Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bettina

  1. These arc episodes have only happened twice , the other time being when I got off a bus one day and the arc suddenly appeared . Within 5 minutes I went into an opticians and they looked at my eyes with cameras . I went through colour contrast shade tests and afterwards they said they found nothing wrong .


    A third event was without any arc when I gradually noticed that the left side of a television picture at approximately 4 metres was disappearing . I thought of doing the mirror test on this occasion and I couldn't see the left side of my face but could see perfectly well the right side with my right eye .



    I can't help you anymore except to say that an optician is not a medical doctor. You should document everything (like you have here) and make an appointment with an ophthalmologist who can examine the eye completely. Make sure you list your medications, medical history, (last physical) whether you use social drugs....and what kind, pretty much everything you ingest.



  2. The first sparkly meteoritic effect I describe as being a common occurence never happened at the same time as the second arc effect .


    Here are the best details I can give after reading the information in the previous posts . Bear in mind I am not manufacturing a situation based on what I've read , it just helps me to collate information .


    An arc appeared from approximately the 6 o'clock position to the 12 o'clock position in the left peripheral field of vision of the left eye . The arc was large in diameter compared to it's width and consisted of a multicoloured zigzag which moved as I tried to centre it in my vision . When I stood up and looked in a mirror I couldn't see my leftside of my face but could see the right side . It lasted approximately 20 minutes .


    Everything you're describing (in your second example) is an effect of an ophthalmic migraine. (google that) At least that's my best guess based on what you're saying and it's not uncommon for those to last a long time. 20 minutes falls in that range. I've had the "sawtooth" crescent myself with a mild headache and I actually tried to "play" with it as long as I could. It was kind of cool when you experience it for the first time and I tried to draw it on a pad though, as you found out, they don't like to be tracked. :). Mine last only three minutes or so and I only get them two or three times a year but have also experienced a "snowy" field of vision as this is taking place which makes it hard to read anything in that eye.


    If I were you, to ease your mind, I would make an appointment with an ophthalmologist for a simple checkup. Also, I would bring this to the attention of your GP. So far, you've said nothing that I haven't heard before from other people. Check the video in this link...





  3. I've often wondered why some words seem to incite such a horrific response under some conditions and illicit quite another under different conditions when the words basically mean the same thing. I have in my life whispered the so called F bomb into womens ears with certain words before and after it and received quite a different response than when I've said the same word to the same women with different words before or after it even though none of the extra words were in any way bad or demeaning. I mean if the word F--k p-ss-s you off when it's said one way why not the other and why if i smash my finger and SHOUT F--K! I get a completely different response than if for instance a I loose my pen and just say f--k out loud? F--k is a perfectly good Anglo-Saxon word, why is it hated so much? Frak it! BSG for those of you who are not literate in science fiction vernacular. :doh:


    Remember shoot is just shit with two o's


    How about "rapports sexuels" nah, doesn't quite have the same ambiance, maybe baiser?



    I've never been a fan of the fword. I just find it degrading especially in a family oriented forum which is why I asked. I would rather see someone post #$%& which delivers the same message rather than the ones you listed. I've been to forums that are so heavy with the fwords that I automatically relate it to a persons character, not a persons intelligence, just their character and that means a lot to me personally.


    I'm going to poke around in the weeks ahead but right now I'm in my final year of nursing college, interning/studying at my local hospital and hope to have my RN license by Dec/Jan. I want to take my psych course over again this summer since it's my only low grade. (B+)


    Is Martin still active here? I remember he was a really nice guy in the Cosmology/Physics section?



  4. It's still against the rules, as you can see in posts 3 and 4 in this thread, although the forum software no longer censors it automatically. If you see vulgar language being used in an abusive or inappropriate manner, you can report the post and we'll take care of it.


    Is the fword itself against the rules or only when used in a certain manner?

    I'm not a total prude and I have no problems with the minor swear words but the fword for me is out.




  5. I haven't been here in awhile and I was toying with the idea of coming back to get some different perspectives on politics, religion, and cosmology but now I've noticed that the forum has fwords all over the place. Is this allowed now? I have a deep dislike for that word and if it's become acceptable....in any degree.... then I'll stay out.


    I just want a quick clarification.




    And hi mooyey ;)

  6. I'm a weak atheist. I don't believe in any god because there is no evidence showing them to exist. By evidence I mean objective, consistent, repeatable evidence, same as I would require for any other scientific question. Belief in god, on the other hand, is quite real and can have interesting effects, either positive or negative.


    I'm a Christian and an atheist, a realist and a humanist, and I like this answer. :)



  7. I personally don't believe in God but I do understand that religion is important to some because it's the only source of hope they have. So, which religion is right? Any one that doesn't kill people.



  8. Thanks for the interesting replies. I would have thought someone here would mention special relativity which is what my mind snapped to when I first heard this question. I thought of the bucket in motion vs the water in motion. Isn't that...though infinitely small... a factor too?



  9. If I take a bucket and begin filling it with tap water from a faucet, what would be the result if I kept moving the bucket up and down in the stream as it was filling verses keeping it stationary at the bottom of the stream. No water splashes out.


    a) It would take less time to fill

    b) It would take more time to fill.

    c) It would take the same amount of time.



  10. But -- isn't this exactly what he SAID he was going to do? Didn't he say he wanted us to have a dialog about race in this country? Isn't this a perfect opportunity to do that?


    No, it isn't. Not when it's being done at the expense of someone else. First, I voted for Obama (my first time voting for president) and given the same candidates, I would do so again. However, Obama is wrong on this because it was never a race issue. It was about a homeowner who was caught breaking into a home and refused to show his ID to the policemen to verify that he was the owner. He went ballistic instead.


    It was only after the situation began spinning out of control did he finally do so. (at least from what's been reported). At that point the police officer had had it and arrested him for disorder. There was no race issue here no matter how much the professor wanted it to be.


    Obama needs to apologize, verbally and in writing.



  11. I don't understand why it's gone on this long. I thought we (usa) had trained snipers, navy seals, or someone who could sneak/swim/minisub/portable motorized something/ over there and take these guys out. :confused:


    I don't see any other viable option. Paying ranson just feeds them.



  12. Jackson33... To me, teaching Creationism in school should not be the responsibility of the local Education board. It should be the responsibility of the Supreme Court. They should be the one's to determine whether something that borders the supernatural be taught in public schools and whatever that determination is, it should be universal to every state. Sarah Palin, given McCains age, had a real chance to be president but her views on creationism along with the possibility of appointing Supreme Court justices made for a scary situation.


    Just so you know, The last election was the first time I was of age to vote for POTUSA so I went over each candidate with a fine tooth comb. In the beginning I was beholden to no one but when I examined past voting records of each candidate on sites like http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm and matched them to my personal ideals it quickly became clear that I couldn't support most Republicans. I saw President Bush as stagnant, John McCain too old, Huckabee and Sarah Palin as full creationists, and the rest too weak to move America out of President Bush's dark age.


    Yes, I sing in church and concerts and I live a very Christian way of life but in my heart I'm just not a believer. I really wanted to be but all I ever saw was emptiness. However, I fully support any non-violent religion as long as it stays in the home, place of worship, or on your person, and not in schools or politics.


    Lastly, believe me I don't want to see Socialism but I don't want to see uncontrolled greed either. There has to be something in the middle and I can only hope Obama knows what he's doing. :confused:



  13. I hope they never recover. I rather have socialism than see the republican religious ideology back in power. Think Huckabee, womens right to choose, the teaching of creationism in schools, ban on stem cell research, war on science, etc, etc. Republicans back in power give me the chills. :doh:



  14. ...considering the background of our historical references to black folk and "porch monkeys" and apes, there's no way to avoid that interpretation. It was stupid on their part to run this cartoon. With a little creativity they could have tweaked it to eliminate the racist implications...


    Exactly. I'm surprised some here just don't get that.



  15. I disagree. Most of the available evidence suggests that women (as a general tendency of course) are not attracted to men who are sweet, nice, sensitive, kind, or compassionate (or even too intelligent for that matter); it is this thesis which serves as the current thread topic. That women are attracted to violent, aggressive males or "bad boys" is a tangential, yet interrelated subject.


    I'm a nice girl who likes nice guys and I never hang out with crude, insensitive low-lifes. Maybe you should do some research outside the bar room you're getting this "evidence" from. :doh:



  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.