 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:58:23 +0100, "Phil Cook"
<phi### [at] nospamrocain freeservecouk> wrote:
>'And lo ...
You're talking a load of ...
:-)
PS I've got an excuse, I'm in my dotage. What's yours? :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook wrote:
> 'And lo as the raging waters doth caress thy head reflect that all
> things are transient and that all things lead ultimately to Him [...]
> For this thy Blessed and Most Holy Sacrament of the Swirlie shall show
> you the path.
>
> Those encompassed by the blue are blessed of Fanglemork; those who hear
> the music of the water shall dance before Tekneos; those who which
> they'd brought cleansing products to the Great Bowl shall follow the
> path of Scypian. But all exist under the gaze of Hruggh for they come to
> him as waste and so shall they return'
Start a web comic already!
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:05:57 +0100, Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom>
did spake, saying:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:58:23 +0100, "Phil Cook"
> <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>
>> 'And lo ...
>
> PS I've got an excuse, I'm in my dotage. What's yours? :)
Dropped too many times on my head as a child "I'm sure he'll bounce this
time"
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> It's funny, when you think about it at the very basic level of things,
>> we all started as a chemical reaction ...
>
> This presumes facts not in evidence.
Is the basis of biology not chemistry?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> scott wrote:
>
>> We all still are just chemical reactions!
>
> Thank you for pointing that out. It's easy to overlook. ;-)
>
Yep. That, too. Eventually the conditions become unfavorable for one set
of reactions, and another set takes over, which ...
... So, really, life is just one on-going chemical reaction. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> it a non localized (and ununderstood) physical change. Then your brain
> starts processing the 'We'. First the retina sees a set of lines and
> curves by adjusting the voltages over several cells. Then the brain
> decodes the 'W' and the 'e' and various voltages of cells in the cortex
> are adjusted. That goes to the next level where they are combined and
> you become aware that a group is meant that includes at least the writer
> and possibly yourself. Only after decoding the whole sentence you know
> that with 'We' mankind is meant, possibly even the entire fauna (plus
> flora). This is followed by a response of disapproval, resulting in the
> release of stress hormones. That in turn is then followed by the
That reminds me of something I read recently, dealing with parallelism,
neural nets, and brains. They did scans of someone's brain as it was
working. What was interesting was when something new was perceived, it
would start as chaos, then eventually settle into a pattern of neurons
firing. All of the processing that happens is massively parallel. I wish
I could remember all of the details involved, but it was a fascinating
document.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> Is the basis of biology not chemistry?
http://xkcd.com/435/
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Is the basis of biology not chemistry?
>
> http://xkcd.com/435/
The ALT-text seems kinda amusing given the context of this thread. ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> Is the basis of biology not chemistry?
>
> http://xkcd.com/435/
>
New question: Is there anything that hasn't been covered by xkcd? :D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
>
> New question: Is there anything that hasn't been covered by xkcd? :D
Yes. You may read those thing from Xkcd's that will be published in the
future ;).
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
