CAUTIONARY NOTE ON THE AFTERLIFE
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Speed of Time
Next: "The Einstein Hoax"
From: purple on 17 Jan 2010 07:02 On 01/16/2010 10:09 PM, Geopelia wrote: > "purple"<purple(a)colorme.com> wrote in message > news:7re8diFdajU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> On 01/14/2010 02:16 PM, Geopelia wrote: >>> "purple"<purple(a)colorme.com> wrote in message >>> news:7r8j7uF7nqU1(a)mid.individual.net... >>>> On 01/14/2010 04:52 AM, Geopelia wrote: >>>>> "Occidental"<Occidental(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >>>>> On Jan 13, 10:19 pm, "Geopelia"<phildo...(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: >>>>>> "Anti Vigilante"<antivigila...(a)pyrabang.com> wrote in message [...] >>>>>> Perhaps God is really a Goddess? >>>>>> Like the Venus of Willendorf. >>>>> >>>>> ..with a better waistline, one hopes. >>>>> >>>>> She's a Mother Goddess, not a fashion model. How many women, in the >>>>> Palaeolithic, could have become so fat? >>>> >>>> The palaeolith is probably from the upper Palaeolithic period. >>>> >>>> That depends a lot on the particular culture. If they had time and >>>> the dedication to make statues then it was probably a culture that >>>> had a priest class, and leisure, among a subset of the culture, >>>> leading to such obesity was not only possible but probable. >>> >>> They could have overfed a large woman as a priestess or something. But at >>> that size, she would have difficulty walking. >>> >>> She's like a Barbie doll today, an impossible ideal. >> >> Not to be nit picking, but in my lifetime I've met a few >> Barbie Doll real women. Well that requires the definition >> of real women to be limited to actually existing. Beyond >> the physical, not much else about them was real. > > A real woman with the same proportions as Barbie would just look like a > freak. Freak is a matter of opinion. Of course we all have them. Barbie is built as she is because that's one of many models much sought after, yet rarely achieved. If that's a freak to you I have no objection because there are very many ideals available. Vive la difference! (Apologies for this accentless AmerEnglish keyboard.) Why is Sarah Palin so despised?
From: Don Stockbauer on 17 Jan 2010 07:44 On Jan 17, 6:02 am, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > On 01/16/2010 10:09 PM, Geopelia wrote: > > > "purple"<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote in message > >news:7re8diFdajU1(a)mid.individual.net... > >> On 01/14/2010 02:16 PM, Geopelia wrote: > >>> "purple"<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote in message > >>>news:7r8j7uF7nqU1(a)mid.individual.net... > >>>> On 01/14/2010 04:52 AM, Geopelia wrote: > >>>>> "Occidental"<Occiden...(a)comcast.net> wrote in message > >>>>> On Jan 13, 10:19 pm, "Geopelia"<phildo...(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: > >>>>>> "Anti Vigilante"<antivigila...(a)pyrabang.com> wrote in message > > [...] > > > > >>>>>> Perhaps God is really a Goddess? > >>>>>> Like the Venus of Willendorf. > > >>>>> ..with a better waistline, one hopes. > > >>>>> She's a Mother Goddess, not a fashion model. How many women, in the > >>>>> Palaeolithic, could have become so fat? > > >>>> The palaeolith is probably from the upper Palaeolithic period. > > >>>> That depends a lot on the particular culture. If they had time and > >>>> the dedication to make statues then it was probably a culture that > >>>> had a priest class, and leisure, among a subset of the culture, > >>>> leading to such obesity was not only possible but probable. > > >>> They could have overfed a large woman as a priestess or something. But at > >>> that size, she would have difficulty walking. > > >>> She's like a Barbie doll today, an impossible ideal. > > >> Not to be nit picking, but in my lifetime I've met a few > >> Barbie Doll real women. Well that requires the definition > >> of real women to be limited to actually existing. Beyond > >> the physical, not much else about them was real. > > > A real woman with the same proportions as Barbie would just look like a > > freak. > > Freak is a matter of opinion. Of course we all have them. Barbie > is built as she is because that's one of many models much sought > after, yet rarely achieved. If that's a freak to you I have no objection > because there are very many ideals available. Vive la > difference! (Apologies for this accentless AmerEnglish keyboard.) > > Why is Sarah Palin so despised? Endless discussion creates the Global Brain, this thread being the prime example.
From: * US on 17 Jan 2010 10:42 On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 06:02:38 -0600, purple <purple(a)colorme.com> wrote: >...Vive la >difference! (Apologies for this accentless AmerEnglish keyboard.) There's no such thing as a keyboard on which you can't produce that accent. There are other ways to accomplish its production, as well. We can be grateful that others don't try to blame their hardware for their ignorance. Vive la diff�rence! >Why is Sarah Palin so despised? I don't know anyone who hates her, but plenty of people consider her a laughingstock.
From: Autymn D. C. on 23 Jan 2010 02:26
On Jan 8, 1:59 pm, BruceS <bruce...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 8, 7:15 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > On Jan 5, 12:00 pm, BruceS <bruce...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > Just because you don't fully understand something someone else says, > > > don't assume that they're more intelligent than you are. It's > > > possible that they're talking more in their own specialty. It's also > > > possible that they're quite insane, and that you aren't understanding > > > them because they make no sense. Guess which Hammond is. > > > Of course, some people fit both categories, but I won't name any names > > > on that. > > > someone != they > > 1 != 2 > > > a someone -> one > > the someone -> who > > :s/they're/he's > :s/them/him > :s/they/he > > That should fix it. Sloppy typing is just lazy, but bad grammar is > reprehensible. The penitent apologizes for his lapse and strives to > improve. Uh no, it's my way or whisht. Mine are pronouns; yours abuse English, which died 1000 years ago. |