Scary pictures, for the love of Halloween

[FleshCage]

a lot of females in nature are larger than the males??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism


Wait. I found this while searching for the animals. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/di...ls-themselves/

[Iconoclast]

You folks don't joke do you?

Not only could my post have been interpreted more accurately but now a source this one links to, giving evidence that either gender can statistically (or naturally) have more weight than the other (depending on the species), which is more than what I was saying.

It seems civility does not stop humans from being savages, in their perceptions. If anything it does the opposite.

While we've switched to this topic, I'm following that I respect people for their differences. I don't really value others when I see things that we have in common. In a nature that can be related, I also don't care about the supposedly "statistical" or "psychological" analysis of "this gender is naturally smarter than that gender" or "thinks less about this subject than the other".
I believe in sympathy.

[FleshCage]

Come again? It's apparent you don't joke either.

Are you referring to my post?
If you click on the first link, and you scroll down, you'll notice the portion about humans. Although more specific, I thought it was relevant to the spun off topic of the thread.

The second link, I found to be really weird, and figured someone would get a kick out of it. that one was a joke.

Again, if this is directed towards me, and I'm just throwing this out there, you don't have to be touchy.

[Iconoclast]

Originally Posted by FleshCage

a lot of females in nature are larger than the males??

No, you need to learn to interpret people's posts accurately.

[FleshCage]

Yup. Maybe I do. Maybe I'm just a big fucking flaming retard? Yay! Someone was bound to fucking say it.
Too bad they're just words, and no one can understand the context in which they're being used, unless heard from the person's mouth.

This is ridiculous. I'm out.

[Iconoclast]

Know how the lightning that comes from the sky, strikes down below?
I mean tornadoes were already referred to as "God's judgments", but wouldn't it be awesome, is if the lightning was rainbow-colored?

So that perception was bound by many rainbows , openly expressing itself as a systematic matrix?

[FleshCage]

What about the negative charges that go up? Are they the absence of light since the ones going down are rainbows?

[Reaper man]

Originally Posted by FleshCage

This is ridiculous. I'm out.

Originally Posted by FleshCage

What about the negative charges that go up? Are they the absence of light since the ones going down are rainbows?

wat.

[FleshCage]

Ah, it's silliness.

[Iconoclast]

Yeah well kids I guess that would be what they call a "fucking question", but while we're focused on light, rainbows are no mystery. Through a process named refraction, light energy can be split into its components and even form a rainbow.
Charge is a concept applied to matter in question of which components of light (i.e. red, green, blue) are absorbed or reflected.

We see the colors in an object when they are being reflected, but darker or black objects are warmer than bright or white objects because these components are absorbed so that we do not see them.

But you don't want too many rainbows coming down on you cause uh that would mean somebody up there likes you. Can't have that now can we.