Archive for January, 2006
January 24, 2006 at 9:45 pm · Filed under Rigamarole
The best comment of all time:
In response to my “absence of lies” question.. I received this reply:
 |
lolz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
that makes know sense!!!!!!!!!!1
ur gay lolzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!1
byezzz propzz back lolzzzz!!!11
Posted 1/24/2006 at 4:14 PM by dreamgrllaura
|
… Interestingly enough, though it happens a lot on this page, I don’t think this comment was hilarious on purpose.
And that makes it even funnier.
Thank you my Dream Grl Laura for making my day.
And congratulations on being born in the 90’s. It was a time I treasured with all my heart.
It might make know sense now, but you might understand one day. 
January 21, 2006 at 6:39 pm · Filed under Rigamarole
Is the absence of truth a lie?
January 20, 2006 at 6:35 pm · Filed under Rigamarole
Are there 1 dimensional creatures?
Are there 4 dimensional creatures?
Supposedly we are 3 dimensional figures moving through the 4th dimension [time]. Considering the fact that we can’t move back and forth in time, I think it’s safe to say that for now we’re stuck in this 3rd dimension moving carelessly through the 4th dimension idea.
2 dimensional creatures
Is it possible that there are creatures of the 2nd dimension, creatures with only a sense of linear that move along forward only endlessly through what we consider our 3rd dimension? Is it possible that we never see them and never perceive them because they’re not traveling with us at all in the 4th dimension of time, but moving instantaneously and endlessly at the same time in a direction we can draw easily with a line?
4 dimensional creatures
If time is the fourth dimension, are there creatures made completely out of the fabric of time? Is it possible that we’re living in one of these creatures of the 4th dimension, moving forward always the way blood flows through a vein… Never able to go backwards?
Writers dream that we may one day be able to travel time… but can we ever conquer any dimensions besides the 3rd? —
Have we conquered the 3rd dimension?
Have we really conquered the idea of dimensions?
January 20, 2006 at 5:28 pm · Filed under Rigamarole
Are there 1 dimensional creatures?
Are there 4 dimensional creatures?
Supposedly we are 3 dimensional figures moving through the 4th dimension [time]. Considering the fact that we can’t move back and forth in time, I think it’s safe to say that for now we’re stuck in this 3rd dimension moving carelessly through the 4th dimension idea.
2 dimensional creatures
Is it possible that there are creatures of the 2nd dimension, creatures with only a sense of linear that move along forward only endlessly through what we consider our 3rd dimension? Is it possible that we never see them and never perceive them because they’re not traveling with us at all in the 4th dimension of time, but moving instantaneously and endlessly at the same time in a direction we can draw easily with a line?
4 dimensional creatures
If time is the fourth dimension, are there creatures made completely out of the fabric of time? Is it possible that we’re living in one of these creatures of the 4th dimension, moving forward always the way blood flows through a vein… Never able to go backwards?
Writers dream that we may one day be able to travel time… but can we ever conquer any dimensions besides the 3rd? —
Have we conquered the 3rd dimension?
Have we really conquered the idea of dimensions?
January 19, 2006 at 6:17 pm · Filed under Rigamarole
Which is worse?
A fist in your anus… or an anus on your fist?
A toe in the vagina… or a cork in the butt?
Would you rather do…
Angelina Jolie as a man.. or Drew Barrymore as a baby?
A hermaphrodite [with all parts] or a eunich [no parts]?
Reader Input
..would you rather
[have a] needle in the eye or needle in the eardrum?
Posted 1/19/2006 at 1:45 PM by CaKaLusa
Pee a marble or poop a softball?
Posted 1/19/2006 at 3:45 PM by Lemon451
Three boobs or one eye?
Posted 1/19/2006 at 2:57 PM by ch50
Anyone who can come up with good questions will get their question posted and linkage.
January 19, 2006 at 4:30 pm · Filed under Rigamarole
Which is worse?
A fist in your anus… or an anus on your fist?
A toe in the vagina… or a cork in the butt?
Would you rather do…
Angelina Jolie as a man.. or Drew Barrymore as a baby?
A hermaphrodite [with all parts] or a eunich [no parts]?
January 18, 2006 at 6:07 pm · Filed under Rigamarole
Wednesday is hump day.
Hump someone you love.
Circle K 2003
January 18, 2006 at 12:59 am · Filed under Rigamarole
Is the absence of truth a lie?
January 18, 2006 at 12:00 am · Filed under Rigamarole
Mind-Chew: Infinity.
Is there anything bigger than infinity?
Chew on this:
Take a set of integers (counting numbers that increment by 1):
Group 1: {1, 2, 3, 4 ,….. ,to infinity}
This set contains an infinite amount of numbers, right?
Next: Take a set of real numbers that starting from 1 that increase by .5:
Group 2: {1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5,……to infinity}
This set also goes to the same place [infinity] and contains an infinite amount of numbers.
HOWEVER! Even though amount of numbers in Group 1 is infinite, and the amount of numbers in the Group 2 is infinite…
GROUP 2 has TWICE as many numbers in the set leading up to infinity.
Therefore… The infinite amount of numbers in Group 2 is TWICE the amount of infinite numbers in Group 1.
G1 Infinity = 2 x G2 Infinity… WHat???
How can that be, when infinity means… well, infinity?
The answer that many math gurus claim is that there are actually an infinite amount of different infinities and that just because it’s infinite doesn’t mean that it is the infinity of the greatest significance.
So next time, someone says to you something like “I am better than you X infinity”, you can honestly reply “I am better than you X (2 x Infinity)”
…And they can’t say it’s wrong, because it does actually exist.
Question of the day:
What kinds of things do you like to twist your mind around?
I like to think about shit like this, do puzzles [SUDOKU!] and take IQ tests.
This stuff was floating through my head ALL DAY.
January 17, 2006 at 6:08 pm · Filed under Rigamarole
Can there be good without bad?
How do we judge?
I had a discussion with someone the other day and we came to complete disagreement on this subject.
I
am in full belief that there cannot be anything good without the
comparison that something is bad. For everything that exists that
isn’t a median, there is an opposite.
For example, there is no
way that there can be white [the reflection of all light] without the
presence of black [the absorbtion of all light]. How are we to judge
what is one or the other if one doesn’t exist?
It doesn’t
even have to be that black and white [pardon the pun]. Suppose there
is white and there is off-white, then the white considered white
because it is being compared to the off white. If one had known off
white their entire lives as the whitest of white, then they would judge
it as the whitest of white until they saw the true white.
My friend differs and says that things can be good just in the essence of being good. His example is this:
Say
there is a bowl that suits your purpose. That bowl is good because it
suits your purpose. You are not comparing it to anything because it is
simply good unto itself.
My argument is this: How do you know
that the bowl is good? You know it is good because in your mind you
can think of things that wouldn’t suit your purpose… like a plate. A
plate would not be good for the purpose, but the bowl would.
However,
if the bowl didn’t exist, then you would use the only other thing
availible to you (the plate) and you would probably call it good
because you didn’t know any better.
It’s like in Math when your
teacher teaches you a way to solve a problem. You solve the problem
and you believe that the method is good because it enabled you to solve
a problem.
Later, you find out that the way you chose to solve
the problem is considered the “bad” way compared to the simpler way to
solve the problem. Without the simpler way, you would have continued
to consider the “bad” solution “good”.
Question of the day:Can there be good without bad?
Next entries »
