And, what kind of YouTubers would these three be, if they were YouTuber backpackers, instead of scholars at King’s College in the UK?

 

Regarding Watson, I think we all know what kind of YouTuber he would have been, here in Thailand. Watson would have spent most of his time in Pattaya, drooling.

 

As for Crick, I guess he might have portrayed himself as some sort of god on YouTube.  And, that is OK, because he is really intelligent, unlike Watson.

 

Anytime I think of James Watson, I think of the dummy who followed around Sherlock Holmes, just as he followed around Crick and Franklin.  What a fool!

 

Regarding Franklin, she was really too nice.  She did a great deal of very hard work, and was never credited for what she had contributed, as everybody knows.  Maybe if she had not been a woman, but a ladyboy, instead, she would have been given more credit for her contribution.

 

We can be thankful for Crick and Franklin.

Watson, however, should never have tried to do science. James Watson is truly the type of intellect that you might see stumbling around in Pattaya, maybe getting into bar fights, or just leering at young women.

 

Sometimes, I get freaked out by Thailand YouTubers.  Yet, are they really so bad?  No.  Compared to at least one Nobel, they are darn right fine.

 

King’s College London is amazing.

 

Send your kids there…why not?

 

Maybe they will write a  pivotal thesis like Crick.

The world has changed.

And, maybe women are now given credit for their work, rather than their bra size.

Rosalind Franklin was cheated by both Crick and Watson, as everybody knows.

 

So, what it really boils down to is…..Can We Classify Thailand YouTubers in terms of their DNA:

 

aa.  The James Watson type of Thailand YouTuber

 

 

bb.  The Francis Crick type of Thailand YouTuber

 

 

cc.  The Rosalind Franklin type of Thailand YouTuber

 

 

dd. The Rosalind Russell type of Thailand YouTuber

 

 

What do you think?

 

Rosalind Russell....All the Way!

Russell has great DNA!

Always well written, albeit oftentimes in the abstract, your posts deserve the recognition worthy of them, and therefore should earn at least one reply.  

 

Fortunately or unfortunately, for this type of forum it's "Rosalind Russell....All the Way!" indeed.  I doubt many here will be cracking a beer in celebration of the 70th anniversary of "the most beautiful X-ray photographs of any substance ever taken."  Nor do I suspect you'll find any jubilations for the discoveries involving DNA leading to mRNA technologies, which spawned our current Covid vaccines.

 

"On 28 February 1953 Crick interrupted patrons' lunchtime at The Eagle pub in Cambridge to announce that he and Watson had "discovered the secret of life"."

LOL.  Perhaps this will go down in history as one of the boldest claims ever uttered by a scientist.  Or any human, for that matter.

"As I occasionally do in my notes, I’m anthropomorphosizing “science” by casting a multifaceted discipline in simple human or individual terms. But now it seems that when science claims to understand the workings of a molecule of DNA, for example — the “master molecule” of life, as it’s often called — science then states that it’s stripped away the mystery of DNA and reduced our functions to easily understood mechanistic ones. But Jane and I maintain that grasping the marvelous workings of DNA should instead increase our sense of the wonder and mystery of life. The DNA lies exposed in all of its parts, but the questions about the life within it remain unanswered. Why does science want us to live thinking that we’re creatures programmed only for the survival of our selfish genes? Even the biologists (and other scientists) who insist upon our mechanistic bases do so with feeling!"
—NoME Chapter 3: Session 821, February 20, 1978

I'm no huge fan of mRNA technologies.  But that has to do with my divergence with scientific belief that life is purely mechanistic, mindless, purposeless, and interested only in it's own survival.

Are you paid by the word, if so I'd demand a refund? 

35 minutes ago, swbaggies said:

Are you paid by the word, if so I'd demand a refund? 

From his writings it is decidedly obvious that the author is of above average intelligence, very well educated, sharp minded, possessed of a good deal of wit, and highly creative.  Granted his style may not be appealing to everyone, as that would be factually impossible.

Given that then your critique should accord respect, at minimum, to at least be composed using proper English sentence structure.  Or in other words:

Hey man, cut the dude some slack, will ya?

19 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Always well written, albeit oftentimes in the abstract, your posts deserve the recognition worthy of them, and therefore should earn at least one reply.  

 

Fortunately or unfortunately, for this type of forum it's "Rosalind Russell....All the Way!" indeed.  I doubt many here will be cracking a beer in celebration of the 70th anniversary of "the most beautiful X-ray photographs of any substance ever taken."  Nor do I suspect you'll find any jubilations for the discoveries involving DNA leading to mRNA technologies, which spawned our current Covid vaccines.

 

"On 28 February 1953 Crick interrupted patrons' lunchtime at The Eagle pub in Cambridge to announce that he and Watson had "discovered the secret of life"."

LOL.  Perhaps this will go down in history as one of the boldest claims ever uttered by a scientist.  Or any human, for that matter.

"As I occasionally do in my notes, I’m anthropomorphosizing “science” by casting a multifaceted discipline in simple human or individual terms. But now it seems that when science claims to understand the workings of a molecule of DNA, for example — the “master molecule” of life, as it’s often called — science then states that it’s stripped away the mystery of DNA and reduced our functions to easily understood mechanistic ones. But Jane and I maintain that grasping the marvelous workings of DNA should instead increase our sense of the wonder and mystery of life. The DNA lies exposed in all of its parts, but the questions about the life within it remain unanswered. Why does science want us to live thinking that we’re creatures programmed only for the survival of our selfish genes? Even the biologists (and other scientists) who insist upon our mechanistic bases do so with feeling!"
—NoME Chapter 3: Session 821, February 20, 1978

I'm no huge fan of mRNA technologies.  But that has to do with my divergence with scientific belief that life is purely mechanistic, mindless, purposeless, and interested only in it's own survival.

May I quote you?  "oftentimes"

 

Makes me think of the other two similar:  oft-times  and "often times"

 

Personally, being the man I am, I prefer to utter oft-times, just for effect.

 

As I mentioned in recent days, I believe you are a teacher, which is a devotion and calling for which to be exceedingly proud, even though teachers should still try to be humble, whenever possible, as has always been traditionally the case throughout history in China, but maybe not so much in Greece.

 

AGAIN, I wish you.... Chok Dee!

 

If you wish, I can tell you where you can download the complete original series, Hong Lou Meng, possibly for free, which involves a teacher in some parts of this amazing drama.

 

CHOK DEE, my friend!

 

(In my opinion, everybody on the Forum Pub are valued friends of mine. (Although, I can understand if the feeling is not always mutual.))

 

Chok Dee!!!!

 

 

5 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

May I quote you?  "oftentimes"

 

Makes me think of the other two similar:  oft-times  and "often times"

 

Personally, being the man I am, I prefer to utter oft-times, just for effect.

 

As I mentioned in recent days, I believe you are a teacher, which is a devotion and calling for which to be exceedingly proud, even though teachers should still try to be humble, whenever possible, as has always been traditionally the case throughout history in China, but maybe not so much in Greece.

 

AGAIN, I wish you.... Chok Dee!

 

If you wish, I can tell you where you can download the complete original series, Hong Lou Meng, possibly for free, which involves a teacher in some parts of this amazing drama.

 

CHOK DEE, my friend!

 

(In my opinion, everybody on the Forum Pub are valued friends of mine. (Although, I can understand if the feeling is not always mutual.))

 

Chok Dee!!!!

I've apparently left off perhaps your best, and in my humble opinion, most important quality; playfulness.  The playfulness of spirit reflective of the original intention of all life.

 

Throughout my life my defiant rallying cry was, "Never grow up!!!"  The most terrible and disheartening words I've ever heard spoken: "You ain't a kid anymore."

 

Volley and return.  Return and volley.  โชคดีเช่นกันเพื่อน

 

 

Link, please.  Looks interesting.  Perhaps the book, Dream of the Red Chamber, is best?  Books are always better than their movie counterpart.

Teacher.  Perhaps a student teacher.  At best.  LOL

6 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

May I quote you?  "oftentimes"

 

Makes me think of the other two similar:  oft-times  and "often times"

 

Personally, being the man I am, I prefer to utter oft-times, just for effect.

 

<snip>

Oft-times strikes me as more poetic.  Another of your excellent qualities?  LOL

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

Oft-times strikes me as more poetic.  Another of your excellent qualities?  LOL

It sometimes feels good to be a throwback.

19 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I've apparently left off perhaps your best, and in my humble opinion, most important quality; playfulness.  The playfulness of spirit reflective of the original intention of all life.

 

Throughout my life my defiant rallying cry was, "Never grow up!!!"  The most terrible and disheartening words I've ever heard spoken: "You ain't a kid anymore."

 

Volley and return.  Return and volley.  โชคดีเช่นกันเพื่อน

 

 

Link, please.  Looks interesting.  Perhaps the book, Dream of the Red Chamber, is best?  Books are always better than their movie counterpart.

Teacher.  Perhaps a student teacher.  At best.  LOL

OK.  But, I can't link Hong Lou Meng, here.

 

I have the DVDs.

 

I would need to upload them, and then provide you the link to the uploads.

 

This can be done, if you are interested.

9 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

OK.  But, I can't link Hong Lou Meng, here.

 

I have the DVDs.

 

I would need to upload them, and then provide you the link to the uploads.

 

This can be done, if you are interested.

I'd be most appreciative.  

BTW, I just wanted to make sure you didn't miss the link to the book, Dream of the Red Chamber. The link is a good one and I've already got it.  The file consists of 3 different translations into English of the book.  A bonus is included; Story of the Stone in five volumes.
 

Edited January 16, 20224 yr by Tippaporn

19 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

It sometimes feels good to be a throwback.

Correction, if I may.  Oft-times it feels good to be a throwback.  

 

I've always had a particular appreciation of 19th century and earlier literature in the authors' exquisite ability to express themselves in words.  If that's the 'throwback' you're referring to then I wholeheartedly agree.

 

But this is easier -- no editor and I know at least someone will read it.

15 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Correction, if I may.  Oft-times it feels good to be a throwback.  

 

I've always had a particular appreciation of 19th century and earlier literature in the authors' exquisite ability to express themselves in words.  If that's the 'throwback' you're referring to then I wholeheartedly agree.

Tom Jones is and was amazing.

 

Madame Bovary.

 

Fanny Hill.

 

200 more....

 

("Back in the Day", maybe 60 years ago, our main entertainment was reading books which were written before 1800.  We, as young boys, loved to read things like "Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure".  We used to lie in bed and read, all the livelong day. And, it was fun.  And, it was very sexy, too.)

Edited January 16, 20224 yr by GammaGlobulin

8 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

 

But this is easier -- no editor and I know at least someone will read it.

Books and throwbacks = . . . . 
 

 

9 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Books and throwbacks = . . . . 
 

 

Very, very nice.  VERY.

26 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Tom Jones is and was amazing.

 

Madame Bovary.

 

Fanny Hill.

 

200 more....

Now here's a book that doesn't fall into the classical literature category but is a deliciously fun read in it's unrefined expressiveness; and also if one likes to have their imagination stoked.  A very riveting read as well, as Garcia is flush with harrowing, real life tales set in a just as real historical backdrop.

Tough Trip Through Paradise, Montana 1878-1879 by Andrew Garcia

Here's a very good and accurate review of the book, though poorly written.  I won't attempt any edits.

This is the memoir of frontiersman Andrew Garcia condensed and edited. Its doesn't read like a novel, because it is a memoir, and Garcia tends to ramble, but it is a fascinating read, particularly for those who live in, and love, the American West. Garcia lived in the wild west during the time when only Native American tribes hardy frontiersmen and trappers inhabited the country. Garcia went west for the excitment of being a trapper, but fell in love with the tough and sassy Indian girls, and this is the story of his first Indian wife, and the great love of his life. She was a Nez Perce, who had been with the infamous Cheif Joseph band when they fought and died, and her story is told here too. She is still a teenager when she meets Garcia. He marries her and they embark on an epic journey, just the two of them barely out of their teens, with 7 horses, 5 dogs, some guns and provisions, from North Dakota to the the Hells Canyon area in Oregon for a sad return to her homeland, and then, partly running for their lives north to Montana. It's an enormous area to cover by horseback, looking at a map I am amazed they could do it. The journey, as the title notes, is through paradise, some of the most beautiful and wild land in our nation, but it is dangerous and heart-breaking. Andrew Garcia tells his story without prejudice or political correctness, straight from the heart. It felt like I was there reading it. The only thing I would like to have had more of was description of the land, often Garcia skips the scenery in favor of the game animals, probably because he was always hungry. The most beautiful land for him is the land filled with elk, deer and buffalo.

I've search hi and lo for a download of this book.  I've had the paperback since the late 70's but alas it's in storage in the States.  The link is to a site which allows for a free reading via loan.  I highly recommend it.

 

Edited January 16, 20224 yr by Tippaporn

7 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Very, very nice.  VERY.

Thank jerrymahoney.    I just dug up the YT of the song.  It is a very good tune.

15 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Thank jerrymahoney.    I just dug up the YT of the song.  It is a very good tune.

More interesting to find out who was the lyricist Lorenz Hart and how he practically dictated the lyrics off the top-of-his-head to Richard Rodgers' already written music.

12 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Thank jerrymahoney.    I just dug up the YT of the song.  It is a very good tune.

The sad thing is:

 

There is a whole flock of great books that most decent schools put on their reading lists, maybe about 500 books that students should read by grade 12.

 

However, it should be obvious that most of these books should be read very close to the time the student passes through puberty, while his or her juices are flowing at MAX, in order to achieve the greatest Umph out of the reading of these books.

 

Passing through puberty is a time when our brain is at a point like no other time in our life.

 

Most of the high-school books should be read between age 11 and 14.  Otherwise, this crucial time of amazement in the reading is missed, forever.

 

Maybe you might not know what I mean.

 

Once you miss this time in your life, this narrow window...then...this unique opportunity can never be recouped... it is gone, forever.

 

Try reading Fanny Hill at age 40, for example.

Try reading Fanny Hill at age 11.5, for example.

Not the same experience.

 

Same with so many books.

 

Read while you are young, or be doomed to ignorance, for life.

 

 

39 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

The sad thing is:

 

There is a whole flock of great books that most decent schools put on their reading lists, maybe about 500 books that students should read by grade 12.

 

However, it should be obvious that most of these books should be read very close to the time the student passes through puberty, while his or her juices are flowing at MAX, in order to achieve the greatest Umph out of the reading of these books.

 

Passing through puberty is a time when our brain is at a point like no other time in our life.

 

Most of the high-school books should be read between age 11 and 14.  Otherwise, this crucial time of amazement in the reading is missed, forever.

 

Maybe you might not know what I mean.

 

Once you miss this time in your life, this narrow window...then...this unique opportunity can never be recouped... it is gone, forever.

 

Try reading Fanny Hill at age 40, for example.

Try reading Fanny Hill at age 11.5, for example.

Not the same experience.

 

Same with so many books.

 

Read while you are young, or be doomed to ignorance, for life.

It's the theory of some that man reverts back to an infant in old age.  In which case I think I'm around that 11~14 year mark on the backside of life's hill.  

Perhaps that is why I'm such a prolific poster in the "Thailand, the most beautiful girls in the world" thread?  I should do more reading now instead of posting fantasy pics?  

 

From Playboy's first edition up until sometime in the 70's, I suppose, much was left to the imagination.  And one could argue that the imagination offered the best visualisations.  Another argument in favour of reading rather than posting pics.

 

Edited January 17, 20224 yr by Tippaporn

6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's the theory of some that man reverts back to an infant in old age.  In which case I think I'm around that 11~14 year mark on the backside of life's hill.  

Perhaps that is why I'm such a prolific poster in the "Thailand, the most beautiful girls in the world" thread?  I should do more reading now instead of posting fantasy pics?  

 

From Playboy's first edition up until sometime in the 70's, I suppose, much was left to the imagination.  And one could argue that the imagination offered the best visualisations.  Another argument in favour of reading rather than posting pics.

 

The truism is that, the older one becomes, after the magic age of 59, one loses the ability to appreciate written fiction, ie, novels, in most cases.

 

If this has happened to you, too, then read Nemesis by Roth.

At least, you can still read this with quite a bit of pleasure.

 

Roth writes beautiful paragraphs.

 

Roth should have received the Nobel for Literature, except that, maybe, due to his "background", he was found wanting.

 

Was Saul Bellow a Jew?  Not sure.

 

The only thing I know is that Philip could write rings around Saul.

 

The Nobel has always been a joke.

 

Awards, such as these are a joke, both in science and in literature.

 

You got a small group of dirty old white men telling the world what is pure.

 

I am white.

But, I am not dirty, hopefully.

I try not to be.

 

1 minute ago, GammaGlobulin said:

The truism is that, the older one becomes, after the magic age of 59, one loses the ability to appreciate written fiction, ie, novels, in most cases.

 

If this has happened to you, too, then read Nemesis by Roth.

At least, you can still read this with quite a bit of pleasure.

 

Roth writes beautiful paragraphs.

 

Roth should have received the Nobel for Literature, except that, maybe, due to his "background", he was found wanting.

 

Was Saul Bellow a Jew?  Not sure.

 

The only thing I know is that Philip could write rings around Saul.

 

The Nobel has always been a joke.

 

Awards, such as these are a joke, both in science and in literature.

 

You got a small group of dirty old white men telling the world what is pure.

 

I am white.

But, I am not dirty, hopefully.

I try not to be.

 

Sorry, but the real thing is....

 

That, after we reach a certain age, then it becomes almost impossible to read fiction, such as a novel, with a straight face.

 

There is no escapism after one reaches a ripe enough age.

 

And, when this happens, then...maybe YouTube.

46 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

The sad thing is:

 

There is a whole flock of great books that most decent schools put on their reading lists, maybe about 500 books that students should read by grade 12.

 

<snip>

You must be referring to those throwback days.  In our current time that list of 500 books might well get pared down to 0 if the current establishment continues to have it's druthers.  Here's a short list of books which are or have been banned in various countries of the world:

(One of the most notable was The Lord of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkien, burned (at the stake, I imagine) in Alamagordo, NM in 2001 outside Christ Community Church along with other Tolkien novels as satanic.

 

• The Great Gatsby, by F. Scott Fitzgerald
• The Catcher in the Rye, by JD Salinger
• The Grapes of Wrath, by John Steinbeck
• To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee
• The Color Purple, by Alice Walker
• Ulysses, by James Joyce
• Beloved, by Toni Morrison
• The Lord of the Flies, by William Golding
• 1984, by George Orwell
• Lolita, by Vladimir Nabokov
• The Sound and the Fury. by William Faulkner
• Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck
• Charlotte's Web, by E. B. White
• Catch-22, by Joseph Heller
• Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley
• Animal Farm, by George Orwell
• The Sun Also Rises, by Ernest Hemingway
• As I Lay Dying, by William Faulkner
• A Farewell to Arms, by Ernest Hemingway
• Their Eyes Were Watching God, by Zora Neale Hurston
• Invisible Man, by Ralph Ellison
• Gone with the Wind, by Margaret Mitchell
• Native Son, by Richard Wright
• One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, by Ken Kesey
• Slaughterhouse Five, by Kurt Vonnegut
• For Whom the Bell Tolls, by Ernest Hemingway
• The Call of the Wild, by Jack London
• Go Tell It on the Mountain, by James Baldwin
• All the King's Men, by Robert Penn Warren
• The Lord of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkien
• The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair
• Lady Chatterley's Lover, by D.H. Lawrence
• A Clockwork Orange, by Anthony Burgess
• The Awakening, by Kate Chopin
• In Cold Blood, by Truman Capote
• Satanic Verses, by Salman Rushdie
• Sophie's Choice, by William Styron
• Sons and Lovers, by D.H. Lawrence
• Cat's Cradle, by Kurt Vonnegut
• A Separate Peace, by John Knowles
• Naked Lunch, by William S. Burroughs
• Brideshead Revisited, by Evelyn Waugh
• Women in Love, by DH Lawrence
• The Naked and the Dead, by Norman Mailer
• Tropic of Cancer, by Henry Miller
• An American Tragedy, by Theodore Dreiser
• Rabbit, Run, by John Updike
• Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain
• Leaves of Grass. by Walt Whitman
• Harry Potter series, by J.K. Rowling

 

24 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

You must be referring to those throwback days.  In our current time that list of 500 books might well get pared down to 0 if the current establishment continues to have it's druthers.  Here's a short list of books which are or have been banned in various countries of the world:

(One of the most notable was The Lord of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkien, burned (at the stake, I imagine) in Alamagordo, NM in 2001 outside Christ Community Church along with other Tolkien novels as satanic.

 

• The Great Gatsby, by F. Scott Fitzgerald
• The Catcher in the Rye, by JD Salinger
• The Grapes of Wrath, by John Steinbeck
• To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee
• The Color Purple, by Alice Walker
• Ulysses, by James Joyce
• Beloved, by Toni Morrison
• The Lord of the Flies, by William Golding
• 1984, by George Orwell
• Lolita, by Vladimir Nabokov
• The Sound and the Fury. by William Faulkner
• Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck
• Charlotte's Web, by E. B. White
• Catch-22, by Joseph Heller
• Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley
• Animal Farm, by George Orwell
• The Sun Also Rises, by Ernest Hemingway
• As I Lay Dying, by William Faulkner
• A Farewell to Arms, by Ernest Hemingway
• Their Eyes Were Watching God, by Zora Neale Hurston
• Invisible Man, by Ralph Ellison
• Gone with the Wind, by Margaret Mitchell
• Native Son, by Richard Wright
• One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, by Ken Kesey
• Slaughterhouse Five, by Kurt Vonnegut
• For Whom the Bell Tolls, by Ernest Hemingway
• The Call of the Wild, by Jack London
• Go Tell It on the Mountain, by James Baldwin
• All the King's Men, by Robert Penn Warren
• The Lord of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkien
• The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair
• Lady Chatterley's Lover, by D.H. Lawrence
• A Clockwork Orange, by Anthony Burgess
• The Awakening, by Kate Chopin
• In Cold Blood, by Truman Capote
• Satanic Verses, by Salman Rushdie
• Sophie's Choice, by William Styron
• Sons and Lovers, by D.H. Lawrence
• Cat's Cradle, by Kurt Vonnegut
• A Separate Peace, by John Knowles
• Naked Lunch, by William S. Burroughs
• Brideshead Revisited, by Evelyn Waugh
• Women in Love, by DH Lawrence
• The Naked and the Dead, by Norman Mailer
• Tropic of Cancer, by Henry Miller
• An American Tragedy, by Theodore Dreiser
• Rabbit, Run, by John Updike
• Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain
• Leaves of Grass. by Walt Whitman
• Harry Potter series, by J.K. Rowling

 

Tropic of Cancer?

 

Really?

 

(Sorry, I was thinking of Last Tango in Paris, and the Butterfingers Brando, which was not noteworthy.)

 

Still, I forget Tropic of Cancer.

Those were the days.

Edited January 17, 20224 yr by GammaGlobulin

30 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

The truism is that, the older one becomes, after the magic age of 59, one loses the ability to appreciate written fiction, ie, novels, in most cases.

 

If this has happened to you, too, then read Nemesis by Roth.

At least, you can still read this with quite a bit of pleasure.

 

Roth writes beautiful paragraphs.

 

Roth should have received the Nobel for Literature, except that, maybe, due to his "background", he was found wanting.

 

Was Saul Bellow a Jew?  Not sure.

 

The only thing I know is that Philip could write rings around Saul.

 

The Nobel has always been a joke.

 

Awards, such as these are a joke, both in science and in literature.

 

You got a small group of dirty old white men telling the world what is pure.

 

I am white.

But, I am not dirty, hopefully.

I try not to be.

I believe that the idea of the dulling of the self in whatever way in old age as an unalterable and inescapable fate is myth.  It's an idea that many experience, unwittingly, I believe, as self fulfilling prophecy.  Beware of what one accepts as truth for tomorrow it might well be reality.  Look to the exception to know what is possible, and to know what is true as well, for there is more than a single truth.  And then choose that potential and that truth for yourself.  Just a humble suggestion.  

 

Agree about the awards, especially the Nobel.  It couldn't have been made more transparently clear when some previously no-name, unaccomplished Senator from Illinois ascended to the U.S. Presidency in 2009 and immediately received the Nobel for Peace without a single citation to his credit.  A joke indeed.

3 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Tropic of Cancer?

 

Really?

To be clear, it's a list of books that either are banned, have been banned at one time or another, and banned in one or more countries.

Here's a link to a site, Banned And Challenged Books, which chronicles the detailed history of challenges or bannings for each title.

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I believe that the idea of the dulling of the self in whatever way in old age as an unalterable and inescapable fate is myth.  It's an idea that many experience, unwittingly, I believe, as self fulfilling prophecy.  Beware of what one accepts as truth for tomorrow it might well be reality.  Look to the exception to know what is possible, and to know what is true as well, for there is more than a single truth.  And then choose that potential and that truth for yourself.  Just a humble suggestion.  

 

Agree about the awards, especially the Nobel.  It couldn't have been made more transparently clear when some previously no-name, unaccomplished Senator from Illinois ascended to the U.S. Presidency in 2009 and immediately received the Nobel for Peace without a single citation to his credit.  A joke indeed.

Sometimes, white men feel the need to choose not among their own kind, on rare occasions.

This is not something which happens frequently.

Be thankful when it occurs.

 

Forget the Nobel.

 

And, instead, go with the Ig Nobel Prizes.

 

Everybody knows that the Nobel is a Joke.

 

(The science is real.)

(The prizes are really taken from Cracker Jack boxes.

 

 

 

 

I would see Watson occasionally at Cold Spring Harbor and knew women there that he interacted with regularly.  Later in life he was interested in connections between female hirsuteness and sexuality.  A scientists's version of a foot-fetish I guess.  In any case, since his leanings were towards the more plump ladies he probably would have been disappointed with Pattaya.  I don't know how he felt about Asian ladies.  Probably either extremely positive or extremely negative.  

9 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

To be clear, it's a list of books that either are banned, have been banned at one time or another, and banned in one or more countries.

Here's a link to a site, Banned And Challenged Books, which chronicles the detailed history of challenges or bannings for each title.

Understood,

Sorry, I missed that when I first read your comment.

 

Banning books is now impossible, and pointless.

 

Here is a book that should not have been banned in China, in case you might enjoy it:  Tombstone: The Great Chinese Famine, 1958-1962

 

I have a copy in the original Chinese, in case you might like it. (As far as I know, the Chinese and the translated versions, might not be the same.)

 

 

24 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

<snip>

 

(The science is real.)

 

<snip>

So say the scientism-ists.