Hmm....well, alright. Let me think of something or another.
See, the problem with this is, if you put your beliefs out there, you're apt to lose your head and make it into a huge ad hominem shit-flinging fest. Which never helps anything. Either that, or the topic makes everyone depressed, and that, children, ain't no good. Well, let me scan through topics.
The Peterson case is easy to solve: the guy fucking did it. Don't worry about not finding bodies and shit like that, it doesn't really matter. We all know that Steve or whatever the fuck his name is has a soul like a 200 year old, ne'er changed bedsheet, that bastard. Never mind the cute little face, he's guilty as fucking sin.
Gay people scare me.
If I get called ma'am on the phone one more time, I'm just going to fucking snap. I don't have a gun yet, but that's a real good provocation to go get one.
I like radishes. As a matter of fact, they're fucking awesome. Every time I go to Las Palmas I cry giant tears because I know there's going to be two, godawful radish pieces on there, and I don't know why, but I eat them. It's kind of like parsley at O'Charley's.
Speaking of that, French Dip is about the most American dish with a foreignesque name ever made. First of all, they would turn up their noses at our au jus. In France, you say "au jus" when you want your meat in the cooking juices, it doesn't mean they give you a little thing in a bowl and you dip it...the French are too "refined" to use their hands or forks in such a manner. And two, if they ate that shit all the time, they wouldn't be known for their skinniness. But it's still really tasty, so I don't know why I rambled.
Here's a good controversial topic that I brought up with you, Linds...maybe everyone else will want to put in their two cents (but reigniting the BLogs typically requires an emotional event to go on, so probably not): are retarded people the missing link in the evolutionary chain? I posed myself with the question yesterday: "if evolution is true, then why aren't monkeys still evolving?" Linds then presented me with the fact that some species end their evolutionary strains, as in the case of the crocodile, where it stops in its present form. But because of the rampant reproduction of most mammals, especially in the case of humans and our simian "counterparts," is it actually possible to evolve 100% of a population and have nothing in-between? As in, if evolution is true, should we actually believe that every single one of the monkeys that turned into humans evolved? Shouldn't there be some evolutionary residue? As in, a species that sort of "evolved" another way, human like, but not quite? Even the crocodile did that, we have alligators, very closely related. In monkey evolution, strains branched. So what I'm trying to say is, why isn't there another strain of what we call human?
So thus pondering, I found a lot of stuff that sort of comes in between monkey and man, mostly dealing with the retarded. Think about it: a monkey's intelligence has severe limitations, being that its brain is definitively wired towards survival being a creature of the wilderness. Now, for the retarded: severe limitation on what they can be taught and how they can communicate, except better moreso than an ape, the greatest being speech as a means of communicating, however limited.
Look at the body structures: most are slow to metabolize, meaning their bodies are wired more towards immediately burning the energy they intake by rapid movement (i.e.: trying to...um....live) than storing it for a later time. Many of them have poor or slackened muscle control (for monkeys: being able to move lithely and quickly, floating scapulas for arm flexibility hence the appearance of dragging arms), over-large bone structures, bone structures that look more suited to hunching and running on fours than walking on twos.
Look at history: nearly 1 in 3 in the Dark Ages were born retarded, and illness cannot entirely be blamed for genetic mutations; generally, if a mother was infected with something, she would die with the child.
All of this to say that I believe the retarded to be the species that evolutionarily existed before the homo sapien...esentially, I'm saying that the retarded are born another species, sort of a "domesticated ape," although that sounds really harsh. Remember the kid that survived in the wilderness of France, the "Wild Child" we studied about in Psychology last year? He was found to be retarded, yet survived very well in the wilderness. This would be inhumane, but if we put a retarded baby in the wilderness and assured that some animal was caring for it, I am almost certain it would do much better than in "civilized" society. Not that I'm saying that we should do this, but hypothetically.
Although, it is a "chicken or the egg" question in some respects, because babies can be born that way through FAS of course. Then again, alcohol affects a biological change...I'm only talking about the genetic sort. They work in the same manner, though: FAS babies are born through chemical imbalances caused by alcohol that draft some changes in the brain. Essentially, I'm saying that they are born with all the traits and flourishes of one who is retarded but are not actually retarded, if you catch my drift. It all comes down to genetics....because both things are just chemical malformities and imbalances in the brain, speaking macro.
Shit, I'm going to better develop this some day.
Guess who's been thinking a little too much about biochemistry, psychology, chemistry, and philosophy too much at the same time lately? Yeah, 'k. I'll shut it.
See, the problem with this is, if you put your beliefs out there, you're apt to lose your head and make it into a huge ad hominem shit-flinging fest. Which never helps anything. Either that, or the topic makes everyone depressed, and that, children, ain't no good. Well, let me scan through topics.
The Peterson case is easy to solve: the guy fucking did it. Don't worry about not finding bodies and shit like that, it doesn't really matter. We all know that Steve or whatever the fuck his name is has a soul like a 200 year old, ne'er changed bedsheet, that bastard. Never mind the cute little face, he's guilty as fucking sin.
Gay people scare me.
If I get called ma'am on the phone one more time, I'm just going to fucking snap. I don't have a gun yet, but that's a real good provocation to go get one.
I like radishes. As a matter of fact, they're fucking awesome. Every time I go to Las Palmas I cry giant tears because I know there's going to be two, godawful radish pieces on there, and I don't know why, but I eat them. It's kind of like parsley at O'Charley's.
Speaking of that, French Dip is about the most American dish with a foreignesque name ever made. First of all, they would turn up their noses at our au jus. In France, you say "au jus" when you want your meat in the cooking juices, it doesn't mean they give you a little thing in a bowl and you dip it...the French are too "refined" to use their hands or forks in such a manner. And two, if they ate that shit all the time, they wouldn't be known for their skinniness. But it's still really tasty, so I don't know why I rambled.
Here's a good controversial topic that I brought up with you, Linds...maybe everyone else will want to put in their two cents (but reigniting the BLogs typically requires an emotional event to go on, so probably not): are retarded people the missing link in the evolutionary chain? I posed myself with the question yesterday: "if evolution is true, then why aren't monkeys still evolving?" Linds then presented me with the fact that some species end their evolutionary strains, as in the case of the crocodile, where it stops in its present form. But because of the rampant reproduction of most mammals, especially in the case of humans and our simian "counterparts," is it actually possible to evolve 100% of a population and have nothing in-between? As in, if evolution is true, should we actually believe that every single one of the monkeys that turned into humans evolved? Shouldn't there be some evolutionary residue? As in, a species that sort of "evolved" another way, human like, but not quite? Even the crocodile did that, we have alligators, very closely related. In monkey evolution, strains branched. So what I'm trying to say is, why isn't there another strain of what we call human?
So thus pondering, I found a lot of stuff that sort of comes in between monkey and man, mostly dealing with the retarded. Think about it: a monkey's intelligence has severe limitations, being that its brain is definitively wired towards survival being a creature of the wilderness. Now, for the retarded: severe limitation on what they can be taught and how they can communicate, except better moreso than an ape, the greatest being speech as a means of communicating, however limited.
Look at the body structures: most are slow to metabolize, meaning their bodies are wired more towards immediately burning the energy they intake by rapid movement (i.e.: trying to...um....live) than storing it for a later time. Many of them have poor or slackened muscle control (for monkeys: being able to move lithely and quickly, floating scapulas for arm flexibility hence the appearance of dragging arms), over-large bone structures, bone structures that look more suited to hunching and running on fours than walking on twos.
Look at history: nearly 1 in 3 in the Dark Ages were born retarded, and illness cannot entirely be blamed for genetic mutations; generally, if a mother was infected with something, she would die with the child.
All of this to say that I believe the retarded to be the species that evolutionarily existed before the homo sapien...esentially, I'm saying that the retarded are born another species, sort of a "domesticated ape," although that sounds really harsh. Remember the kid that survived in the wilderness of France, the "Wild Child" we studied about in Psychology last year? He was found to be retarded, yet survived very well in the wilderness. This would be inhumane, but if we put a retarded baby in the wilderness and assured that some animal was caring for it, I am almost certain it would do much better than in "civilized" society. Not that I'm saying that we should do this, but hypothetically.
Although, it is a "chicken or the egg" question in some respects, because babies can be born that way through FAS of course. Then again, alcohol affects a biological change...I'm only talking about the genetic sort. They work in the same manner, though: FAS babies are born through chemical imbalances caused by alcohol that draft some changes in the brain. Essentially, I'm saying that they are born with all the traits and flourishes of one who is retarded but are not actually retarded, if you catch my drift. It all comes down to genetics....because both things are just chemical malformities and imbalances in the brain, speaking macro.
Shit, I'm going to better develop this some day.
Guess who's been thinking a little too much about biochemistry, psychology, chemistry, and philosophy too much at the same time lately? Yeah, 'k. I'll shut it.
