By published_anthropologist - 23/07/2009 06:13 - United States
Add a comment - Reply to : #
You must be logged in to be able to post comments!
And why? it's recorded in the Egyptian hieroglyphics that the Israelites were enslaved by the Egyptians for several hundred years. You may not agree with the supernatural aspect of Judaism or Christianity, but you can't deny historical facts and findings that coincidentally match with them.
That believe is based on similarities in pyramid shapes in different parts of the world, Indian temples which look like space ships and old stories about little weird looking humans with special abilities. There's a book called "Unexplained Mysteries", read it and it'll make more sense to you. But I still think that's BS. btw. 8 years???
well for one you are stupid for not believing her! havent you watched the show on the discovery channel or is it the history channel i dont remember but its true! most pictures show a strange being maybe not from mars but its totally legit! i know what show she got that from though i watched it too =D
Yeah I know what you mean... that would be pretty logical... but I dunno, maybe the only "intelligent" (meaning that can speak and think, I guess) species in the universe is simply humans. Just because we haven't seen either alien "monsters" or alien humans doesn't mean neither exist, yes?
There are several things that hint towards aliens building pyramids. However they can all be dis proven with logic and fact. For instance on the side of one of the walls there is what looks like a alien space craft, a sub marine and a helicopter. No known hieroglyphs have these pictures. Naturally something with hugely advanced technology, possibly aliens came down and scribed it into the wall. This is wrong. It just so happens that the person who was going to be buried in their changed three times. If you put all their names on top of each other it looks like a space craft, sub marine and helicopter. GG lazy scribes just writing over other words.
ya that's because we don't know who actually built them. there is a possibility aliens did do it because we have no idea how humans where able to do it so fast. plus there are drawings of aliens by them. all I'm saying is we don't know for sure and if there can be life on earth why can't there be on other planets?
- "ya that's because we don't know who actually built them." yes we do: egyptians - "there is a possibility aliens did do it because we have no idea how humans where able to do it so fast." so fast? it wasn't that fast Also, they maybe used concrete anyway: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/pyramid-tt0402.html - "plus there are drawings of aliens by them." Bullshit. There are no drawings of aliens, there are just drawings that you want to be aliens. That's a difference - "all I'm saying is we don't know for sure and if there can be life on earth why can't there be on other planets?" No, you're saying that not only are there aliens, but they visited earth, built some pyramids for fun, fucked around with some peoples behinds and then vanished again. The chance that there are aliens is rather high because the universe is just way too large. There's even a small chance that there are aliens roughtly at or above our level of intelligence. Still, the nearest place aliens could come from is alpha centauri (because there are none on mars). Even with light speed traveling, that would be a journy of over 4 years. Do you really think all they'd do when they finally got here would be some anal play, some cow abducting and some pyramid building? yeah right.
#372- Slavery and simple machines? Really? With all the workforce and advanced machines today, we can't build such great pyramids even now. There is a secret behind how the pyramids were exactly built. I had read somewhere, about a man who had understood the mechanism that the egyptians had used, I don't remember his name.. but, he had built some huge monument alone, with really heavy stones.. he also shifted the monument, alone. He said that he had understood what the egyptians had done, but he didn't tell the seecret to anyone. :/
Wow. This is definitely a fake. So you've been with her for 8 eight years, and you've failed to realize the depth of her stupidity? Either that, or she was flirting with you by making up a stupid story. ( you're supposed to follow suit e.g., "Yeah, and Iceland is filled with giant tucans." So with option 2, we have idiocy on your part by failing to realize when your girlfriend of EIGHT YEARS (btw, wtf?) is flirting with you. So you, her, or both of you are dumbasses here, though I am inclined to think that it is you, OP. Fake FMLs are ruining the site, and this one is the top of that list. Thanks, idiot.
I've got a friend with a Bachelors in it. She works at Starbucks. :-| Some people go to college to prepare to get a job, some people go to college because they're fascinated by a subject, to the point where the worst professor in the world won't turn them off on it, and don't really care about a job. I desperately hope that he's in the second category; I understand even the academic professions around that degree involve thousands of applicants per job. (Reminder: 92.82% of all statistics are made up on the spot. This is one of them.)
A bachelors degree in anthro probably won't got very far unless you want to dig holes for 8 dollars an hour in a cultural resource job. However, a ms or phd can get you the top end jobs in a lot of places. Museums, government work, cultural resource management, as well as positions at university's to teach and conduct research. It just all really depends on what your passion is and how hard you're willing to work to get the job you want.
Are you with a girl like that for any particular reason, or...? D: Eight years is a LONG time, and it's hard to think it took you that long to notice you were a cultured person dating a moronic lunatic. (Well, we can't really judge based on two lines, but if she was seriously defending that theory and dismissing science etc, then it's worrisome.) Your poor offspring, if this ends up with marriage. :X
Comment moderated for rule-breaking.Show it anyway
YDI for being elitist and thinking ur better than ppl cuz u sat in classrooms for a long ass time, fu(kwad
Why? Creationism is not absurd and neither is the theory of Evolution. They both have strong points as well as weak points. AND you CAN get a PhD in the Science of Intelligent Design. A professor of either path would be nothing more than arrogant if he/she blatantly, and rudely told the other that he/she was totally wrong without having some sort of civil debate between the two.
How is creationism not absurd? It is based off of a book written a couple thousand years ago with no evidence to back up the claims it makes what so ever. Much of like everything that has to do with religion. Open-Mindedness is so overrated and over preached these days. There's a point when you need to stop being open minded because some of the claims these people make are fucking ridiculous, i.e. creationism.
I totally disagree with Creationism. Genesis didn't happen. Hell no But I am somewhat convinced by the whole intelligent design thing. I mean, I generally regard myself as an atheist, but I can't help but think that some things cannot possibly have come into existence just by leaving them for a long period of time. Life is the main example of this. I mean, not only is the existence of it amazing, but things within it. Humans have body proportions more or less equal to the golden ratio. How would that evolve, tell me?
You have two entirely inconsistent statements here. You cannot be both an atheist (no supernatural intelligence) and believe in intelligent design. One or the other. Not both. Also, the reason you are having difficult believing is that humans are generally pretty bad at imagining long periods of time and how much change can occur over many generation. Also you don't want to mind that golden ratio human proportion nonsense. Just not true. See http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_05_07.html for an informal criticism For a general debunking see http://www.ams.org/notices/200503/rev-markowsky.pdf Stuff like the golden ratio in human anatomy are factoids, widely accepted, but few people analyze them against the observable evidence. They just swallow anything plausible
Haha, people with no intelligence never see the value of education. Anyone with half a brain knows that a guy going for his Ph.D. in anthropology knows more about anthropology than some girl who thinks aliens from mars built the pyramids. Your offensive remarks at the O.P. only show how dumb you are.
my dad is a professor at stanford and he is pro-legalization of marijuana, and my ex boyfriend got into a huge debate with him. my dad knows that marijuana doesn't kill, hasn't been proven to cause lung cancer, is less addictive than caffeine, etc. (he has researched and even been part of studies to prove these things) and my ex would just keep saying "well YOU'RE dumb, EVERYONE knows its bad because its illegal and your facts are bs" while having nothing of his own to back himself up. yeah I broke up with him 2 months ago and now he is on probation for being drunk in public.
Just so we're on the same page though, cannabis contains more carcinogens than tobacco, which means that chronic use will certainly cause lung cancer. Moreover, while the risk for developing tolerance is low (which is why people say it's "less addictive" than caffeine), there have been cases both of people developing tolerance and going through withdrawal from cannabis use. Withdrawal symptoms include diarrhea, hiccups, and loss of appetite--not deadly, but still unpleasant. Moreover, a cannabis dependence can cause a person to become very dysfunctional, giving up work, school and social activities in favor of using cannabis. I personally agree that if alcohol and tobacco can be legal, marijuana should be too. But the effects and potential dangers should be more well-known than they are.
Actually, letitbe, weed does have more of CERTAIN carcinogens. However, there has never been a direct correlation between weed and lung cancer. It is also impossible to overdose on it, so it can't cause deaths like other legal drugs can. Weeed can be used recreationally or for medicinal purposes, and if coupled with a vaporizer, is most likely the safest out of caffeine and tobacco products. The benefits can far outweigh the downs, and it is impossible to be come physically dependent. It is psychologically addictive, which causes the withdrawal symptoms. Those are the exact same withdrawal symptoms I get when I quit another one of my non-physically addicting bad habits, or the things I get when extremely stressed and agitated. Mind influencing body, that is all.
Also, for the record, tobacco hasn't been "proven" to cause lung cancer either. The reason is that the only way to do that would be to conduct a controlled experiment in which people are forced to smoke cigarettes. That experiment would be highly unethical, and so will never be done. So saying that cannabis hasn't been "proven" to cause lung cancer is a moot point.
It was believed for a long time that marijuana was not physically addictive, but evidence is starting to point the other way. See this article: http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/display/article/10168/54701 And even if it were only a psychological dependence, it would be naive to think that's not a problem. "Mind influencing body" plays a role in all substance abuse and substance dependence. That's why they're classified as mental disorders in the DSM--and a cannabis dependence is in there, in case you were wondering. I think people make the mistake of thinking, "oh, well if it's just my mind, then it must not be dangerous." That's simply not true. It is still a psychoactive drug, that has significant effects on the brain, and causes significant physical symptoms, ie, red eyes, appetite increase, increased heart-rate, etc. It can cause hallucinations, and people can experience severe anxiety leading to panic attacks. I'm not disagreeing that it should be legal, but I think a lot of people start using it because they think it's somehow a "safe drug," and I think that mentality is dangerous.
If you ever take a statistics course they will teach you about how "correlation is not causation" and doesn't prove anything because of the third variable problem, etc. etc. Thus, although tobacco use has been shown time and time again to have a strong positive correlation with lung cancer, it hasn't technically been proven. Don't get me wrong. I think common sense tells us that smoking causes lung cancer. But it would be unethical to try and prove it.
Its about time someone threw that out there. I learned that in a Psychology class. Correlation does not imply causation. That was one of the most important things we learned. The reason there is a correlation between tobacco and lung cancer is because so many people that smoke have lung cancer. If marijuana use was more widely accepted, im sure the number of people who suffer from lung cancer would greately increase. The bottom line is that anything you burn and inhale is unhealthy for the average human. The only time where the pros outweigh the cons is medicinal use. Besides, the whole argument about whether or not marijuana should be legal is useless: one person cannot change the law.
Kaleidoscopeeyes- A- Recent research is proving that people can both build a tolerance to marijuana and experience physical withdrawal from it. B- The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, which psychologists and psychiatrists use for diagnosing mental illness, includes a cannabis dependence. This is based on very strict criteria, and it would not have been included if chronic marijuana use did not lead to significant cognitive impairment and dysfunction in the user's life--chances are you know a few "pot-heads". You'll notice that a caffeine dependence is not in the DSM, for the very reason that caffeine use does not lead to that level of impairment and dysfunction. Is marijuana safer than alcohol and tobacco? Yes. But that doesn't give anyone license to minimize the potential dangers marijuana users face. In fact, part of the reason I favor legalizing it is so that the surgeon general can slap a warning on it. This drug is NOT harmless.
Are you serious? You're going to use the fact that something is listed in the DSM as an argument in opposition? Just like, during the period when homosexuality was listed as a mental disorder in the DSM, we should all have considered it as such, right? Also, on your argument regarding "correlation and causation" - you can do much better by examining actual biochemistry. When you have plausible mechanistic theories, you've moved a little bit beyond mere correlation. In the case of marijuana, it's well-established that its smoke contains certain compounds that are known tumor suppressors, which act in opposition to the presence of carcinogens. The argument is not as cut-and-dry as you make it out to be, that "all smoke is bad".
The DSM-V is being written as we speak, and yes, there is still a lot of controversy about what should be in it and how it should be presented. For example, a lot of people want to combine anxiety disorders and unipolar mood disorders (ie, depression). Other people want to get rid of the personality disorders. A VERY controversial one are the gender identity disorders, and I wouldn't be surprised to see that go the way of homosexuality in later editions. I have heard of no controversy regarding the inclusion of substance related disorders.* Cannabis dependence really does ruin people's lives. They lose jobs, drop out of school, lose friends, and generally miss out on pleasant life experiences, much as alcoholics do. I have heard personal testimonials to this effect, in addition to reading about it in my studies of psychology. Besides, are you going to argue against the existence of, say, schizophrenia or autism just because homosexuality was once in the DSM? (*There are people lobbying to include obesity because of evidence of sugar's addictive properties, but that's not relevant to our discussion.) There are a lot of studies regarding the carcinogens contained in marijuana smoke, not all of which are favorable. You can find them on google. This is a pretty controversial area of research.
@142 Im sorry, but I think in saying that marijuana is physically addictive, you, like many scientists, are ignoring the fact that many people enjoy mixing a bit of tip (tobacco from a cigarette) into the pot that they smoke. A good freind of mine, for example, puts about a sixth of a cigarette into every joint he smokes. He smokes at least six joints a day, and therefore smokes at least one cigarette every day. It is very possible that the withdrawl symptoms you describe are nothing more than the smoker jonesing for nicotene from the tobacco.
@223 *I have heard of no controversy regarding the inclusion of substance related disorders.* Cannabis dependence really does ruin people's lives. They lose jobs, drop out of school, lose friends, and generally miss out on pleasant life experiences, much as alcoholics do. I have heard personal testimonials to this effect, in addition to reading about it in my studies of psychology.* (* are used instead of quotation marks beacuse my keyboard is being French, and types out È whenever I need a quotation mark... and yes, technically it is my computer thats screwing me over, but the symbols are on the keyboard, therefore it gets the blame.) (also, that second * was already in there. FYI) Cannabis dependancy does not ruin lives. Being a lazy douche who lives in their parents basement because they dont want to get off their ass and find a job ruins lives. Not having the maturity to quit when you realise that smoking is interfering with your life ruins lives. Saying marijuana is what causes these people to lose their jobs, families, and drop out of school is essentially alleviating all the blame from them. You simply cannot use pot as a scapegoat like that. At some point people must be accountable for their own actions (or innactions)(not sure if thats a word). Also, and lastly I suppose, could a bunch of you please pull your heads out of your asses, do a little research, and stop pointing and shouting *Scientoligist!!!1* every time someone mentions aliens. Jebus cocksucking christ, use the internet for something other than those hilarious motivational posters and hardcore dp scat pornography (or whatever it is youre into), and learn the difference between Scientology and interventionism. Almost lastly, Stargate FTW. And finally, to paraphrase some Half Baked *You ever seen Stargate... on weed?*
Saying someone with a cannabis dependency is a lazy douche who should just quit is like saying someone with major depression is just being emo and should stop whining, or someone with PTSD should just get over what happened to them already. It's insensitive, and a gross misunderstanding of what is really going on.
@264 I think you misunderstood me. Im not saying people with cannabis dependancy are lazy douches, Im saying lazy douches are lazy douches. The cannabis dependancy has nothing to do with it. I smoke pot every day, and somehow I manage to still make it into work everyday. I still have an active social life(with many people who also happen to smoke pot everyday, and, ironically enough, also manage to keep their jobs. In fact, several of them, in addition to working, also attend Carleton University.). I guess what Im getting to is, you cannot just blame pot, at some point people need to take responsibility for their actions. Also, depression and PTSD have nothing to do with smoking marijuana. I have no idea where youre going with that.
Because you're misunderstanding the disorder. Most people can have alcohol every day without becoming alcoholics. It's not different with pot. Just because you haven't developed a dependency doesn't mean that other people don't. I mentioned the other mental disorders as an analogy to illustrate that, just as with those disorders, it's NOT as simple as mind over matter when you have a substance disorder. You should know that cognitive impairments, such as difficulty following a straightforward argument, are common symptoms of chronic marijuana use. They usually go away when you go off it, but I'd still be careful. You wouldn't want it to get worse. I don't really get the point of the name dropping. Am I supposed to be impressed by where your friends go to school? If I started name dropping you'd call me an elitist asshole. But so it goes.
Why would ANYONE think the pyramids were built by aliens from Mars?
I have a feeling your girlfriend has been watching too much Stargate..