Poonani Maker
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,392
- Reaction score
- 927
"Why Women Dump the Guys Who Try the Hardest"
You paid for dinner. You drove. You said "whatever you want is fine" every single time. All the effort, no expectations.
And she left anyway — probably for a guy who makes her pick up the pizza.
Painful. Also predictable. Her mind quietly concludes that anything requiring zero effort from her is worth exactly zero. You became a free sample, and free samples get taken for granted.
The 22 Rules flip the dynamic. Small shifts that get her investing effort, money, and time in you — until SHE'S the one afraid of losing YOU.
There was no Big Bang.
- Thread starter Poonani Maker
- Start date
"She's Out of Your League"
You've said it a hundred times. Maybe a thousand. And every time you say it, you train your brain to freeze the next time she walks into the room.
Leagues are a myth invented by guys who are scared of women.
She's a person. She has bad breath in the morning. She picks songs she can't sing in the shower. She overthinks her own texts.
Walk over. Say something. The league dissolves the second you open your mouth.
Uh oh. There's trouble ahead.
Without going into detail, without the real need for details, you're wrong. I'm trying to take a minimalist approach, because I want to trust you can easily accept the ideas the video proposes are demonstrably nonsense and completely without merit. Just cut your losses and accept you had a brief moment of misjudgment.
Without going into detail, without the real need for details, you're wrong. I'm trying to take a minimalist approach, because I want to trust you can easily accept the ideas the video proposes are demonstrably nonsense and completely without merit. Just cut your losses and accept you had a brief moment of misjudgment.
That's pretty fundamentalist of you.Deep Dish said:
Did you WATCH the videos? The thing seems pretty sound to me, though I'm not a physicist.
But we should point out that these are both theories. That means it's too soon to say anyone's right or wrong, remember?
“The 22 Rules That Flip the Script With Women… And How You Can Use Them Tonight”
Most guys accidentally kill attraction before they even speak. They assume they need a bigger bank account, a better physique, or smoother lines. They miss the point.
Female desire operates on a specific set of psychological triggers. Break them, and you're invisible. Follow them, and you become magnetic.
I learned this the hard way. Years of freezing up. Getting friend-zoned. Watching other guys walk away with the girl I wanted. Then I discovered a set of 22 simple rules that rewired my entire approach.
The video presented (easily refutable) arguments against the Big Bang but made no specific arguments for an electrical universe. Despite the many minutes to make a preliminary case, the arguments were promised to be forthcoming but never arrived. In fact, the conclusion made was non-sequitur.Gubby said:
No, an electrical universe does not qualify as a scientific theory, as it's not a well-established evidentiary explanation that has withstood rigorous testing. Large objects tend to have a neutral electrical charge, which rather speaks greatly against the electrical hypothesis.
A favorite tactic of the fringe, the video quickly and all-too-predictably devolves to alleging persecution and conspiracies. Pahlease. An electrical universe is not taken seriously by scientists because it's simply wrong. There are two types of science: experimental and historical, and both types are equally adept at tracking causation. The Big Bang is an exceptionally well-supported and valid historical science, whereas the electrical universe is a failure in experimental science.
Nighthawk nailed the real issue. This is religion disguised as antiscience, while the Big Bang is science and not religion.
Rollo Tomassi
Master Don Juan
Blaspheme! When mighty Odin's spear did pierce Y'mir's flesh in the celestial war of creation and the giant's blood did gush forth in torrents thus forming the earth, there was such lightning (electricity, hello?) as to be too terrible for mortal eyes to behold! And lo did it create such a fury of thunder that all the universe echoed eternally from it's impact!
*Shrug* I'm not really qualified to argue. But The big bang certainly doesn't hold up to conservation of energy. And I personally feel more comfortable with the idea that the universe has existed for infinite time rather than trying to wrap my head around the idea of there being nothing at all, which exploded. (Now a cyclical big-bang/big-crunch/big-rebang or big-bang/universe dissipates to uniform nothingness/big-bang I can see working).Deep Dish said:
Saying there was a beginning of time begs the question, "what happened before then?" which is an obvious logical absurdity. My conclusion? The universe must be infinite in all dimensions.
The Big Bang was not actually an explosion but rather the great expansion of space between matter. Lots and lots of energy was scrunched up in a cosmic traffic jam. Thus, it was not "something out of nothing" and, thus, no violation of the first law of thermodynamics. Unlike an explosion, the Big Bang did not happen in any particular location but it happened everywhere simultaneously.
The misconception of "something out of nothing" arises because our present knowledge of mathematics breaks down when time = 0, but rather than meaning there was nothing it simply means our mathematics needs refinement, and there presently is a great concerted effort to do such. This month the new Large Hadron Collider particle accelerator powers up and of one of its loftiest goals is recreating the primordial conditions of the Big Bang.
Physicists know and understand a galaxy more about physics than we mortal laymen could ever fathom, so if Big Science has no problem with the Big Bang regarding the law of conservation then neither should we.
For more information:
“Misconceptions about the Big Bang” (Scientific American)
“What happened before the Big Bang?”
“What really goes on at the Large Hadron Collider” (TED Talks)
The misconception of "something out of nothing" arises because our present knowledge of mathematics breaks down when time = 0, but rather than meaning there was nothing it simply means our mathematics needs refinement, and there presently is a great concerted effort to do such. This month the new Large Hadron Collider particle accelerator powers up and of one of its loftiest goals is recreating the primordial conditions of the Big Bang.
Physicists know and understand a galaxy more about physics than we mortal laymen could ever fathom, so if Big Science has no problem with the Big Bang regarding the law of conservation then neither should we.
For more information:
“Misconceptions about the Big Bang” (Scientific American)
“What happened before the Big Bang?”
“What really goes on at the Large Hadron Collider” (TED Talks)
What the hell does time=0 mean?Deep Dish said:
I don't like this attitude. My father's a scientist and from my experience the cutting-edge that he works at really isn't so far out.... a stretch, but not godlike, okay. Most of the people at his lab aren't trained in the specific discipline anyway and have to read all the textbooks to catch up! (this is genetics, not physics, tho
)But anyway..... I suppose I may be wrong
What I liked about this presentation is it highlights the way that cultural brainwashing seeps into everything, something I've been becoming more and more conscious of, whether the specific instance is right or not."She Wants a Man, Not a Boy"
You asked her if she wanted to grab coffee. Then you asked if the time worked. Then you asked if the place was okay. Then you asked if she'd prefer tea.
Four questions. Four chances for her to say no. Four signals that you're terrified of making a decision.
Plan it. Pick the place. Pick the time. Tell her where to meet you. She'll either show up or she won't.
Either way, you look like a man instead of a scared little boy.
Poonani Maker
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,392
- Reaction score
- 927
How do we account for planetary scarring? http://youtube.com/watch?v=fnM7v-awEm8
We live in an electric universe.
We live in an electric universe.
How about this theory....Big science knows nothing. Big science used to believe that the sun revolved around the earth. Big science used to believe that the world was flat. Big science used to believe that Einstein was right about everything. Big science used to believe that nothing could travel faster than light.Deep Dish said:
Teflon_Mcgee
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2006
- Messages
- 918
- Reaction score
- 27
http://www.amazon.com/Zero-Biograph...bs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211204592&sr=8-1Gubby said:
This book touches on the topic.
It's a great book and everything is explained in laymans terms.
0's cause significant problems in cosmology and physics. Singularities start to happen an things just get weird.
"She Liked You in March. It's October Now."
Attraction runs on a clock.
She flirted for weeks. Touched your arm. Found reasons to be alone with you. And you were careful. Respectful. Waiting for the right moment.
The moment had a shelf life. It expired around month two, and by the time you asked her out, she'd quietly filed you under "little brother."
One of the hardest lessons inside the 22 Rules: women rarely wait. Interest either grows or it decays, and nothing decays it faster than a man who never moves.
Make the move while she's still inventing reasons to be near you.
No....Teflon_Mcgee said:
what I mean is how can you ever say that "time = 0"?
That has a presupposition that there is a start of time. If there is a start of time then we're talking about the big bang. Who the fuc'k said that there's a time=0 or even a time=50 or whatever?
I think it's just as arrogant to know virtually nothing about physics and think that you know better than those who have been studying it their entire lives. Try learning a little about the subject (and it is difficult sometimes, but there are some decent layman's guides out there) before dismissing the amazing discoveries and knowledge that science has given us all.
Should I write an essay? I mean, good responses always take me a lot of time and effort, between all the other things going on in my life, and there are multiple issues to address. I don't think I can resolve this short and sweet. The issue is also tinged with conspiratorial overtones and anti-establishment viewpoints, which ties into my next essay: conspiracy theories.
Poonani Maker
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,392
- Reaction score
- 927
I've been studying this database of bolide impacts http://www.unb.ca/passc/ImpactDatabase/ for over a month now...totally Fascinated by this stuff. You get into wikipedia into the eons, ages, plate tectonics, evolutions, 5 great mass extinctions, the Oort cloud, scattered disc, Kuiper belt objects, and all other Trans-Neptunian objects. Our history just totally fascinates me to no end.
I want to visit these 100 million + year old craters still exposed to the surface. A lot of them are in Australia, Canada, and Russia. Algeria, South Africa, and Libya have quite a few hits too.
My question is "How many of these "impacts" are just electric discharges from a large body passing by and not a comet or asteroid as speculated from the shock quartz found around the rims of these craters?"
It's difficult to discover most of the impacts that surely must have taken place on Earth because of our atmosphere - erosion. The moon and other barren planets show more evidence.
I want to visit these 100 million + year old craters still exposed to the surface. A lot of them are in Australia, Canada, and Russia. Algeria, South Africa, and Libya have quite a few hits too.
My question is "How many of these "impacts" are just electric discharges from a large body passing by and not a comet or asteroid as speculated from the shock quartz found around the rims of these craters?"
It's difficult to discover most of the impacts that surely must have taken place on Earth because of our atmosphere - erosion. The moon and other barren planets show more evidence.
"Stop Asking Your Friends What to Text Her"
Your buddy Dave has been single for three years and thinks "hey u up" is a valid strategy. Your other buddy Mike just got dumped and told you to "just be yourself."
You showed them her text. You asked them to decode the emoji. You drafted four responses and sent the screenshot to the group chat for a vote.
She's been waiting forty minutes.
Put the phone down. Stop crowdsourcing your love life. Type something that sounds like you. Hit send. Then go do literally anything else with your evening.