Re: Not an integral -- Flambers Drugstore

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Sun, March 27 2005, 13:11:03
Author: Katerina
Subject: Re: Not an integral
In reply to: Peter van der Hoog 's message, "Re: Not an integral" on Sun, March 27 2005, 11:46:07

For our ancestors the group, and the few groups around
them, represented the whole world.

How can u be so sure in it when u didn't live there? U may only suppose that.

Maybe the law of thermodynamics has something to do
with what we are discussing but it does not ring a
bell for me.

This law is universal and it works not only for thermodinamics but also in other fields. As well as evolution.

And a few remarks from Fla:

What suprises me in this statement is that anorectic patientst who are actualy psychically unstable people are considered to be realistic, and healthy people are not. So according to the logics of the author you gotta believe in God to stay healthy? Well you better do then, 'cause anorexia is a serious disorder.

Fitness and beaty don't always go together. Fitness is more or less objective and beauty is subjective. You may talk for hours about centimeteres and kilos but still u can't measure beauty with them. Is Sophia Loren with her large mouth and nose less attractive than Britney Spears or another barbie? Gimme a break.
On the contrary fitness can be measured in the number of push-ups and pull-ups that u can do or the power of ur hand or whatever.
Besides i find it too high of a price to pay to be "realistic" - here I am using this word the way the author of the statement is using it of course - u gotta be unattractive, unfit and psychically unstable.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Not an integral -- Peter van der Hoog, Sun, March 27 2005, 18:31:29
- Re: Not an integral -- Katerina, Mon, March 28 2005, 1:39:29
  - Re: Not an integral -- Peter van der Hoog, Mon, March 28 2005, 4:38:07
    - Re: Not an integral -- Katerina, Mon, March 28 2005, 7:52:15
      - Re: Not an integral -- Peter van der Hoog, Mon, March 28 2005, 8:36:21
        Re: Not an integral -- Katerina, Mon, March 28 2005, 8:58:48
        Re: Not an integral -- Peter van der Hoog, Mon, March 28 2005, 13:24:32
        So I supposed just to take ur thesis as an axiom? -- Katerina, Tue, March 29 2005, 2:42:25
        Re: So I supposed just to take ur thesis as an axiom? -- Peter van der Hoog, Tue, March 29 2005, 12:08:18
        Re: So I supposed just to take ur thesis as an axiom? -- Katerina, Wed, March 30 2005, 3:55:23