Kylonicus

Thank you for replying, I want the 5-HTP to be localized. If you get too much 5-HTP in your system, your brainstem overloads, and you die. So I don't want that, I want to take a localized effect at a specific area, that way it doesn't effect the brainstem as much, but I still get all the benefits of it. Thanks for replying to my post-

I was wondering is 5-HTP transdermal? I want to know because I see alot of advertisements on the internet for 5-HTP cream, but I don't know if 5-HTP can be applied transdermally or not without their cream. I was thinking that getting capsules of 5-HTP, then putting it into a liquid, then applying it would do the same thing. I would like to use it. Any help would be appreciated... Please answer?

Peak Oil isn't about the end of oil. It's about the end of cheap oil. There over 2.6 Trillion barrels of oil in North America, it's just very, very, very low EROEI oil. Some of the oil has an EROEI of 1-1.5. For every 1 barrel worth of energy you invest, you get 1.5 barrels worth of energy out of it. The majority of the oil stored in oil shales, and tar sands(to my knowledge) actually has a negative EROEI. You invest more energy than you get out. That's not even mentioning the incredibly devastating environmental impacts of producing that oil. The environmental cost are much greater than the resources from the oil could ever possibly be, if we were looking at the environmental cost. That's what Peak Oil is all about. It's not about the end of oil. We will always have oil. We just won't be able to use it to meet all of our needs. Also, without cheap oil, economic growth(with current technology) is very difficult.

No, I don't think Iran's president is pyscho, this is all about image. It's just like Kim Jong Ill trying to portray himself as pyscho, he's not really pyscho, just good at manipulating his image. His entire country is one giant cult. The reason why these people would portray(or want to portray) themselves as pyscho, is due to the fact that people don't generally like to mess with pyschos. Pyschos can(from the perception of the average person) easily wipe out huge numbers of people, with little remorse or sympathy(this isn't true, true people who are pyschotic generally just want to be left alone, and only attack as delusions increase, or if they are harrassed, and they need help, not to be denigrated) also, pyschos as unpredictable. Ruthless, blood thirsty cold hearted logical people can at least be understood, making them more predictable, and less threatening. Pyschos on the other hand, are extremely unpredictable, and so you never know what they are going to do. Essentially it's fear of the unknown. Also, religious pyschos are the worst, due to the fact that they believe they will go to a glorious afterlife. This makes people think that "hey, they want to die, I don't want to mess with that kind of person!". Ontop of that, religious leadership(especially in extremely religious societies), greatly aids peoples ability for people to relate/respect (to) them. On the other hand, if he really was pyschotic, he might have a messianic complex(he might actually believe he is/was the savior of whatever), and they might have(whoever are his handlers) intentionally put someone pyschotic in office, due to the fact that someone pyschotic can actually be easier to manipulate/control than someone who is sane. Also, pyschotic people give your nation scare appeal. So either A) this is all an image thing, or B) this guy really is pyschotic, but he isn't the real power. There is some sort of power behind the throne(probably some ayotollah) which is who/what is really ruling the country. Unless he has a medical history of pyschosis, I would be in doubt of his psychosis.

I was wondering, Could the mods make it where older post like older than 2 months, that haven't be replied to in two months be deleted? That way if someone wants to get rid of something they are embarrassed about, they can get rid of it, but at the same time, it doesn't cause any blog confusion. Generally, if a post is inactive for or more months, then the thread is generally closed, and deleting a post of that nature would simply free up space on the server. Could/Would the mods do this? It wouldn't hurt the threads, and if someone was going to look like a goofball because they said something, everyone would already know about it. Also, in case someone posted something here because they wanted to communicate an idea, but then later wanted to get rid of it, perhaps for political reasons, they could do so, so that people couldn't look it up, and use it against them. Could mods please make that one change, inactive threads for 2 months or more can have post deleted that are by the author, or post that are inside of them? This would be better for everyone, as if they were setup where they couldn't be edited, but just deleted, it would free server space, and people wouldn't want to make random deletions, due to the fact that it would make their post count down, lowering rank. Anyways, please take that into consideration.

I would like inactive(inactive for like a month or so) older post to be editable/deletable, this way in case you said something you don't want to keep on here you can delete it. It would still have all the advantages of the current system, because if someone was having a debate, they couldn't change what they said, and if someone looked like a goof-ball, they couldn't change it mid flight, so it wouldn't create the annoyance of the ability to edit anytime, but if there was something on there you wanted to remove, you could do it, so long as other members weren't posting in that thread, and so long as it was old enough. Another advantage of this, is if it's an older post, and you delete it, then it eliminates wasted space on the server, which can be put to use in other areas.

Remember Azure Pheonix, their job isn't to entertain you, it's to make you remember those adds. If they've pissed you off, then you'll remember them, and so they have done their job. Ontop of that, you have to remember your probably in the top 98% of the population, which means that you have people of much lower intelligence watching those adds, and saying "HAAAWWW HAWWW, THAT'S FUNNY" or something to that equivalent.

This makes sense, The Republicans are for the Patriot Act(the enslavement anti-freedom act) and the Democrats are against it. The Republicans are against Net Neutrality(the First Amendment of the Internet), And the Democrats are for it. Hmmmm, This makes me glad I'm a Democrat! ANYBODY BUT BUSH!

A virus/parasite/bacteria like that would have(in order to have any real probability, there is always a small but improbable chance) to be genetically engineered. What if someone engineered a parasite that both pumps PCP into someone, while applying tons of trophic factors so that persons body doesn't burn out? You'd get a super regenerated, super strong, super insane human being, and if the parasite continued to eat the persons body(and or brain), and to spread and grow, and the person, because they lost mental faculty, and could no longer adequate feed themselves became somewhat starved, then the Zombie could be made. Oh, if the Zombie bit you, you would end up being a Zombie soon enough! Dun Dun Dun!!!!!

Take a look at this link, http://www.physorg.com/news63371210.html

If you had reliable artificial gravity, and you had complete control over it, could you use it to go back in time?

It's not a matter of "should he be jailed" it's a matter of would he be jailed, and I think the obvious answer is yes. The fact of the matter is, Super Man is a wild card. Sure, he stands for justice, freedom, peace, prosperity. Sure he's a guardian of the planet. But you see, that would take away the justification of other bodies/organizations reason to exist. Ontop of that, most of the people who are really powerful in this day in age(I mean powerful, not necessarily wealthy/rich) are heniously evil, as they nearly have always been. So if you were an evil human being, bent on screwing the world somehow, would you want fly-boy wrecking your party? If Enron had collapsed and Ken Lay, and Jeff Skilling had gotten off scott free, and had everything they wanted, while they had caused so much pain, do you think Super Man would have stood by, and watched it happen? The answer of course, is no. Super Man would have used his Super Mind control(yes he has mind control, Super Man II, near the ending, Superman kisses Lowis Lane to make her forget that he's really Clark Kent, because of all the emotional damage it's having on Lowis) to force Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay to either A) have a heart, the most likely action, or B) Give back the money. Note: People like Ken Lay, and Jeff Skilling control this world, that's one of the main reasons it's so screwed up. So Super Man would be jailed unfortunately.

I'm not completely sure the government doesn't already have this kind of weapon, but are simply not utilizing it. I have talked to an aquaintance about a weapon like this(with it's effects) and he said he heard rumors of a device kind of like this. So the government may already have this kind of weapon, but are simply avoiding the use of it to prevent technology exposure. If we hadn't had dropped the Atom Bomb, the Soviets may have not had the inspiration to know they could construct one themselves. Knowing what's possible is half the battle. So they could be keeping this technology for a rainy day, and not using it simply because they don't want others to see what's possible, and then build one themselves.

The reason I'm worried about censorship is in part due to Peak Oil. Dictatorship feeds off of fear, and crisis generates alot of fear, so the greater the crisis, the greater the amount of dictatorship, and Peak Oil is something that is really going to cause alot of problems(especially with the way we're doing hardly anything about it, relative to the immensity of the problem). It may even force a massive population contraction due to lack of foresight. So that's why I'm worried about dictatorship. Dictatorship won't just be instated, it will be demanded by the sheeple themselves. As they have already demonstrated that they are willing to exchange a great deal of freedom for security, for something like terrorism(which in comparison with Peak Oil or Global Warming, has taken lives in the U.S, maybe by the thousands, which Peak Oil alone, could take lives easily in the hundreds of thousands to millions, while causing pain for all classes), what makes you think they won't do the same for Peak Oil? Never underestimate the stupidity, or the power of people in large numbers.

I was wondering what y'all would think about using metaphors to talk about political issues, the writing of stories to write about political issues, so that it doesn't infuriate certain people, and so certain things that require intelligence to discern can be said, with less danger of worrying whether you'll be imprisoned. What do you think?