That was a relatively recent invention
Idk man I think the paleolithic predates ancient Egypt.
Most date from the Gravettian period (26,000–21,000 years ago).[1] However, findings are not limited to this period; for example, the Venus of Hohle Fels dates back at least 35,000 years to the Aurignacian era, and the Venus of Monruz dates back about 11,000 years to the Magdalenian, and the Catalhoyuk figurine[2], 8000 years old.
Trying doing some ecstasy/mushrooms/LSD
(It won’t necessarily fix you not having a gf, just to be clear)
Googling “couch fucker” just comes up with some guy named J. D. Vance a bunch. Must be some pornstar for fetishists.
“Animals are something invented by plants to move seeds around. An extremely yang solution to a peculiar problem which they faced.” -Terence McKenna
But he was always sucking on his fags and he paid for them fair and square.
And do you have any idea how high fags are taxed in this day and age?
It’s not like when I was a boy. I was sucking fags left and right without a care in the world about paying for them. Granted pretty often they were the cheaper sort that you got from cruise-boats, tax free.
Pic related, it’s one of those boats for cruising. I’ve also heard them referred to as “fuckboats” but honestly it’s more the tax-free that pulls in people.
To each their own, but I’ve never changed an opinion because of the quantity of people who believe I was wrong.
Somewhat relevant or not:
(still doesn’t affect LLM’s being trained of stolen material by entities who get upset when you share even a mb of their IP illegally, and LLM’s being powerhhungry fuckers, but I believe some of those smaller and more economic models could perhaps be worthwhile, and some NPC LLM set in skyrim shouldn’t need as much training as Gemini trying to be omniscient)
“I’d purposefully avoid talking about gun control”
Found the American.
Gun control works as surely as antibiotics do and people denying it are brainwashed yanks >99% of the time
We’re not even close to the thread max, you’re just desperate to run away.
Because just like all the other kids, your letting your ego control you. Quite manly of you, really. Usually it’s teenage boys who have these tantrums. I genuinely wish you’re at most 25 and not an actual adult, because if you are, you’re gonna have a real tough time with your life. Although I don’t think I need to worry too much about it, since the worst insults you can imagine are “garglebargle” spam and “you’re probably a virgin”. Like what is this, 8th grade? :D
So, no more “lol look at how many paragraphs you’re writing” because I actually like writing, whereas you’re “wasting your time” as you put it.
Doesn’t matter how much you cry, you still say you believe in things which have no scientific support. And that just drives you mad realising how everyone is laughing at you, so you’re *itching" to run from the thread. But you can’t, since your ego won’t let you. :((
Men seem to be the better shooter than women, especially when shooting handguns.
https://gracefulinsights.space/blog/who-shoots-better
Now isn’t that weird? I can just imagine how furiously you’re googling something to find against it, but can’t and I can almost hear the steam whistling in your ears. Too bad, deary, won’t change the facts of life. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Edit oh and just to piss you off a little bit more, exposing your bs
Ah yes, back to pretending like you were never serious at all, even though that also implies you weren’t serious about women being better marksmen, even though you can’t actually admit to that.
Why do you kids never believe me when I say I’ve seen this tantrum you’re having hundreds of times?
Like I said, it’s alright for you to be religious and not understand science. Many people are. And your agreement isn’t needed, as you’re showing everyone. :)
Maybe it’s because you have a hard time reading actual hard science, and need someone to simplify it for you…?
This is seemingly an American woman, so you’ll feel comfortable with her language.
Most shooting instructors, both men and women, will happily tell you women are better shooters than men, followed by anecdotes to support their claim. But is this really true? Since I am a researcher, I do not believe in anecdotal evidence. I want the hard scientific facts. So, I did a little research on this topic sharing here with you what I found
Summarizing the findings of all these studies, I came to the following conclusions: Men seem to be the better shooter than women, especially when shooting handguns.
https://gracefulinsights.space/blog/who-shoots-better
“NUH-UH, THE EARTH IS FLAT!”
Saying stuff doesn’t make it true, hunnybunny, and willfully refusing to accept science shown at you makes you a religious person who will be sorely mocked.
I mean, you are publicly shaming yourself with this tantrum, but on top of that. :)
I’m literally just in the comment section now to post a gif saying something along those lines but you beat me to the comment so I’m just gonna post a gif here
I don’t think you know what the word means, tbh.
You can check my history, dozens of kids there having tantrums exactly like yours, where they can’t talk about what they said earlier in the thread. Start avoiding. Then a little bit of “lol you waste your time writing paragraphs” to let me know how you’re actually disliking this. Again I’m not. :))
I’m getting “tons of enjoyment out of it” or whatever you said a day or two ago.
Sorry girls are better shots and you cant handle that. Its just objectively true.
Sorry, hunny, we’ve been over this. Something you believe but science says isn’t true isn’t “objectively true”, it’s “subjective delusion”, ie religion. (Although organized religion is sort of objective delusion as well.)
I know you don’t even register it when you see science but for the umpteenth time:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7068418/
Pistol and Rifle Performance: Gender and Relative Age Effect Analysis
Conclusions: The main conclusions of the study are: (1) the men’s pistol performance is better than the women’s even though RAE is not associated to the shooting score in any case; (2) men and women performed equally in the general analysis, but their performances were different depending on category and event with no RAE influence.
What’s that sentence?
men’s pistol performance is better
On a scales of 1 to PMS, how annoyed are you…?;>>
I wonder how old you are.
Usually it takes a day or two for you to realise how childish you’re being, just because you felt a bit silly when someone pointed out something you think is true was a myth.
But you’ll get there. Now it’s just a childish compulsion to answer, because you think you’ll get “the last word” ie “win” a thread if you can be the last comment in it, no matter what preschool word-salad you vomit. It doesn’t work that way. You’re just publicly making an idiot of yourself. I’ve seen this literally hundreds if not thousands of times. It always ends the same.
Because I like writing and am not delusional nor super upset (or "butthurt as the kids say.) None of which seem to apply to you. So now you’re just digging your pit deeper and deeper. Enjoy. ;>
Another miss with the preschool insults.
Your aim really doesn’t seem to be as good as you made it out to be.
I can show you my gold marskmen medals from the army though, but again, that wouldn’t mean men nor women are better marksmen. Just that I got gold scores in the army.
As I kinda doubt yours. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
By definition, you are, though.
You said you don’t care there’s no science to prove “girls are better marksmen anyway”, yet when it’s pointed out to you, you get a tantrum. Much like religious people when you point out how ridiculous they are.
I have no need to “let it go”.
I’m on forums because I like it. How did you put it… “it riles people up and gives me a ton of joy.”*
My mom is also dead btw. Dad went last year grandma and mom this year. So idk, since you’re religious you’re probably gonna feel all bad about making jokes about dead people.
I find it hilarious that I can quote you back at you, while all you can do is spam nonsense. It’s not like anyone’s going to notice you’re desperately avoiding mentioning why you’re even in the thread to begin with. Can’t mention that you said “women are better markmen anyway”, especially not with how the votes stand on those.
You keep getting madder. I just enjoy writing. ;>
It most definitely can. While obviously recreational use is a bit different than having MDMA/psilocybin/LSD-therapy (or ketamine, which is slightly more acceptable for some reason, but works in a different fashion psychoactively so not relevant here).
Lol any other drug propaganda you heard in preschool you wish to share? I’ve done every single drug you can think of, never addicted to anything except maybe weed a bit (and when I was younger also cigarettes and caffeine), and I’ve never felt anything even close as powerful as when you properly get infatuated. Because that is honestly a very strong cocktail of hormones and the difference between hormones and neurotransmitters is quite small, some acting as both.
Also incorrect. Was you first time tasting coffee the strongest caffeine rush you’ve had, or was it a bit later when you’d got used to it and could binge? Same with alcohol. Except that with serotonergic substances, you don’t do that.
One single use can alleviate severely depression on terminally ill patients for months. Literally. That’s not those people being high or having some false sense of happiness.
If you want me to get more objective about how it works and why I suggest it to OP, then here. Think of your emotional memory being associative memory, like smells are. You can probably remember what your first gf/bf smelled like, at least vaguely, but if you actually had the taste in front of your nose, it would unlock just tons of visceral memories. Now you had those memories even before having the scent in your nose, but they were sort of “locked” behind the associated trigger. It’s not about what is a trigger and what is not, but the general associative nature of it. When you do a serotonergic substance for a sufficient dose, it floods your head with all sorts of those triggers, but the ones that have to do with serotonin, ie good feelings of unity etc orrr on the flipside high anxiety (that’s why MDMA with a therapist is preferred to shrooms by yourself, so it actually goes the pleasant route and you don’t get a serotonin induced panic response, ie a “bad trip”). And since your brain is flooded, it also unlocks a lot of memories of happy times and contentedness, which in depression just sort of “fade away” because you haven’t felt them in a long time and depression is a feedback loop.
Thats why you need a powerful substance to break the loop.
So unlike psychiatrist have been pushing for like 30 years, serotonin reuptake inhibitors (prozac, cipralex, escitalopram, etc) don’t actually function well, despite there being a little bit of an idea behind it (as in a correctly identified system, serotonin). The problem is that low dose over a long time won’t help, high dose over a short time will. Kinda like setting something on fire. A slightly warm electric battery won’t help no matter how long you keep dry grass on it.
Shit analogy at the end but the theories hold true.
I can find more detailed sources but I’m kinda tired and wrote all that already so leave your questions/doubts under this akd I’ll adress them tomorrow if you can’t find it on this basic wiki which I didn’t read currently I’ve just read a lot over the years and can’t be arsed to try and look for specific references rn
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelic_therapy