Our World

[baba G]

To me it seemed like your connatation, I don't think I was reading too far into it.:)

 

[squiggly]

Honestly squiggly, I think a soldier does what they are told.

I've got a best friend from childhood and still a best friend these days, he works for the govt, doing hydrology based engineering, he designs computer programs from scratch to solve problems that have no known answers yet...it's cool stuff.
Do you ever hang on chemistry boards and chat chemistry with people of your calibur? Seems you rarely talk of cannabis, just my observation, I know you don't have to grow herb to be on here but I'd love to see your work if you grow? As you seem to have an acute attention to detail and a passion for learning; I'm imagining you could grow some super!

I live in a non-medical state, so there will be no pictures from yours truly.

This part of this forum is specifically for this type of banter. I'm well within TOU to be posting stuff like this here. You can actually check out my profile and go check out some of my older posts and you'll find that I do comment quite frequently on cannabis related stuff. I also buy mad gear from the farm. I'm probably one of Alien's biggest customers. Have a pack of FPOG waiting for the right time to pop :)

Most of the stuff i post is still chemistry related. I tend to that sort of thing because it's where i can be most useful. I try not to say things which aren't of use, unless they are for leisure (this type of thing here).

I've done some discussions on terpenes, effects of light cycle and the biochemical pathways associated with that, and I've even been working on a cannabis chemistry compendium that I plan to publish to the farm at a later date, so that everyone will have access to the chemistry knowledge most relevant to growing cannabis.

As for your question about frequenting chem boards--yes I do. I tend to leave the more boring stuff for those boards, but often I am talking about canna chemistry there as well. This is the niche I am attempting to dig out for myself, it is where my interest truly lies.

Most of my chem bantering needs are satisfied within my research group--there are plenty of projects and the like going on to keep me busy. There are 11 of us, so it gets pretty busy in the lab :)

As for the attention to detail comment--yes this is definitely something I'm used to hearing. I actually suffer from an autism spectrum disorder. Meh I shouldn't say suffer, it's actually been more of a blessing than a curse for me. Certain things just pop at me, and I can't form a thought without attacking it from 10 different perspectives.

This is part of the reason I like pot so much, as I seem to "get" people a lot better when I'm high. I'm essentially a few orders of magnitude higher-functioning than someone who has Asperger's. So I get sarcasm and stuff like that, and I'm not at some savant level when it comes to math and science (although my abilities are a bit more fine tuned for these than most).

It does translate out sometimes as me coming across socially flat--and I've even been told I come across as a sociopath at times. I realize things like this often. Like for instance I have feelings, but how I get to them is a bit different from most. I actually think a sentence out in my head and "decide" what feeling I should have. The feeling "feels" legit--but it was based on a decision. There's very little in my life that doesn't involve an actively thought-out decision.

Like if someone pisses me off:

I'll first say, hey this person just did X. I think that I should be pissed off about X--that's how that social construct works. Then I go ahead and get pissed off, once my brain has given the okay. This happens very quickly, so it's not as awkward as it might sound--but it certainly can cause people to get the wrong impression of me, especially over the internet.

Fortunately for me when you decide what your feelings are going to be, it's super easy not to give a fuck about what other people think of you.

See in my position, I actually need other people's perspectives to get by. I always have. That is why, I think, that I have developed this logical debate style. I need to really vet my perspectives out, or I'll end up doing something I shouldn't have.

As an aspiring scientist I also realize that not only is my view of the world skewed from others, but also that everyone's view of the world is merely an illusion--things are not what they seem. Imagine if you could see infared radiation, or ultraviolet. Or even gamma rays. What would the night sky look like then?

It would look as it actually is, that's how it would look.

If we think of me as being on a similar spectrum, perhaps I can see that infared a little bit--but I'm missing part of the blue band in the visible spectrum because my perspective is shifted. For this reason I need people to figure out what blue light can tell us (figuratively of course)--but at the same time, I might be able to give you guys some insight on the infared information.

Using logic is just my method for deciding who to believe. What doing this has taught me, is that everyone should do this. Logic doesn't lie, and it only misleads when all of the facts aren't in hand--or according to an error made by the logician. If you do things the correct way, you will get to the correct answer.

 

[baba G]

I wasn't saying or hinting anything about you being out of line with the TOU, I was just curious if you had a thread or any shots of your cannabis work. I do appreciate the biochemistry when it's needed for growing herbs, but when most people buy bottled nutes these days, that takes a lot of the biochem out of growing for a lot of folks. But the chemistry of the plant is fascinating and chemistry in general is pretty awesome and answers much in life along with physics. I also am a scientist, a Botanist:D atleast according to the university...lol

It's hard to imagine seeing gamma rays but I'll try after I smoke some amber shatter! lol

 

[baba G]

You should develop a nutrient company squiggly, you can retire by the time your 50 and buy an island like big mike!

 

[squiggly]

You should develop a nutrient company squiggly, you can retire by the time your 50 and buy an island like big mike!

Way ahead of you. Working on generating capital at the moment :)

 

[sanvanalona]

The nutrient business is not as lucrative as it may seem. It is an extremely hard market to get into, and from what I am told by homie who owns an upstart one, everyone buys from the same source so that sets the margins more or less. You see I am a scientist too, a political one. LOL. More than that though I am a business man, if you need some place to go with all this chemistry based cannabis research and piecing that into a business get into proper testing and r and d, that is assuming you would like to make money and not run around trying to compete with the big boys.....and they are quite big these days too. First things first, get to a medical state so your own research can begin, we have a lot more room in growth in the understanding of cannabis in medical states than you would in starting a nute company. Sorry a little long-winded but that C-4 will do that to me!

 

[ttystikk]

Way ahead of you. Working on generating capital at the moment :)

Commenting on the last page or so of your posts, so forgive me if this seems a bit disjointed.

On the plane hitting the Pentagon; the building was undergoing remodeling work designed to make it more resistant to terrorist attack with truck bombs. The work hadn't progressed very far as of 9/11, they had only completed one side of the five (hence the name, penta-gon). By happenstance, that was the side the plane hit, which combined with the speed it was going, all but completely obliterated the wings without penetrating the hardened facing of the building. The engines were torn off when the plane skipped off the ground in front of the building; I remember seeing the scar of impact and the remnants of the engines as shown on TV on that fateful day.

Can someone please explain to me why this has to be a conspiracy? What's wrong with the official story, except perhaps some details? The Bush 43 administration was caught so flat-footed by this supposedly planned event that they couldn't pivot from their predetermined plan to attack Iraq (HERE is the REAL conspiracy, but no one is looking for it!) and instead wound up trying to blame the wrong man for quite some time. It was Bin Laden, NOT Saddam- and of course it took months for the oval office to catch on. If this WAS a conspiracy, surely they would have been a lot more on the ball.

On your skin cancer; basal skin cell carcinoma? None of my business, but it seems right? Melanoma is a far more deadly type of skin cancer... Anyway, any cancer sucks, maybe you can tell me if/how smoking cannabis helps you with this?

On your 'autism spectrum disorder;' I am currently researching this to help explain some of my own issues- which seem strangely similar to yours. Wondering if you could help point me towards any info I might find helpful in ruling it in or out in my case? This may also explain why I feel like you and I find ourselves philosophically on the same page so much.

On starting a nutrient line; I can think of no one else more qualified, but it is also true that this is a tough business to break into. I'd be happy to help field/beta test, when you get that far! I have a few ideas about how to differentiate yours from the crowd, too...

 

[dirk d]

The only video footage we have thats been made available from the pentagon clearly shows an explosion on the Wall. You do not see any debris blowing around. If this was a plane that hit the pentagon then clearly a release of the video, a whole shot video not 5 frames, would put this to rest. There is just too many holes to be considered closed for me. And for many other pilots. Military pilots.

First off there is no way I can fly a 757 without many many hours of training on the 757 or a simulator. Flying at 80 mph, like the supposed pilot, and flying at 500+ is not feasible, doesn't matter if your a rocket scientist or a mcdonalds worker. I've taken off on a twin engine plane roughly 120 mph and it was crazy. now to pilot a jumbo jet at 500+ is laughable by pilots.

Now if you have never flown a plane sure it's possible, but those that have actually flown planes know it's impossible. Hence why most pilots don't believe this. If the plane tilted 20' above ground then where is the crater? and the hole in the wall wouldn't be like it is now. most likely the plane would have hit the exterior wall from an angle as opposed to straight on.

Ground Effect is also something to consider. Normally 1/2 the length of the wingspan is basically your "ground effect" area under the plan. so for a plane with a 124' wingspan the GE would be 62'. )

But if Military Pilots say they can not fly that plane into the pentagon then I'm 100% sure that some arab flying cessnas can not as well. And The pentagon knew about the "plane" and there was testimony from the commerce secretary, i believe, that said under oath that cheney had told norad to stand down. Why would he say that?

Also where is the massive debris field from flying at 10' over the ground from a massive jumbo jet? you can't just fly at 10' there are cables and poles and towers and all kinds of shit, which as a pilot, you have to watch out for. So Clearly if there is not a field of damage 124' then most likely it is not a plane that hit the pentagon.

To drop from above and then go straight to 10' above ground and then crash into the pentagon is like saying i'm going to make a 3 point shot from here to New York. Can it be done?? hell sure, maybe, i dont know lol maybe I can get the basketball into the jet stream lol But I wouldn't bet on it lol.

 

[dirk d]

Here is an interesting video on the Pentagon attack. Brings up some major questions. a 757 carries with it 8600 pounds of fuel.

• that much fuel would need a soil cleanup.
• looking at the floors after the collapse clearly shows there is no burn damage. interesting. more and more questions.
• Where is the crater? In the firefighter picture??
• Where is the wreckage???

 

[dirk d]

Can someone please explain to me why this has to be a conspiracy? What's wrong with the official story, except perhaps some details? The Bush 43 administration was caught so flat-footed by this supposedly planned event that they couldn't pivot from their predetermined plan to attack Iraq (HERE is the REAL conspiracy, but no one is looking for it!) and instead wound up trying to blame the wrong man for quite some time. It was Bin Laden, NOT Saddam- and of course it took months for the oval office to catch on. If this WAS a conspiracy, surely they would have been a lot more on the ball.

Ttystikk i know you are a very logical person. Why are there so many ?'s involved with the pentagon attack. All that would be needed to crush this is a release of the video clearly showing a 757 flying into the building. Why would anyone have difficulty in releasing those videos?? Often when one is lying they try and redirect focus on something else. And if it is true that there was no plane that hit the pentagon, then the entire 9/11 story is likely to be false.

I plan on addressing many issues about our world in this thread. However there are many issues that need further clarification. I am not one of those people that "trusts" our government anymore. At the time of 9/11 I would not have believed it was somehow a cover up. But the more questions there are the more likely it is that it is in deed, a cover up.

At one time we were told the world is flat. We were told that the vietnamese attacked our ships and killed our troops. That's why we went to war with North Vietnam. We now know that was a lie. We know the US government overthrew the Legitimate democrat government of Iran. We know the US sold weapons to Iran and used the $$$ for their war on Nicaragua. We were told that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, that it didn't receive from the US by the way. We now know that it was a lie. So excuse me if I don't believe what our government tells us. The list can go on and on.

 

[sanvanalona]

Commenting on the last page or so of your posts, so forgive me if this seems a bit disjointed.

On the plane hitting the Pentagon; the building was undergoing remodeling work designed to make it more resistant to terrorist attack with truck bombs. The work hadn't progressed very far as of 9/11, they had only completed one side of the five (hence the name, penta-gon). By happenstance, that was the side the plane hit, which combined with the speed it was going, all but completely obliterated the wings without penetrating the hardened facing of the building. The engines were torn off when the plane skipped off the ground in front of the building; I remember seeing the scar of impact and the remnants of the engines as shown on TV on that fateful day.

Can someone please explain to me why this has to be a conspiracy? What's wrong with the official story, except perhaps some details? The Bush 43 administration was caught so flat-footed by this supposedly planned event that they couldn't pivot from their predetermined plan to attack Iraq (HERE is the REAL conspiracy, but no one is looking for it!) and instead wound up trying to blame the wrong man for quite some time. It was Bin Laden, NOT Saddam- and of course it took months for the oval office to catch on. If this WAS a conspiracy, surely they would have been a lot more on the ball.

This is the thing, look at this with all that you can.. We have two basic theories here:

1. Take the government for its word, meaning that Osama Bin Laden and his crew was able to catch the most technologically military/ country in the world with its pants down. They did this with the U.S. having no prior intelligence to the situation.

2. Look at this as a conspiracy, of course leaving a plethora of questions as to the degree in which it was a conspiracy and what actors in the government knew about this going down and were profiting or planning to profit off of it.

9/11 has far too many holes coming from the governments side of theory. First and foremost, referencing Michael Moore here, why were Bin Laden's immediate family the only ones allowed to fly immediately after the attack? I have a million doubts about the presence of Bush that day in the class room, that is uncommon for any president to be reading a book to a kindergarden class ( but serves as a great "wag the dog" moment of innocence), next they had pinned Bin Laden as the culprit before he had taken any credit I remember they were claiming it was Bin Laden around 9 a.m. Eastern time that morning (funny for a country caught off guard), the intelligence report that was on Bush's desk months prior about the possibilities of commercial aircraft being used as terrorist weaponry. Let's continue on. We have the huge government contracts going out quite openly to Halliburton and Blackwater.....the first time a legitimate case for those in the highest office getting to use the military industrial complex to its financial advantage (can only imagine a forensic IRS accountant on this one, any of you know what I am talking about i need not further explain), the onslaught of the Iraq war which continued to constantly have altered motives depending upon public opinion. I can spend all day on this but I won't, we do not need to get to the scientific details of whether or not the plane hit the pentagon or not so long as we can to the basic understanding that there was a lot going on here that we/public do not know about.....or at least the beginnings of a conspiracy.

 

[dirk d]

I tend to Follow the $$$ and look to see who benefits from this Horrific Situation

 

[squiggly]

Also where is the massive debris field from flying at 10' over the ground from a massive jumbo jet? you can't just fly at 10' there are cables and poles and towers and all kinds of shit, which as a pilot, you have to watch out for. So Clearly if there is not a field of damage 124' then most likely it is not a plane that hit the pentagon.

Actually there are several eyewitness reports which state that just prior to hitting the building the plane hit several poles. Look through the eyewitness accounts and you'll find that a taxi driver was actually injured by one of these poles :)

There wouldn't necessarily be a crater--again this is a physics argument. Ever hear how hitting water moving quickly enough makes it like hitting cement. Now imagine what hitting cement (or dirt) is like.

It's important to remember the scale of the videos you're looking at. It's going to be nearly impossible to analyze any damage (or debris) on these scales. You need to be on the ground.

 

[dirk d]

I don't want "eye-witness" accounts, I want images where I can see the damage. There was 1 pentagon worker that survived, black women i think she's in one of the videos, that said "there is no evidence of a plane" as she walked out of the hole created by whatever hit the pentagon.

Even if the aircraft "skipped" as you say, where is the proof of that? And if the plane did "skip" then i doubt that it would hit head on, more like it would hit from the side.

Also I have an issue with no burn marks on the upper floors of the pentagon. Carrying 8600 pounds of fuel would burn everything around it. Not leave books and tables and concrete with no burn marks.

 

[squiggly]

On your skin cancer; basal skin cell carcinoma? None of my business, but it seems right? Melanoma is a far more deadly type of skin cancer... Anyway, any cancer sucks, maybe you can tell me if/how smoking cannabis helps you with this?

Correct--but I've also had instances of squamous cell carcinomas. I am at a high risk for melanoma. For me the marijuana hasn't had much to do with treatment here. I didn't have IV chemo--all of mine was topical, so I suppose it just helped with the pain more than anything. My first instance was @ 14, and I began smoking around 12 (13 heavily). So I was a full blown pot head at this time. The shit was retardedly painful, so the pot didn't really do much. I was maxing vicodin at this time, actually.

On your 'autism spectrum disorder;' I am currently researching this to help explain some of my own issues- which seem strangely similar to yours. Wondering if you could help point me towards any info I might find helpful in ruling it in or out in my case? This may also explain why I feel like you and I find ourselves philosophically on the same page so much.

Go to a psychologist and tell him about your concerns. For me there were just a few telltale signs really. People can never tell if I'm listening to them (but I am usually listening more intently than anyone). I'm terrible with eye contact its always either too much or too little with me--and I definitely weird people out sometimes with this. Patterns jump out at me big time, when I'm looking at them on a page, it's almost like they look a different color--I can't explain it really. They just look different and it pops at me. My memory is off the charts, which is why I've always got something to say. I always remember something about what you're saying. It's rare that I have no useful information to share. I am drawn to repetitive tasks, I used to rivet stuff in a factory and I fucking loved it.

I can play video games for literally 36 hours straight if no one interrupts me, and it'll feel like maybe 5-6 hours to me. I obsess over chemical structure, obsess is the right word to use. As soon as I got into this stuff, I knew I was doing the right thing. When I draw a molecule in 2D, im extrapolating out the 3D structure in my head. This can at times be very complex, but my brain basically does it for me.

I feel like I can 'see' the electrons being shared in orbitals, the shapes of the orbitals, etc. Stuff that should be really difficult to visualize sort of pops right in there without me trying.

There are other things like this as well--I have played violin since age 2. I've got perfect pitch and can learn just about anything by ear. I remember every song I've ever learned note for note.

I read people exceedingly well. Facial tics, body language, and the like. I pick up on these tiny things. For most people a facial expression imparts a feeling to you, or prompts a quick reaction in the conversation. For me its all about patterns, and that leads into reading people. Because of this reason I'm a very adept salesman. I can be incredibly manipulative in this sense.

This also applies to conversation. I pick up on conversational patterns. It's why I'm a good debater. Part of debate is leading your opponent into agreeing with you when they didn't know that they did. When people try to bait me in this way, I almost universally identify it as bait and don't take it. Similarly, when I bait people--they tend to bite. It's because I've identified their "thought pattern" (this is the best I can describe it--it's like when I meet you, and we converse, I'm building this library of who you are, your reactions to things, your conversational style, etc--and then every decisions I make about you or how to present something to you gets "fed through" this iterative list about your wants, likes, dislikes, tendencies, etc.) and I can identify the "back door" in their program.

It's like every person approaches problems differently. We don't think of it as this big pattern, but literally for almost everyone there is a step 1, 2, 3 to solving a problem. It is this discrete process with a beginning and an end--and that leaves it open for analysis. Within that there are all these tiny idiosyncrasies which people have as it relates to their problem solving. The reason my girlfriend and I get along so well is that we both tend to parse problems according to this "many perspectives" thing, she does it for different reasons than me--but we both come to the same conclusion.

Its infinitely more complex than that, but I think that's the best I'm gonna do on that one. I essentially think of everyone's problem solving as a piece of software. I am simply able to hack into that, and also to use some of the hardware limitations against the user.

Again this isn't some conversational prowess, it's literally patterns to me--nothing more or less. That's the most pronounced difference really, for me it's patterns when for you its just this inkling feeling that someone is being disingenuous. That feeling becomes a full blown fact for me, almost instantaneously.

I can usually tell if someone knows what the fuck they are talking about. Bullshit has pattern associated with it, too. This is perhaps one of the main reasons I get into trouble on this board. I treat a bullshitter like a bullshitter, even if for everyone else he has been adept at keeping himself from being identified as such. For me, I usually talk mad shit about people like this because in a sense they are like me--they are deceptive, and they are good at it. I look at this as "using their powers for evil" and my reaction is strong.

I have the power to use my abilities for evil and excepting some manipulative experimentation around 7th-8th grades (which I regret terribly, people's lives are not meant to be toyed with)--I have chosen never to do that.

Like the physics dude from before. I knew he didn't know the physics--but he wasn't being disingenuous. He really believed it was as easy to prove as what he was saying. I don't fault such people. Had he been a guy who knew what he was saying was false, but wanted to play this deception game anyway--now those people I flat out attack.

There's a lot of stuff really, but most of it is just slightly different from others. Like I said for me it's an exceedingly mild case--I seem to have gotten a good portion of the good and almost none of the bad. The social awkwardness might bother me more if I didn't have a great group of friends and a wonderful girlfriend of a few years (who I intend to marry--really, really, great girl). But I have been lucky. I feel like people were drawn to me in the environment I came from because I had answers for them, and I could put it into their terms (because as I've said earlier, I'm actually really great with perspective--I'm constantly parsing and re-parsing new thoughts in multiple different ways).

Good luck figuring it out, in any case.

The thing that pushed my guy over the edge towards the diagnosis was the pattern recognition stuff, and the repetitive stuff. I have quite a few tics and things of that nature if I'm left completely alone. I can't help from tapping out a rhythm, or sometimes I'll do subdivisions in my head (like counting).

On starting a nutrient line; I can think of no one else more qualified, but it is also true that this is a tough business to break into. I'd be happy to help field/beta test, when you get that far! I have a few ideas about how to differentiate yours from the crowd, too...

I think what my first objective is going to be is developing a product with a specific use rather than a full nutrient line. If I can make a successful product that improves yields and it becomes ubiquitous (or close to it) then I've got a huge amount of leverage in terms of marketing a nutrient line.

People absolutely will not change their nute schedule if there's no reason for them to be interested in your company. If I can develop a product which gives a 10% yield increase simply by adding the stuff in, people are going to wonder if perhaps my company knows what the hell its doing.

It's really all about getting your foot in the door--so I'm going to put all of my focus there to begin. Plus if I'm only developing one product my overhead is shrunk considerably. From a business perspective I believe this model just makes sense. Start little, get big.

 

[squiggly]

I'll offer an example involving you directly tty:

I now know that you're a writer. I haven't any proof for the case, but I had you pegged for this before you told me. It's obvious that you iterate on what you've already written. You proofread, you add support, you take you time. You won't like the way one sentence is and you'll go back and change it, or expand on it (especially this). This is clear because people do not think in these iterative terms in a flow. Things come to us in varied order--almost never is a thought (put to paper) complete on the first go 'round. You don't end up with these well thought out points [on the page] if you aren't really involved in the writing process. People are who are not writers, or avid students of English, often are not cognizant of this--because when we actually speak from our mouths, we are much better at producing complete thoughts. Reason being that we've practiced doing it every day of our lives. People rarely separate these two processes (speaking and writing) as being different processes which require different practice routines. We tend not to delve deep on things which don't grab our attention.

When I see a guy like you doing it, I know it's grabbed your attention--and that it probably interests you a lot. It's not a far jump to think you're a writer, or at the very least someone who has done an ass-ton of writing (maybe a psych student or something like that would qualify as well).

The thing that ultimately pushed me over the edge to guess you are a writer is your attention to audience. You change your writing style based on audience, and you also are adept at identifying who that is precisely.

More than that, you have a journalistic tone. Your writing is at times very rhetorical, and most times when its not--it is very informational. I can't really peg it (with a word, I know what I think) but you also have this air about your tone. I want to say kinda yuppie-esque, but that's not the right word. Don't know how to explain it.

It's like a remnant of the tone which is required when you're writing to a mass audience. It's a very general tone that appeals to a large group.

The reason I do this in the same way is less about being super interested by writing, and more about doing writing correctly (like a pro would do it). I am a chameleon in this sense when it comes to all things. Once I know about how to do something right, I can't un-know that, and I'm obsessively compelled to follow through with it. Once I knew how to write, I could no longer write lazily. Once I knew how to practice violin, I had to do it the right way. Once I figured out how to read people, I had to expand on that and continuously do it. Literally everything I do is done this way. I borrow the best of what I see from everyone (or the best I can identify and absorb) and I use it myself. It's not a purposeful theft, though, it happens naturally.

For this reason I can speak with professors and explain my research to them and impress them wildly, or I can go kick it in the projects with my homies (speaking fluent ebonics :p ) and no one except those who know me would be any the wiser that I know my ass from a hole in the ground.

What many of the people here who have disagreed with me most stringently have failed to realize is that I really do appreciate the debate. Its good to get people pissed sometimes because it doesn't just offer you what they really think (or put their brain into overdrive thinking up a good debate strategy)--it also offers you a different perspective. For me this is just something else to copy later.

Any of you who have proven me wrong have opened up a new path for me in the future. The more I know about what you think, the more I know about your perspective. For me this is just something else to download into my "perspectives" program, a different plugin.

I can use this against you, for you, or in a way having nothing to do with you at all. The latter being the most common. A couple months back I got proven dead wrong on this board. It wasn't because my overarching premise was flawed--it was because I'd stated my specific criteria way too specifically. Now the argument itself is probably one I'll never have again, so the specific perspectives are moot--however the debate style the guy used, baited me into writing a check I couldn't cash.

I learned from that, and I promise to use it in the future.

My entire life is comprised of little moments like that one.

In a way its unfair for me to do this without other people's knowledge. They think they're having a lazy conversation which us Americans have become all to fond of--when in reality they're talking to, or in front of, a person who is being critical of every fucking syllable and undertone.

The "best" way to be, is somewhere in between those two--but I really truly believe that most people are waaaaaaay into the lazy spectrum when it comes to their thought process. I see myself as a force for good here, really. I feel like by being waaaaaaay on the other side of the spectrum--I can pull the conversation into the middle.

I don't want to pat myself on the back or anything, but I think I've done a little of that in this thread. You'll notice that as people come to the middle to meet me--I bring myself and my comments more into that part of the spectrum. This is intentional. None of you should take this the wrong way, but it's like a "reward" for doing what [I believe] should be done. If you're willing to be more logical--I'm willing to be more amenable to your arguments.

That makes me sound like a behavioral psychologist, but in essence this is the science of how we act. We all probably wish we weren't as easy as Pavlov's dogs--but in many cases we are. I don't mean to say that I think anyone here is as simple as a dog, just that there are processes in our brain which precisely mimic that same interaction.

If I my position was completely untenable, no one would ever come into the middle [by my comments alone]. This is just as behavioral as saying I give a reward for moving to the middle.

Most people would call it being open-minded, but our brain experiences it as a reward when other people are open-minded about our ideas--so I call it that.

Oh well, I'm rambling lol--have a nice day everyone!

 

[baba G]

Do you wear a shirt with a big capital S on it?

 

[squiggly]

Do you wear a shirt with a big capital S on it?

No, but I think you may have missed the point.

For every place where I may (or may not) be more advanced than most--there is another place where I am crippled beyond recognition as compared with them.

Super man is the best of everything. I couldn't be further from it.

I'm the best at different things--and pretty fucking terrible at things which most people excel at. Think of eye contact problems. I can't even look at people right, lol.

If the world was full of me's, we'd probably be fucked. Having heightened senses in some areas causes me to miss out on some of the more obvious things at times (which people here are more than happy to point out :P ). There is a reason why they call what I have a disorder. It's not all marshmallows and pixie sticks.

If the world were full of supermen, by comparison--that shit would be wicked awesome.

 

[baba G]

Dude, everyone misses your point. I was just trying to get you to laugh for a second and stop and smell the roses.
You may have missed my point, classic humor. That was all squiggly, lay back and don't debate or try to prove something for a minute.

How is your summer starting out for you?

 

[squiggly]

Dude, everyone misses your point. I was just trying to get you to laugh for a second and stop and smell the roses.
You may have missed my point, classic humor. That was all squiggly, lay back and don't debate or try to prove something for a minute.

How is your summer starting out for you?

I think you've hit the nail on the head dude. This is the kind of thing that I'm not so good at lol.

Summer is actually going terribly. I've been really sick the entire time and it's been one thing after another in terms of being busy. Was looking forward to a break--and it's becoming clear that I won't get one this year :)

Yeah dude when I tell jokes sometimes they go over well--but when I hear them they don't always behave in my head as they should. I take things literally which are meant lightly--etc.

For this reason I'm actually hugely into stand up comedy--I view it both as practice, and some of these guys/gals are so good at what they do that even I get it :P

I have had time to catch up on some of the new comedy specials this summer thus far, so there's that.