Club 30's "Kill the Boredom Demon" Jive Pad 142nd Edition
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
yeah, you're way too thin ..... you may be a high risk mother .....
but that's something very easily corrected ....
nah, that's not the problem. anyway, what are the names? -
not going to reveal it here .... that'll wait till the BBs come out .......
both are biblical names, one male, one female ..... female one first .....
that fits .... we dreamt of our kids too .....
-
afternoon
F1 road diversion kicks in
-
thanks for the reminder .....
got to avoid the town this weekend ....
-
Fatum, u saw e KTM deal?
In any case, their new Malaysian economic plan incl high speed rail bet Ipoh - KL - Singapore, oil terminal in Johor as only Singapore has indep oil terminal in Asia, MRT system for KL, river cleaning for Klang river...
wasn't all these wat we did in 1970/ 80s?
-
their insecurities run deep ......
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
their insecurities run deep ......
Actually the land swap deal was alrdy in the original POA...If everything was done then, guess they would have gained lots w/ the devt in Marina Bay.
-
well, they had to deal cos their trump cards are dwindling ......
soon we'll be self sufficient in water, we don't need their reserviors or the pipe. No more aces in their hand.
If they don't deal now, maybe we'll just take it to some international arbitration court and they'll end up with nothing.
they are not stupid too, they can see the writing on the wall.
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
well, they had to deal cos their trump cards are dwindling ......
soon we'll be self sufficient in water, we don't need their reserviors or the pipe. No more aces in their hand.
If they don't deal now, maybe we'll just take it to some international arbitration court and they'll end up with nothing.
they are not stupid too, they can see the writing on the wall.
MM said before, the more they try to corner us, the more stronger we got... live w/o them. lol -
half asleep and cramping up. not good at all.
-
fatumnette just called ......
she's home now .... went to the doc and got MC ....
there's this nasty bug going around ..... lots of phelgm .... lots of coughing ....
-
my cramp is stress induced. anyone has effective ways of killing the client?
-
this may work .... if not it's a great de-stresser.
-
Originally posted by cassie:
my cramp is stress induced. anyone has effective ways of killing the client?
well...........dunno about killing but a non-fatal way to make life miserable for your client is to keep slipping laxatives into his or her food/drinks
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
fatumnette just called ......
she's home now .... went to the doc and got MC ....
there's this nasty bug going around ..... lots of phelgm .... lots of coughing ....
i've got it too.
-
home....
orientation today.. i'm lost...
oh well.. tomorrow i get moved into the team
-
@@
Tat proposed (again) KL - Singapore high speed rail will only be extennded to Ipoh & Penang at a later stage.
-
funny shit...
watching Border Security on tv...
next week they get this guy.. he's got a lot of shampoo...
because "so much shampoo, so little hair"
-
Originally posted by av98m:
well...........dunno about killing but a non-fatal way to make life miserable for your client is to keep slipping laxatives into his or her food/drinks
if he was in front of me, i would have stabbed him by now.i got no less than 3 calls alone this afternoon!
-
Reading Zaobao.
People's view of the M'sia plans is good, but scared it might flop as of issues of implementing new policies.
They're warning at this rate, M'sia will realy be at crossroads.
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
well, the way I see it ged, it's like those scientists who say global warming and climate change is nothing to worry about, cos we have not determined whether there's a real link between human activities and climate change yet, so it's okay to go on burning hydro carbons, it's okay to keep stripping forests.
I've been pretty stoked by this topic every since I picked up a copy of the bell curve yonks ago (yeah, more political incorrectness !)
I still think what I've suggested is something instuitive. Like the puppy example I gave over in night owls last night. You want certain physical traits in a puppy, floppy ears, bushy tail etc, you get together a pair with these traits and breed them. the resulting pupsies, at least some of them, would exhibit the traits you want eh ? So why not humans ? And if physical traits can be inherited, why not mental ability ?
I was quite disturbed when I read the bell curve of course, but that book and related publications I followed up with threw up a lot of uncomfortable correlations between socio-economic circumstances and cognitive abilities. Between teenage pregnancies, substance abuse, delinquency, family dysfunction, welfare dependency and cognitive ability. Oh I'm sure sociologist can come up with lots of other reasons, poverty cycle, pure bad luck etc etc. But I think the correlation is a fact, an uncomfortable one, but one that's got to be taken into account.
True, offspring cognitive ability is probably a function of a lot of other more complex factors than just pure genetics alone, but I think we'd be deluding ourselves if we pretend genetics is a determinant in all other physical traits except mental ability. It's definitely part of the equation, the only real question should be just, by how much, eh ?
I think if we're to get down from the ivory tower and not talk about breeding for the species and colonizing the stars etc, each of us has a duty to pass on the best genes we could to our intended offsprings, to give them the best headstart in life. Cos like is or not, the processor one is born with, is the one one is stuck with, for life. Not pretty, not handsome, nevermind, surgery can fix, not smart ? well, no one's invented a smart pill yet eh.
Sure, people like to talk about the latter day's hard work being more important, but let's not kid ourselves, an overclocked 486 would never compare to the latest i7 core from intel, eh ? The potential is innate. A chap gifted with an i7 can choose to be lazy and not go to school etc, but we mustn't confuse that with the lack of innate potential eh ?
And I think this line of thought is getting more and more important nowadays. Modern life is incresingly demanding, mentally. The IQ required to function in modern society has been inching ever upwards. Computers, hps, traffic systems, transport systems, our work tools, are all getting more and more complex as we move into an information based age. Our ability to thrive and prosper in this environment increasingly depend on our ability to process and react to information. Our IQ, in other words. People on the left side of the bell curve would be left further and further behind in this new world.
Hmm. I can appreciate your enthusiasm, and at one level I would lean that way as well. However, there are a few factors that temper said enthusiasm.
First, let's take a look at cases that defy the concept of eugenics. JFK Junior was a failure as a law student and a fashion dilettante before mistaking his plane for a submarine. The Hiltons have rightfully washed their hands of Paris, and Dubya - well, need I say more?
Let's look at the flip side. Hermann Einstein sold beds. Alexander Fleming, a farmer’s son. Anatoly Karpov, son of a factory worker. And those are just the famous ones. The people I work with have a mean education level of a Master’s, and all of them come from ordinary backgrounds.
On one end of the scale, the argument against eugenics is, “just because you can doesn’t mean you should”. On the other end of the scale is, “how scary can this get?”. We’ve been here before. Berlin 1933-1945 is probably the example that comes to most people’s minds –Neitzsche said Uberman and Hitler turned it into the Untermenschen. Mind you, the Krauts aren’t the only guilty ones; for more than 50 years the Americans made a policy of sterilising non-ideal citizens. It’s not just that eugenics has been proven time and time again to not work – the idea is plain dangerous.
The flip-side of socio-economic status aspect of the Bell curve highlights the “nurture” aspect of intelligence. Put this together with the fact that physiologically, higher cognitive ability is associated with the density of connections between neurons, which in turn are influenced with the amount of stimulation that the brain is exposed to, and a much more convincing influence on intelligence is how intellectually stimulating the environment is, especially in early childhood, and hell, nutrition may have something to do with it as well.
The bottom line is that on philosophical, logical and physiological grounds, there’s a case against eugenics.
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
this may work .... if not it's a great de-stresser.
I need one of these !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
Hmm. I can appreciate your enthusiasm, and at one level I would lean that way as well. However, there are a few factors that temper said enthusiasm.
First, let's take a look at cases that defy the concept of eugenics. JFK Junior was a failure as a law student and a fashion dilettante before mistaking his plane for a submarine. The Hiltons have rightfully washed their hands of Paris, and Dubya - well, need I say more?
Let's look at the flip side. Hermann Einstein sold beds. Alexander Fleming, a farmer’s son. Anatoly Karpov, son of a factory worker. And those are just the famous ones. The people I work with have a mean education level of a Master’s, and all of them come from ordinary backgrounds.
On one end of the scale, the argument against eugenics is, “just because you can doesn’t mean you should”. On the other end of the scale is, “how scary can this get?”. We’ve been here before. Berlin 1933-1945 is probably the example that comes to most people’s minds –Neitzsche said Uberman and Hitler turned it into the Untermenschen. Mind you, the Krauts aren’t the only guilty ones; for more than 50 years the Americans made a policy of sterilising non-ideal citizens. It’s not just that eugenics has been proven time and time again to not work – the idea is plain dangerous.
The flip-side of socio-economic status aspect of the Bell curve highlights the “nurture” aspect of intelligence. Put this together with the fact that physiologically, higher cognitive ability is associated with the density of connections between neurons, which in turn are influenced with the amount of stimulation that the brain is exposed to, and a much more convincing influence on intelligence is how intellectually stimulating the environment is, especially in early childhood, and hell, nutrition may have something to do with it as well.
The bottom line is that on philosophical, logical and physiological grounds, there’s a case against eugenics.
One very important factor in the success of these individuals is motivation - and no one knows how that can be passed on or nurtured. An intelligent person may not necessarily be more motivated than the next person, and so his potential never gets discovered. It's one thing to have smart people, and other to make them contribute effectively.
-
Good Morning....Rise and Shine...
-
back in office...
time to clear lotsa paperwork...