starbug1

The pole is his penis. That's obvious. "Fishing"--this would be the act of sex. In short, his mother told him that a vagina was a rotting, decaying fish. Since childhood memories are the ones that are most vivid, this would leak into the man's subconscious, telling him that getting "my feet wet" in this digusting water is going too far, which would be the source of the recurring dream. I see the women in the water as temptation, despite the condition of the water that they are bathing in. Whereas some people might be drawn to this temptation, others, such as the priest, are disgusted by the morality and the consequences of jumping on this emotion. The priest has lingering ideas of what his "besmirched" image of sex is like even though he can't help his innate and ingrained desires, which we all have. The whale is a bit tricky. In my opinion, this is another metaphor for penis, except this time it is a monster; it is a whale because of the blowhole, which probably symbolizes "ejaculation," or maybe "conception." The monster is coming to attack and "hurt the females sexually." Furthermore, this is probably hiding the priests own sexual aggression from testosterone he can't stop, which is why he's with a girl to begin with. Without a relationship or sexual contact for long periods of time, the dreams become more recurrent and vivid. In short, I think the priest has bigger problems. If this is a real-life case, then it's a very unqualified priest. NO marriage, NO relationships, AND ESPECIALLY NO SEX. I have criticism because, in a priest's universe, they find salvation in jesus, not girls. Obviously, if this is in fact a true story, the mother is the sole perpetrator for causing the problems in this man's life. And it was her telling him how awful woman are, which is ironic, and the mother probably has loads of her own insecurities. Mother's like the priests revolve around hypocrisy; she probably controlled her son from the very start. And because of it, the priest, probably against his will, is doing something he doesn't know what for, and has sexual repression and confusion that are a stint on both his social life and his tenure with the church. His mother gave him serious problems that he'll most likely have for the rest of his life. The cliff might also have something to do with it. Maybe he feels that he is pure, on a pedestal, closer to god because he is with the church, yet he can't get over his curiosity for the "dirty" women and acts that are down in the "river of corruption." Also, it might be possible he let himself fall in the river, which would correlate accurately with his real life.

How many of you can speed read? What do you think of it? Effectiveness and benefits? Controversy? Stories? See here and here for the facts. I myself am a very slow reader, I am a substantial bit less than 500 words a minute. And because of my interest and likely benefit of speed reading, I hope to take a class in college and learn (as best I can) the technique. Tries on my own have been a failure, and, to my knowledge, there are no free lessons given through the internet. For the current or past college members here: do you or did you take a class on speed reading? If so, how well did it work for you, and can you still do it after discontinuing practice?

einstein showed up to fix it, but there was something wrong, his hair was combed and

I think the time matters, of course. There are still books published that are taken off the shelves, that list doesn't include them. I found a list that had banned books and controversial books banned in the last five years, but I couldn't find it when I checked again. As to the difference in "once-banned" books, most, if not all should be looked at like history. Since it was a book published way in the past, those pissed off parents and administraters who want to ban a book like huck finn because it contains the word nigger is just a way to blow off hot steam. The dangers are so slim; it's like when Shirley Jackson's "the Lottery" was banned right after it was released. The violence depicted in that story comes no where near the language and violence depicted in other contemporary books of the same time; this is a moot point, but also note that the violence was only implied, and the story didn't actually say anything bad, it just had a "feel." Likewise, comparing the books today, including media, language, violence, sex, to me, is more loosely restricted. Even with sex books on the shelf of the local barnes and noble, or stephen king books containing every one of the seven dirty words multiple times, with "once-banned" books on the shelves in books stores, and provacative tv stations like MTV, you still see Huck Finn and books like it being argued over. And, I don't know if this is right, but Huck Finn is still banned in some southern schools. My idea of it is, kids, students, adults, can get whatever they want. They can get whatever book they want, we have the internet, local libraries, and media everywhere, and yet still books are argued about, so one school in the south representing black people, its wrong to keep books with the word "nigger" out because it teaches kids that its okay to use that word. Also, in my opinion, the only affective way of keeping a book out of the hands of the public, is the dictator-powered book burnings. This is effective, because now there is no book to hide. They find it, they burn it.

I've thought about this too because I want to experience a hallucination, and I've come up with the only reasonable answer without using illegal drugs, without inducing fever, without the application of magnets to the brain, or sleep deprivation, which doesn't have quite the same effect. Medical marijuana is legal, right? Find somebody who has some and just borrow a few of the pills. If you take twice the dose, the effect should be similar to the hallucinogenic experience from smoking a joint, in theory. That's my explanation anyway.

They actually air a Pepsi vs. Coke documentary on the History Channel, and when I saw it two years ago, I remember that it specifically stated that Coke was originally used as a medicine because of the cocaine and alcohol it contained. The two ingredients, like the prescribed morphine for pain after the civil war era, and all the other illegal drugs that were once legal and used medicinally, were put in the coke to be used as a remedy for common ailments, much like the NyQuil of today. The original taste, therefore, was much different and didn't have anything resembling the "soda" or "pop" flavor we know today. Supposedly, accordingly to the History channel, it was more of a cough syrupy type drink without the sugar and viscosity, again much like NyQuil. By 1917 Coke had ran into prohibition and had to get rid of the alcohol, not the cocaine, which was legal at the time. So, eventually, the manufacturers tampered with the recipe so much that we arrive today at the Classic Coca-Cola, (Coca for cocaine and Cola for the plant which caffeine is derived). All it contains is water, heavy amounts of sugary syrup, dye, and caffeine. ....I'm sure wikipedia gives a rundown of all that anyway, and probably more in depth.

Well, sometimes booked are banned for the use of the "N" word, and other are out with just one or two slips of profanity. What's funny is that some of these "profanity" books are banned while others are not. I suppose it only takes a few letters from some pissed off reader to get a book out of a school, and a few more to get it out of the state. Mark Twain's Huck Finn is still debated about today! Recently, in the 90s, it was on the top five controversial books. For over 100 years the book hasn't had a peacable market! Other books are banned because of sexuality. Now, turn on a tv and flip through to the music channels and tell me if you can't spot sexuality or profanity within 2 min. I bet you will. Who knows more about the mentality behind book burning?

http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/banned-books.html here is a great link on books banned in schools and elsewhere. Also notice that Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species comes up. So does Shakespeare and dozens and dozens more, some, I think, don't have any right being banned. Some explanations are very vague and almost unbelievable. For example: and... Also mentioned is the Bible, Gone with the wind, etc. etc. What are some of your thoughts about banning books? In the school system, in libraries, anywhere? Here is a site giving some history on the more extremist "book banning," including the famous book burnings: http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/bookburning/21stcentury/21stcentury.htm Also, here is a list of some recently banned books http://books.google.com/books?q=Recent+books+banned&oi=print

All the proof I need that this guy is wacko: direct your attention to his picture. What a jackass. Also, I read stuff like this quite often, not to the detail this guy give's, but I often wonder if they do it for fun. Of course, sadly, they are never that way; however, I could do it very easily. taking the opposite site is interesting and challenging and you also learn a lot more about the subject than you did before. As a side note: has anyone read Einstein's book "Relativity?" There are so many books on him and his theories, how many have read his actual book?

You can't be serious.

How to Good-Bye Depression: If You Constrict Anus 100 Times Everyday. Malarkey? or Effective Way? http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0595094724/ref=cm_lm_fullview_prod_2/102-2082224-9788134?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=283155 I haven't read it, but it looks to be VERY uplifting. read a few of the reviews on amazon.

Apart from our agriculture, don't forget our advancements in cloning meat. http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,67175,00.html

What are some of the common complaints with ipods? Personally, I have never heard or read of anything technically wrong with them, except that one bout with the recall on the nanos. So nano excluded, how are they less superior than the others.

are they any higher above the law, or are they exempt from any form of prosecution? I think of a corporation as having more resources than just a single person, and therefore a bit different in comparison. Its possible that one person could be running the whole thing, yet the people who are opposed to such a project would be fighting back equally, regardless of the rights the corporation or single person has. I'm thinking every single person isn't so brainwashed to believe that a truman show scenario is right, and repercussions might be reminiscent of the fight for women's rights or the freedom of the slaves. When people see some form of tyranny or something that isn't right, they react. Conclusively, what would happen (in reality)? What kind of people are going to form a bias and take a stand? That is the biggest question when you get past corporation rights. Also, if people would see something like this happening, a baby being adopted with the intent of keeping him in a dome, would they or would they not be able to stop it before it took place?

this might clear up exactly what creationists are all about http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/9213_the_creationevolution_continu_12_7_2000.asp

The first song is much better choreographed for the display.

what's your prediction?

Not sure the names of those involved, those Chinese scientists working on creating chimeras, and who sucessfully fused human cells with a rabbit embryo. That's pretty awesome.

From my observing, I know emotion to be only "senses stimulated." Sight stimulus, soung stimulus... Also, social interaction and thinking trigger emotion. Without sense, (social) interaction or thought, emotion has no meaning. That's to narrow it down a bit. For more information on the explanation and experimentation with the science and meaning of emotion see: Isaac Asimov. Asimov's fiction and non-fiction are heavily influenced in this field, moreso when robots are involved, and he is probably the best man to consult when you want to find deep insight that isn't too difficult to grasp. Loosely touched is this in "I, Robot," His books about the human brain. Any other robot stories. He's got plenty published.

is it meant to give us a message?

Who is responsible for coining these words?

How many instances does this take place in international schools? Is it commonplace or well-concealed? What are the laws in other countries?

Sorry, I wasn't even aware there was one.

Correct! Mitochondria are the sole functioning unit for respiration. Without this BASIC function, the more complex process of photosynthesis would never have started. It's also possible that there was little light where cells first formed.

Does that mean "few" worldwide or "few" in that area?