sxShadoWxs

It's not applied science. Lions do it in Africa. It's called laying down and lowering your air and caloric consumption since you're not out and about hunting for your survival. Lions, are much smarter than scientists. They have it down to a key. They run solely on what they need to survive, not more and not less. My objective is to find an application where I can do this, obviously, there is none. No science actually contributes to prosperity. None can prove otherwise to me. Prosperity is, yet again, another illusion. Appreciation is a selfish self-gratifying emotion. It is nice to have and it inflates the ego and makes you think you are somehow giving a token of your so-called appreciation to nature or to some external source when you are quite literally just sitting there wasting air relaxing while you could lower your air consumption by laying down instead. Appreciation isn't a need or a contribution, it's a simple thought up illusion. Illusions causes further waste of time and resources. It is productive for your ego and destructive for everything else. It's not cynicism, it's fact. I'm not saying I don't appreciate, btw. Just trying to get a clear picture of what science actually does for humanity is all. No matter how I look at it, more is less and less is more. Therefore I should move out to Africa and get eaten by a Lion.

Personality is a perception of yourself judged by what you have done your entire life coupled with it's consequences versus where you are today. To separate one is to separate both and both are the same. How to do this? Psychological deconditioning. You would, somehow, record and journalize your memories first. Ie. Destroying your consciousness and becoming entirely intuitive. Experience and personality is ALL the conscious mind has. IT IS ALLLLLL IT HAS. When left with nothing but with an empty mind, all you got left is your gut instinct and, if you can, the ability to re-actualize your own conscious mind, for say, functioning in society? lol. I am a Buddhist, if you are wondering. I have done this to myself once through a series of meditations and deconditioning sessions. I'm not doing it ever again. That should make you realize what this means. One with an empty mind is like a snack for society. I took time off work and told people I was nearing a burnout when I was actually trying my best to hang on to myself before I became, um, dysfunctional, I suppose. Forgive me from deviating, but, it seems to me like you are asking how to remove a bad memory you might have from your mind. Also the reference of misery and happy lives etc, etc. De-conditioning should be done with an individual who has little to no life experience. Since experience and personality is the biggest factory in physiological development, separating these thoughts/behavior cold turkey would most likely render someone zombified and dysfunctional since the individual is already developed in accordance with said behaviors. It's like removing the hydraulics on a dump truck. You'd be useless and the only thing you would do is find food, eat, sleep and act according to the needs of your survival. Again, personality is a perception. Once you fully realize this, entirely, and master the art of creating behaviors within yourself or visualizing yourself as you darn please - you can mimic, copy, and modify any of your behaviors. OP really sounds like a cry out for help if you ask me, though. Btw, I did not supply evidence - because the evidence is myself. If you find a machine that can interpret my CNS and the signals it sends to the sections of my brain that corresponds to memory and personality I will show you I can quite literally void said section even though you might be flashing a picture of something stupid that happened to me in my past, if you can find such a thing. I taunt you likely because I haven't found a machine to do this on yet. Experience is everything that has to do with you and your interpretation/interaction/etc with mind and body to the material/external world. Not only is it what happens to you, it is what is caused by you, observed by you, even the things you don't see cause you to have an experience. How is that now who you are? An observation of yourself? If you could not observe yourself, ie. experience yourself - how could you define yourself and not be who you are? Experience is what enables you to be who you are. You (a personality) is achieved through your use of experience. You cannot separate the two. You could re-create memories with a video camera, but the picture found on the film is a motion picture - several shots of the moment flashed before your eyes quickly making you assume you are watching your vivid self even though it is a past event where you we're different both in motion, environment and thought. Even though it would seem like you seperated the persona of yourself that time there and then, you did not. There is a myriad of illusions you need to get away from before you come to conclusions when talking about human potential.

Every woman knows this one. A male ego is the most dense material found in every cosmos.

None of you saw the paradox here. I'm a buddhist and: This one wins the cake. It made me laugh. He states, affirmatively that I am concerned when I did not mention that I was or wasn't and bases his entire response on it entirely. I am not concerned. The basis of science and life in general is prosperity. Consuming resources more than what the end result requires is the basis of this logical way of thinking and coming to conclusions. I am not concerned with it, IT IS IT. Science, pretends or affirms, that it finds conveniences or simplicities for us. At what cost? Concerned you say? Of course I am concerned, as a scientist I ought to know what the hell these pieces of plastic I am typing cost not only to me but to every step of the logistical ladder they we're produced from. Take a pen, for example, consider the logistics of it all; what did IT take to get into your hands? It did not just cost a little pinprick of wood and some carbon. Several machines, technologies, human resources we're in effect and, beleive it or not, (And I have taken the time to look into it, by the way.) if you take any piece of material you, study analytical thinking, logistics, industrial production, human resources you will realize what everything actually costs. Money is only the tiniest piece of worth attach to it, the other pieces however, like this RG45 cable for example - don't just cost 15.99$ per 30'. Concerned? I am concerned you aren't aware what the word concerned actually means. For the record, I am somewhat biased and opinionated about science but I do make an effort to try to step into this worldview of scientists, believe me or not, I am. But no matter how it comes down to it, science, medicine, etc, always seems to try and solve the problems on the wrong end of the stick. For example - cancer. Instead of doctors producing a dependence for the needed help to the public, shouldn't we self-educate our kids to eat healthy and stay away from environments that are a total nuisance to them? Instead of waiting 30-40 years until their bodies are so overwhelmed and their immunity systems are so busy fighting off stress alone and eventually succumb to such disease? Also, not bragging by all means, but, beleive it or not - "Using your definition, the only thing I can think of that is productive is starving to death." I dare anyone to define productive in a more meaningful and representative way. Productive = prosperity at little or not cost. Most modern definitions, especially the version coming out of the mouth of that industrial production manager equals how to consume and make things faster so I can make more money so I can invest in more LEAN ways to rip down all tress on this planet while the mining industries does the same for it's minerals and elements. And no, you can't dispute this, it's true. I am tempted now, for a Buddhist that means, um, woohoo, I guess. I like this response, thank you. I'm a Buddhist, right or wrong is like red and blue to me, they are both colors, both can work or not work. In that effect, the definition of the word I used isn't my own. Prosperity is the goal of science. My definition supports this. Many things would exists without science as well. Why do you think science is the total cause of inventions? Did you not know most inventions have been discovered through accidents and not science? With pure simple human error we have made many of the greatest inventions. Your argument is flawed, heavily. A woman invented the inflated balloon while trying to dry some clothes over a damn fire. There was no objective, no thesis, no science involved. Just a woman being intuitive. Nothing in your argument correlates or corresponds with the topics I put in my OP. Your attempt is to deviate me into your own argument where your own variables are set. For the record, some of you have the impression I am looking down on science, I am not. I want to go further into science and possibly specialize in something. I stupid fitness, psychology, philosophy etc etc and there is a good deal I learned from it all - especially for the Buddhist part. But being an analytical think, meditator of sorts and Buddhist, I must choose carefully what I want to study. But, for the love of me, I can't find a single shred of evidence that supports or enables me to answer to my prologue of study: "Is science capable of productivity and prosperity?" Also, on the dictionary reference; Scientists, Philosophers, etc...define their own words, meanings and intentions before entering a conversation so that there can be a *productive* (pun!) conversation. I define productive as though it was prosperity, I suppose, but, let it remain my definition of productive, please. I am open and waiting more responses. Thank you. This is flawed. The truth is science causes us to live longer so we can consume more. You blanketed this by saying we lived longer to find more ways of being productive. My definition is it's true meaning. And then you use an ultimatum-like analogy, which is false, and say that I am saying (through a definition, which I am not.) that it would mean the worse of the worse: let people die young and filthy. Again, false and meant to deviate. My definition is not narrow, it depicts the true nature of the word. Productive (the textbook version) = means to consume more and produce more materials in a more profitable manner. Yes, soap, acid and a justification to enable people to be unhealthy without concern since we can cut them open neatly anyways one or or another. Yeah - that's science. I am starting to wonder if any of you understand the principles of logistics yet. A bar of soap, acid, stainless steel DID, in FACT, cause more health damage to others that this one person who got cut up open. There are people working in the plants where they produce soap, acid, and steel. All these people wear protective equipment, but, even though the wear this gear, some of their health is damaged. This protective equipment has minerals inside them, these are mined and those have the same effect on another lot of human resources. Follow the money my friend, you will understand that this is no longer a concern my friend, it is actual fact. That little stainless steel knife the doctor is using did not just cost 500$. It cost the health of many, many people all of which consume equally unnecessarily in their turn to produce this equipment. I am not looking to get satisfied, either. I want justification for me to enter science. I haven't found it in my own efforts, maybe someone else can. I like how some people just pick out something at random like the above poster (something stated or done by someone else without evidence) and then try to just get me to swallow it up and accept their preceding statement that I won't get satisfied or that I am narrow in my definitions. That's like, paradox embodied. I kind of like it.

curiouscity played you all so very skillfully. Combine pepper spray with kick to the groin after having applied it to his face. Make sure you do it when he has his hands on his face and is blocking his own vision, then, when he does not suspect it, drive you foot up his jewels as though he was about to stab you with a rusty spoon - as though your life depended on it. Then when he is on the ground, take out that camera you have in your bag and put it on a tripod and film him while he is suffering. Post it on YouTube and call it: "What happens to douches when they try to rob you." It will cause you fame, and, everlasting psychological traumas to your predator turned prey victim. Also, curiouscity , the best weapon on the planet to cause any sort of effect is your body. Train, get fit, display confident body language (learn it if you don't know it) and have good awareness. Then these douches won't bother you - people know how to read a person by looking at their body language. PS. it's curiosity. You could always carry a wild rage-bearing cat with you and throw it in his face when he attacks you. I swear to god cats like this are suffering embodied. PSS. Don't forget to kick them while they are down, remember, youtube is watching.

This theory based way of deducting (Science) is of great interest to me. But, being a Buddhist - I must consider how it produces actual, world-considering, productive, end results. In that I mean, does knowing what quanta is actually make the world a better place? If yes, how? If no, how? I will define productive, for the sake of the conversation: A series of actions that cost little to no resources that brings about a change that brings about even less consumption of resources and energy for generations to come. Creating something convenient, like a car in this example; is not productive as in consumes several times the resources and energy needed for a person to actually walk to work, or other places. Any other definition of productive, is false and should no be mentioned. So, my challenge to you scientists is this: Is Science productive? If yes, give me an example of when a Scientist came up with a theory or solution that caused a productive end result? No, the light bulb doesn't count, it's a convenience and is not productive.

If one would take a computer and study it from A to Z, from the very atoms inside inside those elements found in the many metals found in them to the very output produced by the many instructions, assembly languages, programming languages etc - one would, basically be a god-blessed genius. My question is - is there a field of study that teaches one about computers in such a manner? Computer Science, IMO, would seem like it teaches the most obvious first-hand foundations of said technology. Thus would cover, I think, only the most modern interpretations of these lovely machines like how circuitry works, how you can make a LED calculator with some resistors and a basic conductive plate with metals conductors on it. I mean, I want to know how we took electricity and combined it with the elements from A to Z in order to produce this marvelous technological leap in the last 100 years. I mean, if we keep going the way we are going, we are just going to have to sit and eat. Before we become so mundane - I want to know how it got to where we are. O.o What are your suggestions, what should I study to know E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G about computers?

The answer to your question is that your body composition added with the choice of foods you eat divided by the many digestive functions your body has on such foods along with what you drink multiplied by said action (pimple popping) coupled with your thoughts and conscious beliefs you conditioned your body to have subtracted by the temperature said room is at the time you we're in it along with it's lighting, skin conditions you may have along with what you just saw 5 seconds ago = said symptoms. My question to you: Do you really think you can attribute a single "why" to these symptoms? Pain and damage, basically any physical action does this to some extent or another, causes your body to adapt. Another question for you: If this is a pleasure. why would you waste time questioning it? I'm going to make a dumb assumption: Direct and instant damage caused by plopping the crap out of a pimple would, IMO, cause a slight increase in skin producing metabolic functions and, also, might cause a slight elevation of adrenaline. The source of adrenaline, it's production and elimination can quite literally make your body go quack for a while.

So much bad advice on here. Reduce fat intake. Reduce caloric intake. If you want to step it up - do high rep weights. 3 set of 25 reps or something like that combined with cardio. Add 2 hours of sleep per workout day per week. Replace all drinks with water. Eat anti-oxidant containing foods. Eat acid-based citrous foods. ie oranges, lemons, etc. Train for energy, not mass gain as this will cause you to want to binge or cave in due to the heightened caloric demands such training has. 1 month 3 days in 1 out. 1 month 2 days in 1 out. 1 month 1 day in 1 out, 1 in, 1 in, 1 out, 1 in, 1 out. etc etc. Don't binge. Get rid of all tempting foods in house. Make friends oriented with same goals. Meditate on the thought that your body can burn fat, easily, even when you aren't focused on doing so. Remain intuitive and don't hurt yourself. Get a mentor who will monitor your progress. Post a journal online or in a booklet to keep track of your own work. Before and after pictures. Visualizes yourself at 8% body fat. There is no best way or better way - use every way and even your own, unthinkable way if you got that way of thinking. Oh yeah, and take the good luck and wishes from my part! Good luck and I hope you achieve your goals!

What creates an experience is a mind conditioned to believe that a series of events are subject to be broken down into several logical explanations. Such a mind, is not a human mind but - in modern terms, a cold wired machine -> A computer that runs on variables and conditions, very much like C++ or Boolean. Experience is not a mystery, it is an "obvious" turned and twisted into a play of words and logic. We call this science. Consciousness is a belief that the mind of a body or *individual* is, somehow, separate from everything else and can somehow be opened and closed upon a series of external stimuli. Science, although *SOMETIMES* useful seems to like to break things down and has a tendency to dictate that things are not greater than there whole. Science, IMO, should not be able to depict what human potential is. Because, in the end - the whole end result produced by the several human processes outweigh impossibility itself. Experience, in that sense, is everything and is life itself.