Jarryd

This is something that has come up in several posts in this forum and i was unable to find a specific thread for it so i decided we might as well create one. What is 'unatural'? how do we define such a thing, wouldn't anything occuring in nature be a 'natural' occurance. I'm sure this could be taken in different contexts so i will just say that it be taken in the context that it is being discussed in the other threads which is unatural behaviour with regards to personality disorders, paedophilia and generally anything we often call 'unatural', and why that is a justified term. I will post when i have more time.

Yes i think the term 'natural' is being used the same way as 'morally right', as for paedophilia i think that in the context that it is something that it is likely something with a genetic start and that it is not uncommon in nature.. it is natural although as far as the views of the majority of society it is 'morally wrong'. Just the way i say homosexuality as natural and in my view (an many others) 'morally right'. Now you may ask what would be unnatural? Something unnatural would be something with very little hard instinctual or genetic (i know thats shifty ground.. i mean a direct connection) basis and is most likely something that is 'learned' for example foot fetishes (to follow the sexuality theme) would likely be something mainly learned as i do not see many apes humping each others feet.

To my knowledge scanning is pretty much speed reading speed reading is reading something without 'saying it' with the little voice in your head, by doing it like that you miss alot of details and i doubt it could be effectively used for studying and stuff where you need to concentrate.

i had a friend that went to the emergency room because he drank too much coke, apparently it began to strip the lining of his stomach.

What you just did is change the names, anti-matter and matter are just a description of two things that cancel each other out. And it wouldn't be possible for the world to be mostly anti-matter or matter even, there needs to be equal proportions of both in order for the big bang theory to work.

On my computer there was an option to set up file sharing in my computer, and now all i have to do is send things to a shared folder.

ahh i don't know, you should really just have it in your household kitchen.. i know its in alot of things. But since the cooking knowledge involves putting things in a microwave and pressing cook i don't know specifically what its in.

Although i like to think i understand electromagnetic waves there is still something i don't understand: Why in the case of light waves do some substances not reflect any light out at all (such as glass), i know its because it doesn't 'absorb' the frequencies and therefor photons aren't released, but what is it exactly which causes it to be unaffected by the electromagnetic wave? In the same sense why doesn't all the radio waves and other waves shooting around us drastically effect our body?

nutmeg is one of the most common household spices, i can't think what your confusing it with :S

There are many places dedicated to out of body experiences all over the web and all offering fairly similiar techniques, the more occultish way of saying it would be astral projection or astral travel however OBE's is still a common term.

The statistics are fairly varied, if you want to go by kinseys research its about 10% of the population but other researchers think it could be as low as4% although i personally find that unlikely. I'm not sure what you mean by accomodate? All gay peoples want is the same rights as normal people. To be honest as someone who is bisexual it doesn't even bother me in the slightest if people have prejudices and don't 'like' my sexuality, all i would want is the kind of respect that you would give any other stranger and also not be restricted from the choices i am entitled too. I don't really see why you feel that you need to change to meet our needs, we wouldn't change to meet yours. Its kind of like the situation we have with races, as much as we want to believe everyone in society is tolerant and isn't racist that just isn't true, however the fact that someone has closed minded opinions is not important as long as they are not running around the streets yelling the 'n' word or commiting racial crime society runs as it should.

lmao, i hope everyone else has enjoyed this guys demented little quest as much as i have lol... but what the hell i'll answer the questions: 1. As far as hallucinating goes weed doesn't work in the same way for everyone, i have known people who would smoke tons of dope and never have had a hallucination while i have heard some people seeing things such as floating colors (however i think this is more of a 'try hard' teenage mentality). 2. Long term effect are similiar to normal smoking because you are still inhaling smoke into your lungs, there have also been links to many mental disorder although i don't know how conclusive that is. 3. On the short term.. things may appeal more edible then they really are and some people can get a little paranoid although from my experience this hasn't been true. 4. Although i have never tried shrooms or acid those drugs tend to get more of a reputation as a hallucinagen then weed.

oh ok that make sense. Then why do i always read about those trippy quantum theories that we (as in the mind) chooses when a partical is in a certain place (like in 'What the bleep do we know?'). Kind of like the conciousness is taken a role in bringing a certain thing into reality? I know this is fairly pseudo-science however i don't get how this would be a logical conclusion given the explaination you just gave me. (i realise that this is turning into a long question sorry)

What creates the earths magnetic field? (i know it involves the molten core but thats about it lol) With quantum physics, how exactly does 'percieving' something collapse all its probabilities? and by percieving does it mean as in the preception of the light given off or some other way of measuring activity?

I think what the previous poster meant wasn't sex=food so much as sex= happy chemicals food= happy chemicals and these both stem from basic evolutionary drives to get energy and reproduce. I really see the mind as basically stimulus-response, so things like power, sex, food ect ect and other stimulus that are hardwired into us to have pleasurable responses will be what we seek. Speaking in that way however the body and mind can want sometimes unfavourable responses, such as pity, self-hate and anger.. were all slaves to our machine. Although somehow i don't think advertising cutting blades for people who crave pity is good marketing lol.

Just on the whole magnets causing hallucinations thing, i watched a documentary fairly recently about the scientific explaination for hauntings and they have found that many of the homes in which people have 'seen' ghosts actually have either too close wiring or faulty electronics that are giving off an abnormal amount of electromagnetic waves. They have even made people see colors and shapes in the lab setting by pulsing there brain with certain frequencies. So going by what was said in that show (i have to admit i got the feeling it was fairly sketchy science) you could possibly hallucinate by sticking your head somewhere with alot of electromagnetic activity. On the other hand however your mind can do some wonderfull things when in deep relaxation. When i was in my early teens i used to play around in various occult things, and i would often see blurred figures, 'energy fields' and various other hallucinations. I'm pretty sure this has to do with self-hypnosis and being highly suggestable in the various relaxed states i was in, so maybe you could try some meditation or something?

I'm surprise noone has mentioned bisexuality as means in which the genes for homosexuality could be past into the next generation, possibly because bisexuality isn't seen as 'legitimate' by many people especially in western culture. As someone who identifies as bisexual and has an understand of the gay community maybe i can add my two cents here. First of all using terms like 'natural' and 'unnatural' is akin to saying 'right' and 'wrong', they are very subjective terms. However if i really needed to justify homosexuality in the evolutionary sense one of the arguements i have heard is that a group of individuals of the same sex would function more productively as a group because it avoids the conflicts of finding a mate of the opposite sex. Since there is no drive to reproduce with someone of an opposite sex, there are pregnant woman or small children to look after, groups of gay males would be able to hunt for themselves as a group and groups of gay females would be able to hunt for themselves and not be made vulnerable or weakened by pregnancy. As for the common view of 'most' homosexual men, first of all that is a fairly small area of the community, i myself and most of the gay male friends like men who actually act like men. I believe the gender-ambiguity with many gay males stems from growing up relating more to females then males. As many guys on this forum should know the teenage years for most male groups is spent 'chasing tail', a gay male isn't exactly interested in this so of course they are going to surround themselves with female friends and therefor going to develop a feminine personality. Saying that though again that is a fairly stereotypical view of a homosexual male. Lastly back to bisexuality, given that studies in sexuality tend to take the view that everyone is some point on a line between being exculsively hetereosexual and homosexual (i.e many fall somewhere in the bisexual range) would this lead most people to believe that there are several alleles for sexuality or do many just think this is because of different enviorments?

I will admit at first that i know very limited information about nero-linguistic programming, simply that those who believe in it think that they understand the 'system' that the brain uses in common occurences and deliberately tries to use this to change yourself or the actions of others. That was actually a pretty awfull deffinition, but no worries because this is mainly to those who already have an understanding of this pseudo-science. What are the common arguments against NLP? is this really as far out an idea as many skeptic comments seem to believe it is? how grounded is it in actual science? Thanks in advance

I am looking for some inspiration for a media outcome i need to do this year, we basically get to portray a specific subject to a specific audience and ive chosen to do this with digital photography. The subject ive chosen is to show that the often seen as mundane and boring aspects of science are not only present in the real world but they are also beutiful and artistic in their design. I have some ideas such as the typical freeze shot of a water droplet and the diffusion of ink through a glass of water, but i also wanted to know if anyone else has some good ideas? keeping in mind that i only have a basic digital camera (detail is average) and that i am trying to use things that are readily available to photograph. (i.e i don't have alot of chemicals or things like that to play with)

I think they mean like an analytical chemist in which case their are plenty of areas in which their is employment from forensic fields to enviormental areas.. it is pretty broad. Although from what ive heard looking at the forensic chemistry area it is (atleast in the areas ive researched and Australia) fairly sparce employment and highly competitive.

I think salt and water is argueably a chemical reaction, because sodium chloride ionises. But i think with something such and 'kool aid' isn't it just a mixture of the compounds like the water doesn't actually react with it? As you can tell i have no idea what im saying and probably shouldn't be answering this question.

Although this may seem like somewhat of a harsh way of saying it, but wouldn't those who have HIV be more easily detected and 'quarintined' (sorry for spelling). This alone you could say would slow down the rate of mutation because their is a decrease in population size of a virus, therefor the chances of a mutation occuring at a given time would decrease. Also with a condition such as HIV you tend to either be doing great (because of drugs working correctly) or not doing well at all which may result in death which would kill the mutant strain anyway.

Ok this may make me sound like some 40 year old conservative, but i think the main problem here is not many academic role models for students (in paticular minority groups). I mean is academic achievment praised by many peer groups in schools? From my experience the smart person is generally looked down upon by most fellow students (of any race). This is because kids simply don't see the point or the good that can come from trying hard at school. (Ok now i can stop and feel young again).

I think to make such generalizations is far from a productive thing to do because it adds to more critical statements like all black men or criminals or all asian people are bad drivers. Statements that are generally created as a way to insult a culture. However there is some science and logic to such statements, people of african decent because of years of evolution tend to have longer legs and arms because of the need to increase surface area in the hot climates of africa. These attributes are generally considered great for a game such as basketball. And as for asian people being generally more intelligent, i think thats more of a cultural thing.. the oriental way of life generally has a strong basis in work ethic and learning.. unlike more lazy caucasian views of education and work. This has probably grown from the highly competetive nature of the chinese and japanese markets. Another not so racial but still controversal generalization is those made about gay and lesbians in the western world. This affects me personally as a bisexual male that my masculinity is constantly being taken into question because of my sexuality. Of course like the other generalzations these don't come without grounds, many young gay men find it easier to surround themselves with female friends because they relate to the same sexual interests which may cause a gay man to grow up with somewhat effeminet traits, unfortunately this is the side the media seems to most enjoy and portray as a stereotype. Like the other things although it may seem like a harmless and justified generalization is leads to discrimination and labelling which is not productive.

Oh lol.. i think we posted at the exact same time IA.. i kind of gave it away..