Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment



"OmegaZero2003" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Hey Mr. Reality (DRS) - put up or shut up - what is reality?
>


Reality is when I drop a dumbell on my foot.

dogsbody

>
> "DRS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> [email protected]
>> > DRS wrote:
>> >
>> >> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD <[email protected]> wrote in
>> >> message [email protected]
>> >>> rosie read and post wrote:
>> >>
>> >> [...]
>> >>
>> >>>> i like your christ, I do not like your christians, your christians
>> >>>> are so unlike your christ.
>> >>>> .............................................gandhi
>> >>>
>> >>> Ghandhi's dead.
>> >>>
>> >>> Christ lives.
>> >>
>> >> Prove it.
>> >
>> > Why should I?

>>
>> Because you claimed it to be so. Put up or shut up.
>>
>> --
>>
>> A: Top-posters.
>> Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
>>
>>

>
>
>
 
Full Mu_n <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 01:57:14 +1000, "DRS" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>> Dig up their respective graves. One has bones, the latter nothing.

>>
>>There's no reliable evidence as to the location of either grave.

>
> Don't agree.
>
> Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.


Hello-oo! Random, 2000-year old legend? Please!

Howabout you go away and stop making religious folk look bad?

dogsbody
 
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 15:59:08 +1300, "Supergoof"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I've been taking extra magnesium for muscle cramps, but it also seems to
>help me to sleep - I have no idea why.
>
>But I wonder if a person can have too much magnesium, and if so what would
>the effect be - I've had a squishy tummy all week and I've been taking two
>magnesium pills at night for bad lower leg cramps.
>
>I'd still rather have the squishy tummy than the cramps though. Easier to
>take an imodium than to be up and down every half hour throughout the night
>walking off cramp.


"Squishy tummy", now there's one I haven't heard before. I guess
that's probably the same as an "upset stomach". Magnesium salts are a
common remedy for constipation. Perhaps just take one pill? Or one
in the morning?

Proton Soup
 
DZ <[email protected]> wrote in message
[email protected]
> DRS <[email protected]> wrote:
>> But if you're not a believer why would you be defending their lies?

>
> My cat "thinks" shrimp occurs by a process in some ways similar to the
> big bang theory of creation of the Universe. But in fact I buy it at
> Farmer's Market. Humans are like cats, only somewhat smarter. There
> are limits beyond which we cannot grasp things, even if the
> explanation was presented. I think of religion as a way to live with
> that.


I think that philsophy entirely lacks integrity.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
DZ <[email protected]> wrote in message
[email protected]
> DRS <[email protected]> wrote:


[...]

>> Yeah, yeah, yeah. In the entire history of our species we have
>> found exactly zero credible evidence of any supernatural being who
>> created the universe. Moreover, the more we learn about the
>> universe the less necessary we find any such creator.

>
> We're like ants exploring the kitchen. At this point in our
> unsupervised brain evolution we know ZERO about what it is we're
> exploring, and worse, unable to understand the picture even after
> collecting the facts. Appealing to looking and not finding is quite
> naive.


Utter, utter ********. We know a lot about the universe and we learn more
every day. We are not the ignorant peons you would have us be, who need
religion to explain things because there's no alternative.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
Seth Breidbart <[email protected]> wrote in message
[email protected]
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Christ lives.
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
>> Board-Certified Cardiologist
>> http://www.heartmdphd.com/

>
> Really? What's his pulse rate?
>
> Or does a "cardiologist" have a really strange meaning for "lives"?


Makes you worry, eh?

"Doctor! Doctor! His heart's not beating! He's dead!"

"No, he's alive."

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
Supergoof <[email protected]> wrote in message
[email protected]

[...]

> I've been taking extra magnesium for muscle cramps, but it also seems
> to help me to sleep - I have no idea why.
>
> But I wonder if a person can have too much magnesium, and if so what
> would the effect be - I've had a squishy tummy all week and I've been
> taking two magnesium pills at night for bad lower leg cramps.


I take quinine bisulphate for cramps. It has no side effects I can detect.
Maybe you could ask your doctor about it. Or just drink lots of G&Ts.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 01:13:36 +1000, "DRS" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>DZ <[email protected]> wrote in message
>[email protected]
>> DRS <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> But if you're not a believer why would you be defending their lies?

>>
>> My cat "thinks" shrimp occurs by a process in some ways similar to the
>> big bang theory of creation of the Universe. But in fact I buy it at
>> Farmer's Market. Humans are like cats, only somewhat smarter. There
>> are limits beyond which we cannot grasp things, even if the
>> explanation was presented. I think of religion as a way to live with
>> that.

>
>I think that philsophy entirely lacks integrity.


This is obvious since none of the alleged 'great thinkers' were acting
collectively or in unison, or indeed had a valid thought in their
revered heads, or were members of a professional association that was
self-regulating.

Proof, if it were required, is that we are no wiser for all their
profound deliberations, thus making them ineligible for induction into
any reputable organisation requiring honesty and integrity - unless of
course earnest endeavour is a suitable qualification.
 
John HUDSON <[email protected]> wrote in message
[email protected]
> On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 01:13:36 +1000, "DRS" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> DZ <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> [email protected]
>>> DRS <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> But if you're not a believer why would you be defending their lies?
>>>
>>> My cat "thinks" shrimp occurs by a process in some ways similar to
>>> the big bang theory of creation of the Universe. But in fact I buy
>>> it at Farmer's Market. Humans are like cats, only somewhat smarter.
>>> There are limits beyond which we cannot grasp things, even if the
>>> explanation was presented. I think of religion as a way to live with
>>> that.

>>
>> I think that philsophy entirely lacks integrity.

>
> This is obvious since none of the alleged 'great thinkers' were acting
> collectively or in unison, or indeed had a valid thought in their
> revered heads, or were members of a professional association that was
> self-regulating.


I don't know what you're getting at there. My beef is with the idea that if
you don't have an explanation for something it's OK to make up a deity out
of thin air and carry on as if it were real.

> Proof, if it were required, is that we are no wiser for all their
> profound deliberations,


Dead-ends are as useful in philosophy as paths that move us forward. That
we don't know everything does not deny the progress we have made.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 01:58:26 +1000, "DRS" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>John HUDSON <[email protected]> wrote in message
>[email protected]
>> On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 01:13:36 +1000, "DRS" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> DZ <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> [email protected]
>>>> DRS <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> But if you're not a believer why would you be defending their lies?
>>>>
>>>> My cat "thinks" shrimp occurs by a process in some ways similar to
>>>> the big bang theory of creation of the Universe. But in fact I buy
>>>> it at Farmer's Market. Humans are like cats, only somewhat smarter.
>>>> There are limits beyond which we cannot grasp things, even if the
>>>> explanation was presented. I think of religion as a way to live with
>>>> that.
>>>
>>> I think that philsophy entirely lacks integrity.

>>
>> This is obvious since none of the alleged 'great thinkers' were acting
>> collectively or in unison, or indeed had a valid thought in their
>> revered heads, or were members of a professional association that was
>> self-regulating.

>
>I don't know what you're getting at there. My beef is with the idea that if
>you don't have an explanation for something it's OK to make up a deity out
>of thin air and carry on as if it were real.


What I'm getting at is that philosophy doesn't require contemporary
concepts of integrity to validate it. In its most simplistic form
philosophy is but the collection of haphazard, if well-intentioned,
unverifiable answers to profound questions that are unanswerable.

That we deify the 'learned outpourings' of these demented 'sages', is
but a measure of our own insecurities.

>
>> Proof, if it were required, is that we are no wiser for all their
>> profound deliberations,

>
>Dead-ends are as useful in philosophy as paths that move us forward. That
>we don't know everything does not deny the progress we have made.


Our thirst for knowledge is unquenchable; our journey on the path of
self-delusion is well-defined. We are no nearer the truth, if there is
such a thing, than we were when we set out on our journey of
discovery.

Stop asking the questions, there are no answers. Which means that
anything is possible and that only a charlatan would claim to know the
'truth'!!

"Religion is the opiate of the masses" - I envy those that have a
profound and unshakeable belief!
 
John HUDSON <[email protected]> wrote in message
[email protected]

[...]

> What I'm getting at is that philosophy doesn't require contemporary
> concepts of integrity to validate it. In its most simplistic form
> philosophy is but the collection of haphazard, if well-intentioned,
> unverifiable answers to profound questions that are unanswerable.


I didn't say *all* philosophies lacked integrity, I referred to the specific
philosophy espouse by DZ in the post to which I replied.

[...]

>> Dead-ends are as useful in philosophy as paths that move us forward.
>> That we don't know everything does not deny the progress we have
>> made.

>
> Our thirst for knowledge is unquenchable; our journey on the path of
> self-delusion is well-defined. We are no nearer the truth, if there is
> such a thing, than we were when we set out on our journey of
> discovery.


I don't believe that for a moment. We have made progress, we do know more
than we did and we have every reason to believe we'll keep learning.

> Stop asking the questions, there are no answers.


Bulshit. There are answers. We know because we've found lots of them and
we have every reson to believe we'l find more.

> Which means that
> anything is possible and that only a charlatan would claim to know the
> 'truth'!!


Not everything is possible and even if there's no Truth there are still
truthes.

> "Religion is the opiate of the masses" - I envy those that have a
> profound and unshakeable belief!


It helps to be a fool.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 02:33:54 +1000, "DRS" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>John HUDSON <[email protected]> wrote in message
>[email protected]
>
>[...]
>
>> What I'm getting at is that philosophy doesn't require contemporary
>> concepts of integrity to validate it. In its most simplistic form
>> philosophy is but the collection of haphazard, if well-intentioned,
>> unverifiable answers to profound questions that are unanswerable.

>
>I didn't say *all* philosophies lacked integrity, I referred to the specific
>philosophy espouse by DZ in the post to which I replied.


My apologies for the generalisation.

>
>[...]
>
>>> Dead-ends are as useful in philosophy as paths that move us forward.
>>> That we don't know everything does not deny the progress we have
>>> made.


Enlighten in one area that which defines why we are here, and where we
are going when we 'once again' are not here?

>>
>> Our thirst for knowledge is unquenchable; our journey on the path of
>> self-delusion is well-defined. We are no nearer the truth, if there is
>> such a thing, than we were when we set out on our journey of
>> discovery.

>
>I don't believe that for a moment. We have made progress, we do know more
>than we did and we have every reason to believe we'll keep learning.


That which we know is tangible, which is a relatively simple concept.
It is the intangible that is the mystery that besets us all.

>
>> Stop asking the questions, there are no answers.

>
>Bulshit. There are answers. We know because we've found lots of them and
>we have every reson to believe we'l find more.


That is almost in unison with the established religions! We know
nothing other than that which we can see, touch or smell! ;o)

>
>> Which means that
>> anything is possible and that only a charlatan would claim to know the
>> 'truth'!!

>
>Not everything is possible and even if there's no Truth there are still
>truthes.


The "truthes" are those which we have established from our
'discoveries' by sight, touch and smell! They explain nothing about
the profundity of our existence.

>
>> "Religion is the opiate of the masses" - I envy those that have a
>> profound and unshakeable belief!

>
>It helps to be a fool.


Oh that I were such a fool and dwelt in the land of the permanently
sedated!
 
Seth Breidbart wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Christ lives.
> >
> >--
> >Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> >Board-Certified Cardiologist
> >http://www.heartmdphd.com/

>
> Really?


Yes.

> What's his pulse rate?
>


The next time I check His pulse, I'll let you know at that moment.

>
> Or does a "cardiologist" have a really strange meaning for "lives"?
>


You are welcome to visit me for a confirmation on whether or not you are
alive or dead.

>
> Seth
> --
> most people are dumb as bricks; some people are dumber than that. -- Lyle


Sounds like an appropriate sig for you.

Would suggest you read:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp


--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
John HUDSON <[email protected]> wrote in message
[email protected]
> On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 02:33:54 +1000, "DRS" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> John HUDSON <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> [email protected]


[...]

>>>> Dead-ends are as useful in philosophy as paths that move us
>>>> forward. That we don't know everything does not deny the progress
>>>> we have made.

>
> Enlighten in one area that which defines why we are here, and where we
> are going when we 'once again' are not here?


Jesus wept, you want me to write books as well. There is no single "why" as
to our existence. Nor does there need to be, certainly not in the sense of
there being a Creator. We are for a time and then we are not. Deal.

[...]

>> I don't believe that for a moment. We have made progress, we do
>> know more than we did and we have every reason to believe we'll keep
>> learning.

>
> That which we know is tangible, which is a relatively simple concept.
> It is the intangible that is the mystery that besets us all.


We're getting there too.

>>> Stop asking the questions, there are no answers.

>>
>> Bulshit. There are answers. We know because we've found lots of
>> them and we have every reson to believe we'l find more.

>
> That is almost in unison with the established religions! We know
> nothing other than that which we can see, touch or smell! ;o)


No, for example we also know what is properly inferred. Our knowledge, for
example, of the micro world cannot be directly based on what our senses tell
us because they cannot operate at that level yet we've managed to learn an
awful lot about it.

[...]

>> Not everything is possible and even if there's no Truth there are
>> still truthes.

>
> The "truthes" are those which we have established from our
> 'discoveries' by sight, touch and smell! They explain nothing about
> the profundity of our existence.


Not so (see above). And what makes our existence profound? In one sense
it's just a byproduct of the laws of the universe.

BTW, do you lift weights at all?

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD <[email protected]> wrote in message
[email protected]
> Seth Breidbart wrote:


[...]

>> Or does a "cardiologist" have a really strange meaning for "lives"?

>
> You are welcome to visit me for a confirmation on whether or not you
> are alive or dead.


Anyone who thinks Christ is alive is clearly unqualified to make that
determination.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
John HUDSON wrote:

> <snip>Our thirst for knowledge is unquenchable; our journey on the path of
> self-delusion is well-defined. We are no nearer the truth, if there is
> such a thing, than we were when we set out on our journey of
> discovery.
>
> Stop asking the questions, there are no answers. Which means that
> anything is possible and that only a charlatan would claim to know the
> 'truth'!!
>


What about someone who says He is the Truth.

>
> "Religion is the opiate of the masses" - I envy those that have a
> profound and unshakeable belief!


Read:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/
 
John HUDSON wrote:

> <snip>
> >> "Religion is the opiate of the masses" - I envy those that have a
> >> profound and unshakeable belief!

> >
> >It helps to be a fool.

>
> Oh that I were such a fool and dwelt in the land of the permanently
> sedated!


You'll be enlightened when you die.

See:

http://www.heartmdphd.com/healer.asp

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/