Three Pimps and a Crack Whore: 10/01/2001

i've been bitching about my throat on my own blog for a while now, so i figure its time i start bitching about it here. my tonsils feel like they're about to come out of my mouth. this is not good. and i don't want to go to work tonight. damnit. damnit. damnit.

I'm gonna add to NopaPimp's answers:

5. Colen Powell
7. John Ashcroft
9. I'm not entirely sure but I know they're under the direction of the Secretary of Treasury.
10. Michigan has 18 and California has 54........(thank you polisci class).......Florida?! I'm guessing like twenty.

Dude, you're weird.

9. Treasury.
10. 25
11. clinton
13. approx. 280 million
14. that question doesnt' sound like gramatically correct english. i refuse on general principle.
15. ducakis

I want you guys to notice something. Jon, Jackie, and I have our own personal blogs. I don't know about Ryan. But anyway, go and read our most recent posts. I wrote mine then read yours. We're all sounding pretty much in the same boat, aren't we? Kind of tired of the way things are going, yearning for something better. Odd, eh?

CapnLoserPimp, from now on will be refered to as JERKO, made me miss my class today. I have no other choice but to remain in my current business of crackwhoring. YOU JERKO I am more than a crack whore!.......I'm a BITCHCRACKWHORE! Without that degree I will never move up to ADMIRAL CRACK BITCH! YOU ARE A JERKO!!!! YOU SHITMIX!! I WOULD HAVE GONE WHERE NO OTHER CRACK WHORE HAS GONE BEFORE! my dreams....shattered.

Smell that garbage man!

Jackass.

you son of a ....BITCH! Are you looking through a magnifying glass when you say that?! I hope not that would just be sad.

Oh yea gay man licker?! Wait suck what---there's not really much to suck....in your case!

At least I don't swallow---GAY MAN!

And about your woman, you womanwanter, YOU ARE GAY!! did you need a constant reminder that you're gay?!

That's it StupidTweetleDumbass"thatwaswayharsh"CapnLoserPimP, you are the one who is the baby!!!! YOu sad crier, you sad crier man!! I am the bitchcrack whore!! Here me stomp in your frikin puddles!

Jackass.

*sniffle sniffle* i'm crying. wanna know why? cuz that was way harsh. the ground is wet with my tears... there is a tear puddle the likes of which have never been seen. i am sad. i think i'll eat pizza.

Does everything have to be a frickin competition to you JOn?! Hey Hey I got how to settle this, we'll just call each other and yell "You smell" into the receiver and hang up! Oh whoops I forgot, that's you're thing. Nothing personal.

Jackass.

Are you? Well, I'm the pimpiest NopaPimp that ever lived. So there. heh.

I am the crackiest crack whore that ever lived!!!!

Holy shit good job Joseph.

Soul Singing--Black Crows
Jokerman--Bob Dylan
Ball and Chain--Janis Joplin

I'll post a harder one within the next few days. But for now, I must read.

Snoogans
-Jay

heh, you dumb bastard, Free Fallin was done by tom petty on his first solo album... heh heh heh

Free Fallin by Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers
Sour Girl by Stone Temple Pilots
Soul Singing by ????
Mercury by Counting Crows
Mmm etc. by Crash Test Dummies
Right Round by Dead or Alive
Stomp by George Clinton
Wake Me Up by Wham (George Michael)
My Sharona by The Knack
Jokerman by ????
Low Rider by War
Brain Damage by Pink Floyd
Ball and Chain by ????
Video Killed the Radio Star by the Buggles

That's without cheating. Chucky... it's hunting season.

You got 6/14 right.

Applesauce Bitch.

i can let go of the statement, and i'm not obsessed with star trek or star wars. i am however, a geek. so back off. lets see how many i can get w/out any help from a website or whatever...
1. freefallin -- tom petty
2. sour girl -- STP isn't it?
3. soul singing -- bert... no no, ernie...
4. mercury -- crap.. i can't remember
5. MMM MMM -- crash test dummies, and i believe the full title was MMMM MMMM MMMM MMMM
6. Right round -- billy idol
7. stomp -- george clinton
8. wake me up before you go go -- was it the go go's? i can't remember
9. my sharona -- the knack (lead singer is jeffery figers brother... they look almost exactly alike, its scary)
10. jokerman -- no clue
11. low rider -- war (widespread panic covered it i think)
12. brain damage -- what i'm going to do to you when we're done!!!!!!
13. ball and chain -- what i'm going to do to you... oh... wait
14. video killed the radio star -- i know that the presidents of the U.S.A covered it, but i can't think of who did it originally...

so how's them apples?

P.S. when i say you're dead to me, i don't mean anything by it... its just a figure of speach like, "i slept with your mom last night" or "gee, your dog tastes great w/ some ketchup.." you know?

Alright Mister "I can't let go of a comment because I'm obsessed with Star Trek and Star Wars, not to mention I'm a geek", I am not dead to you. FYI and for future reference, I am alive and well and if I were dead to you, you wouldn't acknowledge me because I wouldn't be there. And if you don't acknowledge me, I wouldn't consider us friends. Therefore when you say "you are dead to me now" that means that we're not friends. And if we weren't friends, you would've never taken chances in euchre, you woulda never heard "Out Loud", and you woulda never laughed because I'm a crack whore and sometimes crack whores are just funny. You would be sad and I would be sad for not being friends. Why make us both sad?!

Jackass.

Oh and here's some trivia:

Song Titles: Name the Artist
1. Free Fallin
2. Sour Girl
3. Soul Singing
4. Mercury
5. MMM MMM
6. Right Round
7. Stomp
8. Wake me up before you go go
9. My Sharona
10. Jokerman
11. Low Rider
12. Brain Damage
13. Ball and Chain
14. Video Killed the Radio Star

Now I know everyone has a downloading program, but try and see if you can answer em without it.

Star Trek, Star Wars, same thing?!? No. You are dead to me now. Only a woman would think that such a statement has any merit at all. Only a crackwhore...

Yeah, I know, I know... I read an interview with him. I just didn't want to say it. I think he's dumb though. I mean... seriously, this is the guy who came up with Gredo shooting first. Remember that.

"This really is conceived as a six-part movie, of which Episode One is the first chapter. And sometimes it's difficult to keep that in mind. That each film, while it's important in itself and it relates to what's going on in that film, and has to be entertaining in itself, really is fitting to a larger mosaic. And that the whole enterprise won't really be understood, I think, until you can actually sit down and watch all six epsodes and follow the story. We're dealing in microstories here, the larger picture is kind of a different story."

-Spoken by the only man who could settle our argument, George Lucas.

Joe, I have to say, you are one magnificent bastard...

So in case anyone cares anymore, I cannot let this go unanswered.

David Duchovny played Brian the writer guy who drives across the country on a search of old serial killer sites, and who picks up Early Grayce the psycho redneck played by Brad Pitt in Kalifornia. Brad Pitt played another psycho, this time an animal activist named Jeffrey Goines in the Terry Gilliam film 12 Monkeys. Jeffrey's psychiatrist was played by Madeleine Stowe, but her boss was a doctor played by Frank Gorshin, who many may remember as the green suited Riddler in the 1966 release of Batman, which of course, also starred everybody's favorite Batman named Adam, Adam West.

sometimes, when i'm bored. i sit and stare at my computer screen while moving my mouse. its fun, and a good time is had by all. no, really.

So, CapnPimp and I made a bet earlier today. It was about a cooking utensil/tecnique. The bet was, when you boil water in one pan and have another pan on the top where you're cooking something, is the term double boiler (me) or double broiler (CapnPimp). I looked it up on dictionary.com and guess what? I was right. Not to gloat about it or anything, but I just want to make sure that I collect my winnings. heh heh heh. I was right and you were wrong, na na na na boo boo

There is a weird man in my room and I feel stupid.

Jon!!!!!!!! Jon!!!!!!!!! Jon!!!!!!!!!!!!

I want a man who's tall and dark. A man who can pick me up when we're fighting and laugh when we fall. A guy who wants to go motorcycling even if he's never sat on one before. A man who wraps his arms around me when I had a bad day (and vice versa). A guy who gives me my space when I need to figure something out or a guy who kisses away my tears when life gets too hard to handle. I want a man who makes me feel like I can tell him everything that's on my mind. I want a guy with a sense of humor; that can laugh with my family and occasionally interject a one-liner when my dad and I are sparing at the dinner table. I want to hang out with his mom and sister/brother and not feel awkward. I want a guy who can play cards, especially euchre. I like a guy with ambition, that knows where his dreams will take him, but also relishes in the moment (i.e he loves chillin with all his friends now). I want a guy who doesn't need to be around 24/7 and saves the makeout until both of us are alone. He would look at me and smile. So I thank god every day that he's in my life.

I was thinking about a group words yesterday, and it occured to me I've never heard them spoken to me. I've never had someone say "I need you". Not "I need you....to get me something" or "I need you...to help me with this", but just "I need you". I want a guy that says that to me.

Oh yea and a guy that calls me Jack when he's happy and Jackie when he's upset :-).

Oh and I want a guy that can debate damnit....Someone who I can have a good healthy argument and make up afterwards. yyyyyyeeeeaaa the make up--that's always quality. yea how you doin?! hehehe

This man would be so nacho yo.

its not a serious question, and i'm not taking it as such, but i'm trying to answer it honestly. if you want a bullshit answer, you wouldn't have posed the quesion to this forum.

i don't want to limit myself to any specific size, weight, shape, color, personality or what have you. my response to the question doesn't have to do with my fear of limiting my options. it has to do with this. i don't care about what size, weight, shape, color, or personality they happen to have. it doesn't matter to me. i'm not going to give you an answer about what my perfect mate is if the answer is a series of bullshit specifications that i'm not going to try to stick to. if i wanted to define what i was looking for in someone, i would define it as i have. we've had this discussion before, i've defined it the same way. its not a matter of fear. i could say i'm looking for a woman 37 years older than me that's into S&M an yogurt if i wanted to. that would be as valid an answer as any posted so far. it would probably be the farthist from the truth, but whatever. all i'm saying is that i gave you the most accurate honest answer i could. and, you did manage to start a new discussion...

Ok shitmix, it's not a serious question. It an "I'm-just-wondering-so-as-to-have-a-new-topic-of-discussion" question. It's more of a profile of yourself, what you seek, what compliments you. By the time you meet this chicky, all this stuff could have completely changed. But there's a big difference between a person who says "I want a girl that loves to laugh" and a guy who says "I want someone to boink 24-7." It's a harmless question. However, I am a little concerned that your refusal to really consider an actual answer to any specific thing you are looking for may mean you have nothing specific you are looking for. That's all well and good, because in the end those things don't really matter. I never thought I'd fall for some of the people I've fallen for, because they weren't who I was "looking" for. But it didn't take anything away from them because of it, I fell for them anyway. My concern is that maybe you are afraid to specify anything you look for in the opposite sex, for fear of limiting your options. But let me tell you something. There are around three billion women on this planet. One of them is bound to have some of the characteristics you're looking for, so you aren't limiting yourself. And like I said it's an unimportant question, as arbitrary as me asking how your day is. You could meet someone opposite of what you put and still fall in love. It happens. Often. If you want to, imagine the girl you would describe doesn't exist, but you are at the factory designing her. Man, that's a strange thought... if only it could be that easy.

Or just don't answer the question. Whatever.

so, let me get this straigt Sarge. all that stuff is unimportant, and you acknowledge that, but you still want to define what it is that is unimportant. that seems, dumb somehow. yeah, i'm a cheeseball. i knew it too.

you asked for a description of my perfect mate. i told you, its someone who makes me happy. is that not good enough? is that not valid? if i tried to define things that made someone my perfect mate, would i then not hold people to that standard? i mean, if i said, "i need a girl that plays guitar." would i then not hope to find someone that plays guitar, and therefore think of it as a minus that they don't? i see no point in defining somethign that i don't plan on holding someone to. yes, there are things that i find attractive in women, yes those are things i guess i look for. but they honestly aren't specific characteristics. things that catch my eye are things that make me notice a person. they don't make me think, "oh baby, thats what i'm looking for." they instead make me think, "hey, should i talk to that person to find out if i like them."

asking what someone's perfect mate is a bullshit quesiton. you define your perfect mate in terms of things that turn you on, make you smile and laugh, make you feel comftorble and make you happy. you also describe things that piss you off about people as things you don't want. thats all fine and valid. but if you define your perfect mate, isn't that what you're looking for? isn't that something you're holding out for? or are you willing to settle for something less than your pre-defined perfect mate? i'm not willing to settle for less than my 'perfect mate.' but my perfect mate doesn't have many specific things to live up to. they need to make me happy. thats what makes them perfect. cheesball, fine. but its the truth, so back off.

I knew it would be you, Nopa. I knew you'd be the one who says all that stuff is unimportant, and that you just want someone who makes you happy. Cheeseball. I knew it.

Of course that stuff is unimportant. I never said it was. This is basically a question to see what those unimportant things are, not a checklist for girls to follow to win your heart. If you're in love with someone who is the complete opposite of all the things you put, you won't say, "You know, I'm madly in love with you, but you're blond, and I dig redheads... hit the road sugarbutt."

So I guess I'll start, because I'm not counting yours Jon, you gotta try that again.

My dream chicky is shorter than me, her head comes up to my chin, so that when she hugs me I can put my head on top of hers. She is someone who just fits, ya know? Not like an awkward hugger, but her body fits with mine. She's got eyes like Claire Forlani, and a beautiful smile. She's got long hair, but lot too long. Straight hair. She's funny. Very funny. Fall on the ground rolling funny, but she can be serious when she needs to be. She's smart. Book smart and people smart. She can beat me at chess without me letting her. She's friendly, and gets along really well with my family. She is someone who can go hang out with my mom for an afternoon an have a good time. She's someone who can joke around with my brothers and my dad and make fun of them back, because thats what they always do. She's someone who can sit in silence with me, and we wouldn't feel that awkward need to entertain each other. But we can talk. We can talk for hours without a real point to any of it. She's someone who gets along with my friends, and we can go to a party and not have to stand next to each other the whole night. She's very open, and extroverted. She can make an ass of herself just for a laugh without feeling embarrassed. She's very open-minded too, not somone who is so set in her ways that she is scared to death to try something she has never done. She'll go skydiving, she's daring. She is someone I can trust with my life. She's kind, considerate, and loves playing with little kids. She's strong. Not physically, mentally. She can deal with stress, and hard times, and still smile. She doesn't play mind games. She won't do that girly thing where she says nothing is wrong and proceeds to pout all night, or she won't try to push any jealousy buttons just to push them. She's honest. She'll tell me when something is wrong, realizing that if she doesn't think it's a big deal, I probably won't either. She's someone I can fight with and not worry that she's going to leave me for it. Someone who I will know that even if she doesn't like me at the moment, she still loves me. She does something, something I can support her in. Like plays volleyball, or paints or something. She teaches me. Things I've never known before, things I've never experienced, like art or jazz. And she wants to learn things I can teach her, like hockey. She'll play football with the guys and actually play, not just be the typical girl on the guys team who just says, "I'll just run around." She's someone who could take my moms side in an argument against me, but take my side in an argument against her mom. She likes classic rock, and isn't afraid to sing, even if it's bad. But most importantly she'll be someone who moves me. Someone who thinks of things in way that I never have before. Someone who can make me look at something I've seen my whole life, and actually make me reconsider it. Someone who can change my mind. Someone who gives me confidence, instead of attacking me for not having any. She's someone who inspires me to be better at everything I do. Oh, and she calls me Joseph.

That's kinda what I was looking for.. I know you want someone to make you happy, but how do they make you happy? I'm really intersted to read what you have to say, Nopa Pimp, Captain Pimp, and Crack Whore. Later....

-Nacho Joe from Medical School

My perfect mate is someone who makes me happy bitch... big boobs, small boobs, whatever man. blonde, brunette, red head. it doesn't matter. i mean, yeah, there are things that i'm attracted to physically, but they're the unimportant things that if she has its like, "oh. bonus." so, in true playboy fashion, my list of turn on's are as follows. If she plays guitar. I dig red heads. Good smile (i found someone w/an amazing smile. we'll see what's going to happen with that tonight. wish me luck). And I love eyes. so yeah, i'm a hopless romantic. BUT GODDAMNIT!!! I DON'T WANNA BE!!!!

I posed this question to Jackie, and we ended up talking about it for quite some time. So I ask it to the rest of the pimps.

Describe in detail your perfect mate. The girl, or guy in Jack or possibly Ryan's case (kidding, you crazy not gay pimp, you) of your dreams. And none of that cop out "Someone who makes me happy" crap, you aren't hitting on any of us, so you don't need us to think you're such a sweet sensitive person. I want a list of characteristics. Not that you would actually hold anyone to, but just things that would describe your dream mate. For example Nopa, I know you dig chicks that play guitar.

I'll put mine up in a little bit. Ask Jack, it's going to take me about two hours to type out everything I came up with. Good luck, God speed, and what not.

If 200 million americans ordered 1 large pizza every two weeks, it comes out to 60 billion dollars a year for pizza. -Joe Parcell

That's so Nacho.......we should get a pizza place. Three Pimps and Crack whore and a pizza place. (yea Jon I know i said "there is no pizza place" the very first entry...but money always changes a crack whore's mind)

Conservatives piss me off. Not all of them, just the ones who complain that there is too much violence on TV, then blow up a giant poster of severed baby's head and plant it outside the Planned Parenthood Building on W. Michigan.

If you're going to make an argument, if you're going to have a belief, if you want to stand up for something, make it universal. Don't be wishy washy. If you believe in life, believe it all over. Don't say people should live here, but die here. Believe that religion should be pushed or not pushed. Don't believe that we should push religion here, and not here. If you think there is too much violence in the world, don't get pissed at The A-Team and then put up a big picture of a bloody head on the side of the road for children to stare at as they get taken home on the school bus.

Jackass.

It crept up on me, ignored all my pleads, beggin to leave, no justice to name me...fell out of the sky, it's easy to be without a reply, gravity fails me and................."

Almost Ry.....I'll give ya half credit for #4--the Lion's were tied for 2nd in 1944. And Heat was the agent given off in the reaction. Niiiiicce though you got two right!!!! good job ry!!!!!!!!! You are god. That is all.

Walken to Frasier
Frasier w/Joe Pesci in With Honors : Pesci w/ Willis in Loaded Weapon : Willis w/ Walken in Pulp Fiction

Eddie Veder to Kowalczyk (on the fly... it might not work)
Kowalczyk w/ Pitt in Fight Club : Pitt w/ Harrison Ford in The Devils Own : Ford w/ Mark Hamil in Star Wars/Empire/Jedi : Hamil w/ Jason Biggs in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back : Biggs w/ Mark Hoppus in American Pie : Back to Biggs w/ Smith in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back : Smith w/ Neve Campbell in Scream 3 : Campbell w/ Matt Lillard in Scream 1/2/3 : Lillard w/ Tcheky Karyo in Wing Commander : Tcheky Karyo w/ Bridget Fonda in Kiss of the Dragon : Fonda w/ Eddie Vedder in Singles : Vedder w/ Matt Dillon in Singles : Dillon w/ Kevin Bacon in Wild Things : Bacon w/ Elizabeth Shue in Hollow Man : Shue w/ Val Kilmer in The Saint : Val Kilmer w/ Michael Gogh in Batman Forvever : Michael Gogh w/ Jack Nichalson in Batman : Nichalson w/ Rodger Daltry in Tommy. Dizam I'm good.

Kiefer Sutherland and Tim Curry are in Three Musketeers together. No People.

Trey Parker Sigourney Weaver was given to me.. I'm not posting it.

Adam West to David Duchovny. I refuse.

Jay, I have no idea. I just know the Model T only came in black. Nopa, these are for you.

1.) Chris Walken to Brendan Frasier (Easy)
2.) Eddie Vedder (Pearl Jam) to Ed Kowalczyk (Live) to Mark Hoppus (Blink 182) to Roger Daltry (The Who) ("I'm sure this one can be done, I just haven't figured out how yet. Yet...")
3.) Kiefer Sutherland to Tim Curry (One Person)
4.) Trey Parker to Sigourney Weaver. (One Person) ("Good Luck")
5.) Adam West to David Duchovny (Two People)

Shut the fuck up, Fry Man! -Joe

TRIVIA

1. What is the air speed velocity of a swallow?
2. What city is more north: Salt Lake City, Utah or Cheyenne, Wyoming?
3. What number did the Detroit Lion's retire in honor of Dutch Clark?
4. In 1944, the Lion's placed what in the Western Division?
5. What is usually given off in a neutralization reaction?
6. What year was the Louisitania, an American cargo ship, torpeoed and sunk? Extra points for exact date.
7. Who is the host of the show Hardball?
8. What does BIOS stand for? hint.computer term.
9. What is Jimi Hedrixs' middle name?
10. Red Hot Chilli Peppers featured songs such as "Aeroplane" and "my friends" on which album?
11. What band sings "Rosemary"?
12. How many miles of nerves in the human body?
13. How long is the longest recorded flight of a chicken?
14. How many soda's does the average American/Canadian drink annually?
15. How many eyelids does a camel have?
15b. How many times does a camel pee in a month? <---ry that ones fo you.

IT's on Ry

1. No
2. Ohio
3. I know what this means...grrrr shit....damnit
4. zip
5. 24
6. 98 minutes, burned up in the atmosphere
7. Gray, Green, Red, Blue, Black
8. dentist
9. Robert Altman; good movie ('87 I think) with John travolta?!
10. (10-8) of a centimeter and it's a unit by the way
11. hmmm something we can use in another product
12. Never seen it
13. wha….huh?
14. South haven
15. Drummond Island
15b. depends on you

I am a crack whore....I hate cafe food.....I have a drug run at 6.....There's a fist with my name on it at 7 if I skip the drug run at 6......i have a date with the emergency room at 8 if the 7 oclock takes place if i skip the 6......I have pain awaiting me if the 7 is still on if i skip my 6 and if the 8 is a date.....so Im late for the date with my 6,7,and 8......yea. Jackass.

Alright stop, collaborate and listen. As I said, the definition of science is a semantics argument, and is totally oblivious to the question being asked. Yes "science" is an observation, it exists becuase of man, so therefore, how does it not have a will? Don't we aim our science gun at what we want to be scientific about? You are arguing against your first post about this question. If it exists outside of man, then I would agree it has no will, but if you say it has no will, but is a tool used by man... then you aren't making much sense, and you should be put down. :)

You're already thinking of an argument against that last sentence aren't you. Tools don't have will power. Guns don't choose who they kill, blah blah blah, right? The will of the owner is reflected through the tool. Hammers have no will, no bias towards any object, but have you ever noticed that they have a tendancy to hit nails?

So when we say "the will of science" we mean, "the will of scientists who use the science." Jackass.

And time does not exist outside of your head. Time is a measurement, an observation of motion. Without you, it's not there. Just like science.

Joe, Joe, Baby.... Joe, Joe, Baby.... Too Cold, Too Cold..... Word to your mother.

oh, and ryan is... not what one would call internet-inclined. he uses it. its just not the obsession that it is for the rest of us. we'll wear him down... soon, he will be like us. only gay.

science doesn't exist w/out humans jackass. instead of time, lets say light. light is something that we need science to understand on more than a basic 'ouch my eyes hurt' kind of way. does it exist without science, damn straight. nature and science aren't the same thing. we use science to understand nature, or things within nature. science is not a fundamental part of nature. nature is that which naturally happens (my talent for stating the blatantly obvious is now glowing), science is (according to dictionary.com) "The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena." the term science does not apply to the physical ocurance of cells dividing. science refers to us figuring out how, why, when, who, what, where, etc about the cell division. nature does not equal science. science doesn't not 'exist in nature.' science doesn't exist outside of our heads. time does.

I have a sudden urge to do my hair and have a smokey treat.

Hey what happened to Ry?

Ok, Special K, let's get this straight. Science does not exist without humans... but time does? (Sorry, I retract that.) Nop-ster, science exists in nature. Stars would be created without man. Cells would divide without man. Gravity would work without man. Time would still not exist without man. (oops I did it again.) Human advancement in science is what we are talking about. Advancement in biology, chemistry, medicine, hair products.

Now, away from the semantics argument, I agreed with you. (see: fusion reactor vs. fusion bomb). Yes Rogaine doesn't apply itself, just like cigarettes don't light themselves. But science (scientists) work to make hair grow back, and cigarettes "safer" so that more people will get hooked by the product, and thus controlled. The difference is one will kill you, the other will make you look like Fabio. Well, less like George from Seinfeld. Or less like that loser Picard, and more like the righteous James T. Kirk.

And while I'm hitting all of them... Star Wars should be seen Episode 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, then 6.

BUCK FUTTER TREBEK!

look, i don't remember what i said before, and i frankly don't care. let me just sum up what it was that i meant. science is an abstract. its a creation. it doesn't exist with out humans. humans control it, and we further it. with it we can do wonderful or horrible things. but its always the will of the people who weild it. science its self is neither good nor bad. saying so implies that it has a will. science is a word we made up to help explain the world. it has no will, it has no agenda, it doesn't 'do' anything. we use it to acomplish things. we can acomplish great things, we can acomplish horible things. but its always us, its always humans.
science is not a social sysytem. there are people with in social systems that use science as the basis of said social system. but science in and of its self does not create that social system. we do.
take for example the biologist who is deeply rooted in religion. lets say that he does seek to find flaws in darwinism. great. what actually sought the flaws? was it science? or was it the religious zealot that decided that since darwin didn't expressly agree with the bible, he was wrong?
when we send relief efforts to third world countries, we affect their lives. we impact their lives. we use science. but it is always us using things that we have at our disposal. it is never the thing (science) that uses us to affect them. we use things that were created by science and therefore affect their lives. but we chose to use science. we could have chosen not to. science wouldn't have said anything.
rogaine. thats a laughable example joey. yeah, once you start using it you can't stop. i'll give you that. there is a flaw in your argument. rogaine does not apply itself to some unsuspecting bald persons head only to infor that person that he then has to use rogaine for the rest of his life or loose all of his hair. a balding man finds various things he can do to stop himself from balding. he hears or reads about rogaine. he reads that once you start, you can't stop or you loose all your hair. he makes the choice to start using it, and therefore imposes the need for rogaine on himself.
it all comes down to us. science doesn't do anything. we use science for good and for bad. to control others, or to further humanity. but its always us. its never this abstract thing called 'science.' its always us.

-Jon

Kameya--- "science doesn't further humanity or try to control it. On furthering humanity, yes, science does wonderful things." Does anyone else see the contradiction here?!

Science is a social system. The desire of scientists for approval by their peers, for promotions, salary raises, and Nobel prizes shape the products of this system. Take for example, a biologist who is deeply rooted in religion, don't you think that he would be more inclined to seek to find flaws in the evolutionary theory? Or consider a senior chemist in her department. You don't think she'd direct her research so that she can get grants renewed? (Melchert)

You stated that "science also doesn't seek to control humanity." That's a peculiar stance to take my friend. When we send relief efforts over to countries like Somolia (sp?) or Rowanda for instance, we bring our scientific advancements to "save" lives, right? What if the predominant culture, and I say this with the assumption that the helpee's are of one culture, is based on religion? Meaning, what if the helpee's depend on the existance of god(s) to heal the sick or wounded? And considering that religion generally has a great deal of historical roots in a society (ex. recall the history of native american culture), the practices of Somolia or Rowanda for example, have most likely been used for centuries. When we burst into that society and "cure" everyone of their ailments, are we not interfering with their humanity? Are we not controlling their lives by extending them? Not to mention the ramifications of using science verses tradition in a country so poverty stricken that it's awed by the technology, does it really further humanity?

I got a man killed yesterday. It wasn't really my fault, it's just, well, I was trying to sneak him into this building with high security, and I accidentally opened his door in front of two armed guards. Anyway, sorry Mike. Better luck next time.

Now onto Jackie's question. To directly disagree with Nopa, not just to disagree with him, but just because I do, science serves to further AND control humanity. Newer technologies allow us to dwell deeper into what we can do, what we can accomplish, how to better ourselves. Like Rogaine. However, once you start using Rogaine, you can never stop, and thus you are controlled by it. On a smaller scale, think of science as Microsoft. Microsoft and computers have done wonders for us in almost every aspect of life. But its also controlling, because if you're still running MS-DOS 3.11, you cannot utilize all the aspects of science and are therefore lagging desperately behind. Science forces humanity to catch up to it. Its hard now-a-days to live without a credit card, a PC, a television, etc., while a hundred years ago it was hard to live without a horse, a washboard, a clothesline, an outhouse. Its human to want to make a profit, and science is a great means to that end. People want to live longer, they want to get rid of their cancer, they want to keep their hair, they want to run Red Faction, they want to be able to hit a button and have a magical voice fill your car and tell you where to go. If I can put a few bucks in my pocket by letting you, then cool. Thus I further humanity. If I can put a few million bucks in my pocket by making you incompatible with society if you don't buy my stuff, even cooler. Thus I control it.

Of course I think Nopa's point was that science hasn't accomplished anything, because for every person who lives an extra five years, there's an extra 85 year old lady going 15 under in the fast lane on the S-Curve. That has merit too. We hear people complain everyday that there are too many people in the world, but are decidedly and blindly pro-life. People complain that there is too much governmental authority in our country, and then complain when they get held up at an ATM and there was no cop available to help them. The thing is, you can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you just can't please the one egocentric ignorant little bitch with the protestors sign.

You're right Nopa, science has no will. Science is what you make it. Build a fusion reactor to power a million homes or build a fusion bomb to destroy them, its all up to us. What we do with our science is a reflection on human nature. What we find important is where the newest stuff goes. Whether it's AIDS vaccinations or porno on DVD, it is an accurate portrayal of what we find valuable in society. And apparently our society values comfort.

But back to the original question, I guess to sum up, I believe that science is meant to further humanity, to make us better. It's just that, the ones who don't follow suite fall victim to social Darwinism, and therefore it also becomes a necessity.

And therefore....a witch. Burn her.

i want to star in a movie. if i do, i want it to be titled, "polka doted landscapes." and it should be about the 1820's. But with hoverboards. [read more about my movie idea here.]

First... jacks... "acuse me sirs." so. uh. well. did you mean, 'excuse me'? and also, with the whole sirs thing, you sound like that one chick from charlie brown. did you realize that? now, i'm not saying that its a bad thing that you sound like her, in fact, i think its kind of cool.. but i was just wondering, did you know thats what you were doing? or was it just coincidence...

second, joePimp, there is no device in your head... sheesh, we put it in y... oh... i mean.. uh...

third... science doesn't further humanity or try to control it. On furthering humanity. yes, science does wonderful things. but, alowing people to live longer isn't necisarily all its cracked up to be. i'm not saying i necisarily agree with everythign i'm about to write, i'm just offering a different point of view. longer lives mean more people on earth at once, which leads to over population. also, with more people, there will be more industry, which leads to more polution, which leads to furthering the greenhouse affect, which leads to global warming which leads to the polar ice caps melting which leads to everyone learning how to swim real fast. science also doesn't seek control over humanity. it is our creation. hence, it doesn't have a will, it doesn't have an agenda. it just doesn't care. science is whatever the person who uses it makes it. it can be good, it can be bad, it can seek control, it can seek chaos. it is whatever the person who weilds it wants it to be.

oh, and back to the whole 'acuse me sirs' thing. YOU DID IT!!! DIDN'T YOU!!!!!!!! YOU STOLE THE COOKIE FROM THE COOKIE JAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DAMN YOUS!!!!!!! DAMN YOUS ALL TO HELL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dude, I swear, they are out to get me. They put a device in my head, and twelve others. I was only two days old. It controls my mind. They can hear my thoughts. They can see what I see. They can make me see things that aren't there, act ways I'd never act. My god. Are you real? Are these people here real? You work for them don't you. You bastards. Well you'll not get me. I know where you live.

This is an instance of science controlling humanity. Jackie, you're one of them too aren't you?

acuse me sirs......there is a task at hand that you are neglecting to acknowledge. Did you not see the question asked of all of you? My hand hurts damnit and you are the whore!!!

I've decided that the whore isn't crack addict here... anyone, please, ask JoePimp about the USDS... I mean, I feel like I'm in the movie "Conspiracy Theory" or something.

I'm not a whore... I've signed no contract... there is no job description.

Ryan will "fill you in" on "pool tables." Heh heh heh....

Yes!!!!!! Jon is the whore. In my new found Pimpness, I demand that my whore cook me dinner and sing me a song. Yes whore-you must satisfy your pimp, it is in your job description. MWA HAHA AHA

I'd like to bring an up an issue to discuss. Issue dispensing now....and 5, 4, 3, 2 ----- Does science further humanity or does it seek control over it? Just a thought I guess. Whore you may answer if you wish :-)

wait... since when does ryan 'like' pool tables... someone fill me in here

oh, and I got a steak... yum

I've lost my train of thought. I think I'll hop on the train they call the City of New Orleans. mmmm.... Arlo Guthrie. ahhhh....

yes, I'm a whore for music.

-Jon

Three Pimps and a Crack Whore

Tuesday, October 30, 2001

Monday, October 29, 2001

Thursday, October 25, 2001

Tuesday, October 23, 2001

Monday, October 22, 2001

Thursday, October 18, 2001

Wednesday, October 17, 2001

Tuesday, October 16, 2001

Monday, October 15, 2001

Sunday, October 14, 2001

Friday, October 12, 2001

Thursday, October 11, 2001

Wednesday, October 10, 2001

Tuesday, October 09, 2001

Monday, October 08, 2001

Sunday, October 07, 2001

Saturday, October 06, 2001

Thursday, October 04, 2001

Wednesday, October 03, 2001

Tuesday, October 02, 2001

Monday, October 01, 2001

Contributors

Previous Posts

Archives