?

Log in

Sat, Nov. 17th, 2007, 12:19 am
MadLib to "Eleanor Rigby"

Ah, look at all the pompous penguins!
Ah, look at all the pompous penguins!
Georgette McDonald-Gregory-Smith picks up the plum in a decrepid shack where a bat mitzvah has been.
bat in a bottle.

gorge at the inferno, wearing the hippopatomous that she keeps in a delicacy by the old lady. Who is it for?

All the pompous penguins, where do they all come from?
All the pompous penguins, where do they all glut?

Thu, Aug. 23rd, 2007, 04:58 pm
Hi LJ

I'm updating from California. Ummm...So....

I got my new state license. They made me put on a tie-dye shirt and a bandana before taken the picture for it. I'm a class NVW license, which is a non-VW driver.

I tried In-And-Out burger. It was ok, pretty good, but it was lower than my expectations for it. I was expecting Heaven's food the way everybody talked about it.

I tried El Pollo Loco today which was much much better. Best tacos I've ever had in my life.

I beat New Super Mario Bros. the other day. Finally. That was the first DS game I ever bought and I'm just now finishing it. I beat the game a week ago I think, got all the coins a day or two after that. Yesterday is when I finally officially truly got everything by spending all my coins (I think you had to open every level and warp cannon to be able to spend them all)

I still need to beat Contact, and Pokemon (I've gotten more badges since being here), and Mario Vs Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis (which I've really made alot of progress in since coming here, from floor 3 all the way to 8 with only 3 rooms left to beat)

Sat, May. 19th, 2007, 05:30 pm
Because Radiohead is cool

Jonny Greenwood summarised their recording sessions for Kid A:

“ I don't remember much time playing keyboards. It was more an obsession with sound, speakers, the whole artifice of recording. I see it like this: a voice into a microphone onto a tape, onto your CD, through your speakers is all as illusory and fake as any synthesizer - it doesn't put Thom in your front room - but one is perceived as 'real' the other, somehow 'unreal'... It was just freeing to discard the notion of acoustic sounds being truer. ”

Fri, May. 18th, 2007, 02:18 pm

It sure has been awhile..Is anybody there?

Fri, Dec. 1st, 2006, 02:02 pm

Hi LJ...does anyone still read this?

Wed, Sep. 13th, 2006, 10:08 pm

Maybe the solution to the "This statement is false" paradox lies in this question: what would make the statement true or false? That is, can truth and falsehood exist independent of reason or can they exist merely for their own sake?

Wed, Sep. 13th, 2006, 09:49 pm

I'm waiting on coding for something..so I thought I'd think/talk about paradoxes..

Some of the paradoxes I find annoy me..but maybe I'm not seeing something (which happens alot)

Hempel's paradox goes like this:
[Hempel gives an example of the principle of induction: the theory that all ravens are black. Suppose that we go out and examine a million ravens, and observe that they are all black. After each observation, our belief in the theory "all ravens are black" will rise slightly. The principle of induction looks reasonable here.

Now comes the problem. The statement "all ravens are black" is logically equivalent to the statement "all non-black-things are non-ravens". If we observe a red apple, which is a non-black, non-raven, then this observation should increase our belief that all non-black things are non-ravens and therefore that all ravens are black!]

Am I the only one who doesn't see those two statements as logically equivalent? They'd only be equivalent if the first statement were something like "all black things are ravens."
If someone saw a black non-raven object, how would it logically follow that not all ravens are black? It wouldn't, because non-raven objects don't play into the statement that "all ravens are black"

Arrrgh..Wikipedia says that Philosophers debate over it..why? whhhhy? someone help me understand

Fri, Aug. 25th, 2006, 01:05 pm

I likes:
"Enough damage already has been done by the hijacking of the term “fundamentalist” from a group of folks who called themselves this word. The word now means “any religious group in the world we don’t like - you know, like those fundamentalists who were at the scopes monkey trial.” It implies a connection between Islamic terrorists and KJV-only Baptist churches and is pure bigotry. "

Something I've been thinking about lately..I'm tired of the "open minded" and "accepting" turning so hypocrtical when there's people with differing views. Just admit you're not that "open minded"

Oi

Fri, Aug. 25th, 2006, 09:08 am

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/13/AR2006071301845.html

Ho.ly.crap. Talk about an article to get under my skin in the morning

Seriously here, how can people profess to being "open minded" and talk bad about "preachy" people when they themselves are so close-minded to anything but their "feminism" "humanism" whatever label they give themselves for being about "acceptance"..when they themselves are so preachy about "liberation" and whatever else

"Ferguson says her company isn't on a mission to un-liberate women. 'Absolutely not. If people want to buy our suits we're thrilled, but they certainly don't have to,' Ferguson says. A person has to have strong convictions 'to wear our suits,' she says. If you have those convictions, 'you're not going to care about the liberation or if you get persecuted and made fun of.'

WholesomeWear may appeal to certain people of faith, but it also raises many lamentable body issues with which women grapple. Most women dread buying a swimsuit. The occasion is fraught with irrational feelings of inadequacy. Women often joke that they would wear a muumuu to the beach if they could. The truth is there's nothing to stop them from doing just that. But they know the cure for their insecurity is to let go of cultural expectations and their own skewed self-image. The answer is not to hide the body but to cheer for its ability to swim laps or just sedately float -- in a bit of form-fitting, aerodynamic nylon and Lycra. That's not immodesty; that's confidence."

She completely does not understand!! She's so wrapped up in herself, in her own "higher understanding" of humanity and freedom, that she's blind! But I forgot..all women of faith, all women with convictions are just doing it because they have "body issues" *rolls eyes*..hell why stop there, let's just say that women who don't want to have sex before marriage are afraid of their bodies and fear "liberation"! yeah!

whatever

Fri, Jun. 23rd, 2006, 11:31 pm

Sarah's gonna kill me for updating at work but it's ok..there's a brief downtime because I'm waiting on some automated processes to finish

a site, that apparently confused david and matt..about a triangle that creates a hole when the parts of shifted around..

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/trigrid.html

It's not that confusing..assign b1 and b2 to the width of the two triangles, a1 and a1 to the height, and c1 and c2 to the length of the side caused by the angle

the main triangle always is b1 + b2 = b, a1 + a2 = a, and c1 + c2 = c..when you move the two triangles around, that formula stays the same, but the square gap created is represented by a height of a#, and a width of b#, so if b1 is on top, the width of the gap is b1 and the height is a2..it's pretty simple really

10 most recent