are somehow elevated above this status. We can feel and beauty should give us a feeling of.....purity and love. Love everything that is beautiful. Emotions are more than chemicals too. Emotions allow us to.....feel. And (!) feeling is a magical experience. Feeling is so poignant. Just feel.
What is kindness? Kindness is an implicit form of love. Kindness is a low-level form of respectful love. It we were not kind, we would be blank and dourful. Kindness is bright and.....lovely. Thus, kindness contains love. A non-romantic kind of love, but love nonetheless. Love is not only apparent in the form of romantic love. It can be more simple or more complex. Kindness should inspire love in you. Love for others. Love for all. Kindness is a part of beauty and love is these things.
Love is in no way hysteria. Love may seem to be a form of obsession, but hysteria implies wildness and panic. Love is a soothing calm thing, but it does draw you in deep. Love may provoke hysteria if you lose love. Being cut-off or severed from love may cause you to panic. Never give-up on love. Love is so wonderful as to make you never want to give up. You must realise that. Just do not be disillusioned by love, do no be depressed by the miracle that is love. Love........love.
"All you need is love, all you need is love, all you need is love, love, love is all you need, love is all you need!"
M.
Mon Nov 11 22:18:40 CET 2002
screwing is not the answer :)
I do think love can be like a kind of hysteria.But Neil I find your message rather pessimistic, love is not only hysteria though! If it is something you share with someone it makes you feel great like Matthew said while if it is not shared (it happens sometimes) you get deeply depressed. It depends on whether you are lucky or not but those who won't give up, they will find a way to happiness. No matter how many times you lose you learn more each time. From my point of you It's worth trying hard and lots of patience and experience is needed. Homosexuality is not a suitable solution, we love women because we can't understand them, it's boring to leave with someone who looks like you, nothing to learn here!
It's easy to say but much harder to do for real :) and does it really need to be explained? Damn too many questions bothering me and few answers :)
Philippe who still hope
Mon Nov 11 22:18:19 CET 2002
What is beauty? Its just somebody's perceptions of what is good, true etc. and therefore governed by emotions which are nothing but chemicals running around a machine.
What is kindness You should be kind to all things and all people, love should have nothing to do with kindness, beyond the kindness which should be between all humans.
Love is falsehood, self delusion, pain
Neo.
http://
Mon Nov 11 21:47:18 CET 2002
Neil
You are confused, love is not panic or fear. It is beauty and kindness.
M.
http://
Mon Nov 11 21:38:43 CET 2002
Strange
That definition sounds exactly like love to me.
Neo.
http://
Mon Nov 11 20:20:59 CET 2002
Love..........................
Love is not hysteria, hysteria is:
hys·ter·i·a (h-str-, -stîr-)
n.
1. Behavior exhibiting excessive or uncontrollable emotion, such as fear or panic.
2. A mental disorder characterized by emotional excitability and sometimes by amnesia or a physical deficit, such as paralysis, or a sensory deficit, without an organic cause.
That is hysteria, and love does not really fit that definition somehow. Love has many myriad forms but in the end it is instinctive, intuitive and oh so natural. Love is also beautiful, it can be fragile, it can be strong. Love will offer comfort, it will offer warmth. It can dispell darkness. Love can be confusing but it will speak to you directly from your heart. "Können Herzen sprechen?" A song lyric. Can hearts speak? Yes. Close your eyes, in the bewitching hour, it will murmur to you.
Remember above all: Love is magical, beautiful, we all have love in us, we all need to give and receive love. It's not hysteria. It is enlightening and touches us in so many. Love is special.
M.
Mon Nov 11 14:51:54 CET 2002
Screw Love....
It's all just hysteria.
Neo.
Mon Nov 11 13:51:06 CET 2002
What the Photon..........
Is what you mean Klaas!
Sure we should be more 'enlightened' in our sexual views. If enlightened is the correct word here. Are you saying we should encourage other sexual practices that are considered unhealthy? Sadomasichism? That urban myth of snuff films? Uh!
So, in our fantastic 21st Century, why not have complete equality for everyone then? Why do we not allow same sex marriages in the UK? Why do we have poverty anywhere in the world?
Mmhhmm....why is euthanasia not legal? Should we not have the right to choose to take our own life? Oh dear, suicide is a capital sin. Love is a beautiful thing, I will gladly attest to that. But are homosexuals being too lazy in some way by not trying to understand women? Why should we ignore religion Klaas? If homosexuality is normal then people would accept it more readily.
I'm not entirely sure where we are going with this discussion now. Are we going to explore religion or homosexuality or are these two subjects implicitly linked? What is the nature of love then? Why do most people abhor gays then? I personally do not dislike gays. Why should I? Some of them are nice people.
The Philosopher's Final Thought:
What do we have to think about now? Should we accept homosexuality? Should we be zealous about equality in light of the fact that we have thus accepted gays? Does religion play a role in any of this?
Take care of yourselves.......and each other.
M.
Mon Nov 11 12:28:58 CET 2002
What the fuck
Being straight, Lesbian or Gay or anything else, which should not matter any person, if you love a person, no matter the sex, then that is what counts, and not what they write in the bible or any other religious book.
If you love a person so much that you would follow him to the depths of hell no matter the sex, then you should not be blamed by anything or by anybody. Because love is a beautiful thing. Nobody likes the idea that ppl talk about him/her and the person they love and say how it should be, that they don't fit together, etc etc. Not even straight ppl.
Homosexuality is totally normal, even animals have it (we are also animals, but next to that okay).
Love is something that other people should respect! Come on, we live in the 21st century, not 1AD.
Klaas
Mon Nov 11 11:32:55 CET 2002
Oh Dear!
No, no, no.....homosexuality is not good. In either sexes. No, no, no......
M.
Mon Nov 11 00:41:00 CET 2002
IDEA
as a result of men and women being psichologicaly soooo
different homosexuality/lesbianism is thougth to have
appeared in the evolution as a solution - a benefical
coalition between people of the same sex, who can easier
understand each others needs and desires
a scientist
voila
Sun Nov 10 19:29:12 CET 2002
I agree,
You should always try to follow your heart, even when in leads you into the darkest pits of depression and up the highest mountains of trials, for a life without love is a terrible thing.
However to say that is too easy - what happens when following your heart causes pain to another? Or when following your heart will lead you away from important things and people in your life. Or in the worst case when you cannot hear the message from your heart, or cannot believe them?
Who can say they follow their heart? Its either just a powerful pump (the physical heart) or waves of chemicals passing through receptors in your brain (the emotional heart).
The Depressed Neo.
Sat Nov 9 21:15:34 CET 2002
Women..........
There is a famous sketch in British comedy by a man called Harry Enfield. The sketch is entitled: 'Women - Know Your Limits!' Oops, I have doomed myself by even mentioning it! He, he.
Who says men can't think with their hearts? Are you trying to imply something Ania? Only three compliments? Why not make it five to be a nicer round number? Klaas, you mean you didn't know that it was impossible to understand women? Or you mean the secret to understanding women came too late? Miserable without women......? Actually, you are so right! Bjorn, if you're a man why do we all call you Heidi? Or are you really unsure? I think women never know what they want. And (!) that we should all just follow our hearts!
M. (not really a man)
Sat Nov 9 18:01:40 CET 2002
not enough
Well, sadly sometimes it is not enough. Anyway, remember that what doesn't kill you that strengthens you. Sometimes the problem is that women do not know what they really want. Then they 'follow their heartsong'. And of course the compliments should be said before TEA (I, personally, would not mind listening to them before every of the numerous teas I drink every day :)p.s.
"Facing the Future /
Every journey begins /
With but a small step. /
And every day is a chance /
For a new, small step /
In the right direction. /
Just follow your Heartsong." Mattie Stepanek
Ania
Sat Nov 9 12:03:30 CET 2002
Women
That is always the same Klaas. The right information get too late to our heads...
And even when they say we should just love them it is not always enough. But don't ask me why, ask them and you may get an answer. I didn't so far...
a man (at least I think so...)
bjoern@iayc.org
Sat Nov 9 11:33:54 CET 2002
Not late
It's not late klaas, you were late picking it up!!! Mathew woman might think from their head or heart, just know this,
"you would be miserable without them" so just love them!!!!
a woman 2
http://
Sat Nov 9 01:45:06 CET 2002
Why ...
why does al this information always comes to late!!!
Klaas
Fri Nov 8 23:09:13 CET 2002
Coffee?
I think that should read tea.
Jo:rg
http://
Fri Nov 8 23:05:19 CET 2002
the point is...
Secret No1. Women do not think with their heads, they think with their hearts.
Secret No2. Three compliments before the morning coffee will do wonders.
a woman
anna@iayc.org
Fri Nov 8 22:56:39 CET 2002
Hmm....
You think we don't try?
A Story....
Once upon a time a young man and a young woman were in love. They were happy. The man loved the woman. Just loved her. He did not even attempt to understand her. She was too deep, too unfathomable. She was too intelligent. He was happy not understanding. Then one day they have an argument. The woman ends up saying to the man: "Why don't you understand me?"
Makes you wonder......so if we don't understand women, we just love them we get accused of not understanding. Oh dear. But if we try and understand women we get confused.
The moral of the story - make it look like you're trying to understand and they will be happy! He, he.
All material above is subject to copyright 2002, Philosophy Productions Ltd. I, the stated, do hereby declare that woman are fantastic and definitely the better sex! This story is fictional but can be construed as a common occurence globally.
Note to men: Get you fingernails painted. It is enlightening. It helps you understand.
A Man and A Philosopher (sometimes)
Fri Nov 8 22:40:38 CET 2002
Don't even try to understand women, just love them!
a woman
anna@iayc.org
Fri Nov 8 19:16:18 CET 2002
Phewww....
Who'de have thunk it, I arrive to get my practical marked, the guy looks through it in 10 minutes, awards me a S+ (i.e. more than satisfactory) and then its over. Always finish your work 5 minutes before deadline. Its worth it.
Neo.
http://
Fri Nov 8 18:41:29 CET 2002
Ouch
M.
http://
Fri Nov 8 17:08:01 CET 2002
Bang
Klaas
Fri Nov 8 17:03:58 CET 2002
Oh My God...........
Somebody shoot me quick! Einstein did have children, damn I'm stupid. I'm so sorry people.
M.
http://
Fri Nov 8 15:49:01 CET 2002
Mmhhmm........
Respect to the RCSAFAPC. Muscles, perhaps it is the worst thing that can happen! But, but, but.......you at least have to try! Or maybe I will persuade Sebastian B. (BGM) to go for the win then. Go BGM!
I am glad to hear that England is not the only place that it is raining. In fact, I would prefer snow. At least you can play in the snow. Well now, yes, women are too deep for us men perhaps. No, not perhaps, they just are. So, all you ladies out there, teach us stupid men how to understand you. Give us some clues. Next p-board topic: How to Understand Women.
What's a food competition then? Is it: who can eat as much as possible? That would be fun. It is a pity that Einstein had no children. But I did hear that he slept with Marilyn Monroe and ended up having cold showers for the rest of his life. In the make-up competition do they paint boys' nails? He, he. Tell all the boys that it is fun.
Neil, don't worry, it's not just you that does that. It's like my favourite pastime to handle work like that. 4 minutes before deadline is my closest. But, damn, was it a rush! And (!) I doubt women do this, they are just too smart. Before any enquires - I am stone cold sober. I mean it. He, he.
To conclude - why are women so special? It's not fair. They get all the sense, intelligence and depth! Maybe I should go and investigate how I can become female!
M.
http://
Fri Nov 8 14:26:39 CET 2002
Women...
Its true that in many ways women are superior to men, for instance I doubt many women would have left finishing their physics write up until 1/2 an hour before its due in, then wasted five minutes writing a message on the IAYC pinboard when they should be working on it, like I am right now... Really ought to get on with work, talk more later.
Neo.
Fri Nov 8 08:48:27 CET 2002
I AGREE
with everything that these people write on the p-board.
Because women are so intelligent and deep. That's why you can't understand them.
Today: free day. I mean the day when teachers become pupils and pupils become teachers. We were supposed to have a football match between teachers and students but it's been snowing and raining. But I think there is make-up competition. He,he. Food competition. But this year I'm not going. Two years are just toooooooooooo much for me.
Though I might change my mind. Last year we had a theater play. Something with Einstein and the devil. Of course, there was also a hot woman round there. So, Einstein had two children: a genius and an idiot( wearing Pampers). That was cool.
Bye people!!!!!!!!!!!Sleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep
Sma-who recently had a sex change
http://
Fri Nov 8 02:15:45 CET 2002
Hunk of Meat ...
... keep Cool. It's not the worst thing that can happen, being beaten by a girl in the rubiks-cube-solving-as-fast-as-possible-competition (RCSAFAPC). Me and Sebastian B. had two years ago both 1:50 in the RCSAFAPC. Three years ago we had Kalle and Zita solving it in less then 3 minutes. You see, every year somebody will be faster, and it just can't be the same person every year that wins the RCSAFAPC. So I just would say, Jess go for it. 1:45 is nice, but I guess you came on a certain point where you didn't had to switch the corners, and that gives time. I would say, an apprentice became a master!
Klaas
Fri Nov 8 01:30:52 CET 2002
**YAWN**
Goodnight World....
ZZzzZZzzZZzzZZzzZZzzZZzzZZzz......ZZzzZZzzZZzzZZzz
M.
http://
Fri Nov 8 00:35:27 CET 2002
Hi.
Haven't posted for a while, bored, sober, thought I'd say Hi to all. BTW my college team (avec moi) just won at darts.
Sees.
Neo.
Thu Nov 7 23:44:40 CET 2002
Aarrgghh.............................
Klaas you need to start practising. Forget neutrinos and supernovae, your cubing title may lay in shatters next year. Go Klaas! Go Klaas! So, even Jess admits that girls are complicated? 1:45? I don't believe you. Klaas, we can't have this. Someone without a nickname winning the cube competition? It just can't happen. I must start practising mine then. Muscles - Go Muscles! So, who agrees that girls are confusing?
Hunk of Meat (M. - to the rest of you)
http://
Thu Nov 7 22:08:07 CET 2002
cubie -vs- cutie
Girls may be more confusing than Rubiks Cubes.. but that doesn't say too much as I just solved the cube in 1:45. Are you practicing, Klaas?
<3 Jess*
jessicay@mit.edu
Thu Nov 7 19:15:36 CET 2002
Hey
Hi Tijl! That is Sebastian S., for sure it isn't you :) So, nice to see you again here, you didn't forget us!! (so far away when we went drunk in Paris... :) )
roberto
roberto@iayc.org
Thu Nov 7 17:42:14 CET 2002
Ohmygod
Say, who is the guy on the second picture of singing evening, with the grey shoes? It could be me. I have the same shirt and the same shoes, but I thought I wasnt at an IAYC for six years. Was I there? How did this happen? How come I dont remember?
Questions, questions, questions.
Tijl
tijl.vanneste@student.kuleuven.ac.be
http://
Thu Nov 7 00:58:04 CET 2002
Addendum........
Philippe and Matthew
Thu Nov 7 00:48:26 CET 2002
**CONCLUSION**
A Consensus Has Been Reached On The Subject Of Women
RUBIK'S CUBES ARE EASIER TO UNDERSTAND THAN WOMEN! ITS TRUE!
Philippe and Matthew
Wed Nov 6 19:31:42 CET 2002
Neil
Tis ok!
M.
http://
Wed Nov 6 19:21:34 CET 2002
Matt
Sorry
Neo
http://
Wed Nov 6 14:56:33 CET 2002
Neil.................
And Davide. They were potatoes! Trust me on that. Neil, if you think that my grammatical approach is even remotely comparable to your doppelganger then think again! Damn, you do need to aplologise Neil. Every person? So you are counting me as you too? The only person I pretend to be is the Philosopher. Univeristy Internet code of practice? What's one of those? It wasn't me Neil.
RAIN! I hate rain! Why does it always rain here? Damn, rain. Not only does it rain but it is too windy to use an umbrella. So you can't even stay dry!
I have a unique and twisted grammatical approach Neil and why would stoop so low as to impersonate you?
AARRGGHH! RAIN!
M.
http://
Wed Nov 6 13:33:35 CET 2002
They weren't potatoes
They were Scottish poetetee.
Weren't they?
Davide
http://
Wed Nov 6 13:24:16 CET 2002
Matthew....
You know that pretending to be somebody else on the Internet is almost certainly against your university internet code of practice and bleh bleh bleh.
That last message is not mine, its always easy to tell as mine tend to have worse spelling and a unique grammatical approach.
P.S. If that wasn't you matt, I apologise. However seeing as you post around 900f messages on the board as a physicist I can dismiss any posting not by you as a stastical outlier, and therefore conclude that Matt is in fact every other person in the world.
The True Neo.
neil.tarrant@stcatz.ox.ac.uk
Wed Nov 6 09:52:56 CET 2002
MONTE CARLO DAY
Last day in my university there was a Monte Carlo day, everybody getting crazy with algorithms and in the and my friend giving random numbers distributed around a mean value with a Poisson distribution just by mind.
I didn't manage to convert my chips in anything else
I didn't have chips at all, just tea at five.
Neo
http://
Wed Nov 6 02:24:30 CET 2002
Early Morning
WHERE IS EVERYBODY?
I am tired, I must go and think deeply and then sleep a bit.
Goodnight people. Morning soon!
M.
http://
Tue Nov 5 19:34:13 CET 2002
Bananananananananas
Just to test this. I will be careful Klaas.
Inflatable Crococdiles rule!
Inflate those Bananananannanas
All these typos are purposeful!
M.
Tue Nov 5 16:18:06 CET 2002
One Potato, Two Potato, Three Potato, Four, Five Potato, Six Potato, Seven Potato, More! Erotic cucumber party! A challenge, cucumbers are harder to eat than bananas. So, I'm not the guaranteed winner. Jess, there's the perfect suggestion. Neil - can anything be erotic? Mhm, not so sure about that. I can think of things that are not even remotely erotic. Boson is a highly offensive swear word, so never call a banana that! Klaas - here's an idea - you should publish a list of your particles and there rating on the swear scale. Neil, ask me for a list of highly non-erotic things. I can provide such a thing. Klaas: Publish that list of particles so I can use them! And the results of the crazy competition!
M. (The Philosopher? No, he's gone!)
Tue Nov 5 15:13:16 CET 2002
Banana Mans real name was Eric. Its' true!
M.
http://
Tue Nov 5 15:12:58 CET 2002
Banana Trivia.
I'm reminded of the sesame street salute to the banana with all this talk. It was one of their little musical numbers which only actually managed to find the word mańana (not sure about placement of the ~ there) with banana, thus resulting a rather boring song.
I think it is quite clear that Bananas are bosons, or else how else could BEC's (Banana-Eicecream condenstates) form? Klaas - its a winner of idea, lets hope the nobel prize comittee agree for next year :).
As you can probably tell I'm bored as well right now, so I'm gonna go install Linux on my computer and annoy Bill Gates for something fun to do.... That is unless the erotic contest is gonna take place soon. Try hard enough and anything can be erotic, e.g. Chess is the Thomas Crown affair, or much more funnily in Austin Powers 2.
Neil
neil_nova@hotmail.com
Tue Nov 5 14:33:20 CET 2002
Contest-suggestion
What about some erotical Cucumer contest/party?
(exact. at 06.00hr)
PB
have a look view pins down
http://the.same...
Tue Nov 5 13:33:06 CET 2002
one banana, two bananas, three bananas, four and moooooooore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
wasn't that with potatoes?
banana man
http://
Tue Nov 5 10:28:45 CET 2002
Competition
Klaas - you are wacko. I'm wacko, Jess is wacko. I'm not so up for the erotic contest but eating bananas.......well that's my forte. So, score one for the Philosopher. Who wants to see me win though? Bring it on. I'll have a workshop on banana eating at some point. To help you all along. So, Klaas, what does an erotic contest involve then? Or should I be asking Jess that? Jess, how do we enter these competitions? Can we have an apple eating competition too? That would make lots of people happy! Or hows about a philosophy competition? A nickname Jess - well Klaas and I brainstormed but nothing fitted. We will try but Klaas distilled it too its essence and it has to be something natural and a sort of caught-in-the-moment type of assignation. So maybe some time this will happen to you. Bananas! Everyone suggest competitions to entertain me.
Ye Olde Banana Eating Philosopher
pro-banana-eater@platain.com
www.bananas-rule.inflatlable.bananas.tv
Tue Nov 5 06:48:21 CET 2002
erotic contest?!
I never thought to have an erotic contest, but I don't see why not (well..). We could have a banana-eating contest (though that would apparently violate some rules of Physics AND Ye Olde Philosopher is a guaranteed win). Any other ideas? And whatever happened to assigning me a nickname?
-Jess*
jessicay@mit.edu
Tue Nov 5 03:15:56 CET 2002
The one space banana operator
Hmm, I always thought that the banana was a canonical quantisated field operator. Using this operator lets call it B and its hermitian. you can write down the Banana-field. These operators are annihilation (or harvesting) and creation (planting) operators of the banana. And are both much used in banana plantations. due to the fact that a banana is a fermion (it is not possible to have to banana's in the same space-time point and with same quantum-numbers), the operators are answering to the anticommutationrelations of the fermion-banana particle. The physicists of the banana plantations have even proven that probability of a banana being in two different space-time points which are not in each others light cone, drops exponentially. So in normal words, by moving the banana from point A to B (space-time points), you have to harvest or annihilate (eat) the banana first in A, and then create the same banana in B, to eat it later, this means due to the light cone thing, that at the same time, on different positions (space only) two persons eat the same banana. And as every normal person knows, this is not possible. Although my opinion is that this theory is wrong because banana's are not fermions but bosons, and this gives also the possibility of growing a bunch of bananas together. but hey, I'm only a simple student, so who would listen to me. Why am I so nuts for that moment, doing QFT on a banana. Jess, when do you have that erotic contest?
Klaas who is totaly wacko
Tue Nov 5 01:49:23 CET 2002
CRAZY?!?!?!?!
Am I winning Klaas? Come on tell me the results. I blatantly deserve to win. I'm nuts! I must win. Who won, update us on the scores!
M.
http://
Tue Nov 5 00:20:28 CET 2002
Bored.....................
An epidemic of boredom is spreading! Take up a new hobby. Jess- not comedy though! Try reading some new interesting books. Try learning cricket. Thats my challenge to you all. We can have a European cricket team next year versus England! I know we will win! Bring it on Europe. He, he.
M.
http://
Mon Nov 4 22:58:50 CET 2002
speaking of what happens when we're bored...
One day this woman gets on a bus. As she's walking towards the back for an empty seat, another woman says to her, "That's the ugliest baby I've ever seen." The woman keeps walking and sits down, but the more she thinks of it, the more she is bothered by the woman's comment. Finally, she turns to the man next to her and says, "There's a woman up there who told me the most offensive thing I've ever heard. Do you think I should go ask her to apologize?" The man quickly replies, "If it's really bothering you, I think you should talk to her. I'll tell you what... you go talk to her, and I'll hold your monkey."
the joker
jessicay@mit.edu
Mon Nov 4 22:40:39 CET 2002
by the way ... Banana
A banana is flying first class from New York to L.A. Two scientists, one in each city, are talking on the phone about the banana. Because it is moving in relationship to its noun, the referent of the word banana never occupies one space, and anything that does not occupy one space does not exist.
Therefore, a banana will arrive at JFK with no limousine into the city, even though the reservation was confirmed in L.A.
quoted, "Schrödinger's Cat"/"Pure Drivel" by Steve Martin
I guess you can see, I'm bored...
see ya
Paul
pgbeck@gmx.at
http://www.gymmelk.ac.at/~m93030/
Mon Nov 4 17:10:06 CET 2002
Neil..............
You're right, that is a pineapple. Silly Jess. If you ask nicely Jess someone will probably eat a banana erotically, whilst stripping. Ha, ha. Any volunteers?
M.
http://
Sun Nov 3 23:45:21 CET 2002
Je suis un ananas - Doesn't that mean I am a pineapple, or is my GCSE french failing me...
Neo.
Sun Nov 3 19:38:47 CET 2002
and by porn shop, Oh My meant Matt's house.
oh my 2
http://
Sun Nov 3 19:37:27 CET 2002
je suis un anana
For the person who offers to be the seductive banana eater, Matt has offered to be the banana.
-Jess*
jessicay@mit.edu
Sun Nov 3 19:35:54 CET 2002
Addition: Jess...............
Jess has volunteered her services to go and acquire a pair of edible panties for anyone in desperate need when she visits the porn store on Friday for her weekly shop!
Oh My!
http://
Sun Nov 3 19:33:06 CET 2002
Bananas
Jess says she wants to see someone eat a banana erotically. Happy Neil?
M.
http://
Sun Nov 3 19:13:13 CET 2002
Cool Neil!!!!
not a very common name
http://
Sun Nov 3 19:03:36 CET 2002
Why Hasn't Anyone posted!!!
Another Sleepy Sunday! Anyway, I was surfing this morning and found the following link which I think is pretty cool - its all the most common names in Europe by country, however it has left me pondering; what is the most common name over the whole of the continent? Lets find out...
Neil
http://europe.tiscali.co.uk/lifestyle/report/200210/23/europe.html
Sun Nov 3 13:01:10 CET 2002
Monte Carlo Night
Last night my university held a 'monte carlo' night, with poker, roulette and blackjack. I'm happy to say that thanks to the donation of some friends chips, and some rather sneaky card counting by the more mathematicaly inclined friends of mine, I managed to turn 20 chips into 292 over the course of an evening, and ending up wining the first prize (we were not real money (Dam!) but with representative chips. Poker is definately my game now!
Neil - in the money
Sun Nov 3 12:03:05 CET 2002
Happy birthday Miha!
all
http://
Sat Nov 2 02:16:44 CET 2002
Don't run with a stress fracture
...duh? You might think so. Anyway, hello everybody. It's really nice to contact you all again, especially since I have negative free time. You'd think high school wouldn't give too much homework, but... And the moral to this story? Stress fractures hurt, especially when you run on them. It was the last race of the season, and my leg completely gave out the first 1500 of the 5K, and I was not going to give up, so I finished...in pain, yes...disappointed, yes. (See the second/third page of "Odds and Ends" on the link at the bottom of the message). And I'm learning the joys of crutches. Fun. Next up...swimming!
Hope all of you have good times and at least time to check your e-mail once a week :)
PS Those of you in university, does your brain usually freeze up on midterms, or is it just me?
Kat
http://www.pbase.com/megleg/root
Fri Nov 1 21:50:40 CET 2002
or....?
just like the good old IAYC customs: use your isomat!!
JG
http://www.isomataroundyourtelescope.org
Fri Nov 1 21:49:40 CET 2002
Dew remover
Klaas, you may remove dew from the corrector plate with a scourer (schuurspons). This causes very intersting star images. However, a dew heater (a group of resistors in a ring around your main optics (front lense, primary mirror) works the best in humid area as the Benelux. The heat created should be only a few degrees above dewpoint. The total power through the resistors should be around 10W. With P=V*I and V=I*R is it possible to calculate the voltage/amperage needed. If you need extra info, you can mail me of course
yigal
yigalherstein@hotmail.com
http://www.dauwkap.nl/onzin.html
Fri Nov 1 21:46:12 CET 2002
Important Question.................
Yeah, what is the distance between the Moon craters Tycho and Copernicus? Can anyone help me? If not jsut point out a resource that may be able to help me. Thanks. Just stick some kind of answer on the p-board. I will most grateful to anyone who knows! Thanks people.
Matthew
http://
Fri Nov 1 08:06:45 CET 2002
Dew off - for KlaasŽ telescope
First, to prevent it, you can use a dew-shild (that tube that makes your telescope look bigger and therefore more cool).But if that doesnŽt help, you can use also a so-called "dew-remover" or "dew-heater", which is in fact a wire that you attach arround the telescope (or eyepiece) tube, where the lense (of the SCT or Maksutov) is, and then you put some current through the wire, so it heats up and therefore pevents the dew to form. This is of course a very simplified description of the device, more information you can find on the internet (the keyword: "dew remover" or "dew heater") - youŽll find there some commercial versions aswell as do-it-alone descriptions.
Hope that helps. And greetings to everyone from Gerching (Munich), where a non-official (2 persons, 3 nationalities) IAYC reunion breakfast will begin right now.
TiNa, with Jo:rg preparing the breakfast
http://
Thu Oct 31 20:27:58 CET 2002
Telescopes and dew, something that does not work together
I'm wondering if somebody knows a method how to remove dew from your telescope, without a hairdryer. Does anybody know how to remove it or just avoiding it? I'm hoping to get an answer from Bastien/Bart/Heidi/Tim or anybody else with lots of experience in moister!
Klaas
Thu Oct 31 19:37:44 CET 2002
Stolen from Oxford?
Not a chance Neil. The Assassins existed long before Oxford. The origin of The Assassins is in AD 632. This is the earliest date to which their creation can be traced. I am talking about the origins of the Nizari Isma'ilis. That Islamic sect, an important Shi'a minority. This sect's name is where the drug called Hashish comes from. The Assassins used to take a variant of Hashish before they went on their killing sprees. I believe that they imported Hashish from Yemen [modern name]. So Assassin is essentially a corruption of the word Hashish. Sorry Neil, Oxford is not the quintessential home to everything. {Disclaimer - in no way does this message advocate drugs or violence.} {Notes - Hashish is smoked. The Assassins still exist with their latest leader having been sworn in in 1967.}
Matthew
http://
Thu Oct 31 18:32:02 CET 2002
Stolen!
As far as I understand it (then again Oxford claims this about everything) The Assasins are an Oxford traditional dating back decades etc. Zzzzz. Zzzzz. Oxford - home to everything before you.
Oxford Guy
Thu Oct 31 17:25:24 CET 2002
Finally!
I am so glad I have sometime off my studies.So the p-board is turning into a chatroom,hmmm.So our really important and celebrated fest is nearing.It's diwali!I guess some of you would have heard about it,it's celebrated all around the world.It's the festival of light's, this is when we have these amazing fireworks lit up the night sky.It's one amazing view!!!
Narmadha
http://
Thu Oct 31 16:32:30 CET 2002
Awake too late..... guitarists.........
I actually woke up. But.... after all my lectures. Oh my, I missed them all. So what are the designated weapons Gem? Ok, here's a challenge - I'm listening to 'In The Air Tonight' by Phil Collins. What on Earth is this song about? I have heard various theories. Like, it is abtou a guy who drowned or a guy who was in a car crash, but... I have no clue. Can someone tell me? Does anyone think that Rammstein are a good band? Any Germans who like Rammstein? Their song 'Zwitter' is quite amusing. I'm sure someon german will tell you what that means. Ooh, the song has changed - Santana. So, who thinks Santana is the greatest living guitarist? Mhm, I'm not sure. He is good, that is definite. But, Joe Walsh, Eric Clapton and John Squire from the Stone Roses are better in my opinion. Maybe Ritchie Blackmore or David Gilmour or Peter Frampton. Hard question. One answer: Joe Walsh is the best guitarist alive. Who agrees? Who disagrees? Lets have people's opinions who is the best.
Matthew
http://
Thu Oct 31 13:47:51 CET 2002
The Guild Of Assassins
Guess what, there's a cool new soc being created at uni (probably stolen from somewhere else) which works kind of like the shower game, except to kill someone you must present them with an object designated a weapon. The worst thing is the lack of water and general showerness, but then it is very COLD up here and I haven't got a coat...
Gemma
gr128@york.ac.uk
http://
Thu Oct 31 03:35:29 CET 2002
Good night everyone. Good night world. The rain and the wind. I wish I had more to say........... subdued is the name of the game.