IRC highlights!

wheat> 69 is called 69 because the individual digits represent bodies, where the bulky part of the body where sex parts are is the o and the dingle up top is the mouth.
<wheat> thanks for listening.

Wait. I contest that. The dingle parts are the dingle parts and the bulky parts are the heads ala stick figures.

How can we communicate if we can't agree on these basic principles?

Wait. I contest that. The dingle parts are the dingle parts and the bulky parts are the heads ala stick figures.

That's what I thought. But hey, Wheat's the expert here.

What a silly thing to argue about. Let's all be mature and agree to disagree.

SpoilerShow

By opening this spoiler, you have been TRICKED!

Tricked into seeing the TRUTH hidden from you by THE MAN.

He wants you to believe that people are just ORBS OF GENITALIA. But even cavemen* knew otherwise.

To make this easier on everyone I will play out this conversation with my Wheat-body-pillow. I don’t have any Wheat to fill it with, however, so instead I have filled it with straw.

Wheat: “The orbs in the 6 and 9 represent the area of the human body with the greatest amount of mass.”

Me: “You can’t just arbitrarily draw mass lines! Why not say the whole body is the bulky part? We have to base this in reality.

Look at this woman!



Her center of mass is at the pelvis! Right at all the good bits you’d want to get to. If we’re going by mass distribution then the connection between the dingly and the bulky is where the action's at.”

Wheat: “That makes it even less likely that the 'o' is the head then. “

Me: “I disagree, but that's not critical because mass is not what's important here. What else did you notice about that woman?”

Wheat: “She was not a bird.”

Me: “Her face. Human brains are wired to look at faces. They captivate our attention because they convey the vast majority of social cues that our ancestors HAD to understand in order to even get their six to the other’s 9.”

Wheat: “That is foolish. The art of sexy instructions requires emphasis on the genitals. Ancient fertility art is full of bulbous pleasure spheres.”

Me: “The sixty-nine is more than just a set of instructions. It’s a representation of two people. Even fertility symbols never reduced the face to a sliver. When people are drawn, the head is emphasized – often overemphasized. There is no ancient stick figure where the body is the circle and the head is minuscule**"

Wheat: "I concede your point and see no further recourse. I shall mend my ways."

Me: "Thank you lets all be friends."

*okay that maybe that one was drawn by a Native American in a cave and not technically a caveman.

**with the exception of the Lascax Birdman, one of the most ancient stickfigures ever discovered – and even that one takes the ‘sexytimes at the juncture’ route.”

oooooooooo

how would it even make sense as the numeric dingle parts corresponding to human dingle parts?? Not every 69 involves 2 partners with dinglers! it would be a 6o or o9 in some cases, or even a oo!

"Dingle parts" includes legs! In your version, everyone's making out in a wheelchair.

And about that alluring frogman you tossed up there (without a NSFW tag I might add!) You're right that it doesn't look human but the MOMENT those legs become a solid line we are dealing with a stick-figure, and in stick figures the circle is the head!

Modern stick figures first gained popularity between the 1964 and 1972 summer Olympics.

You know what happened between 1964 and 1972? 1969

You must be registered to view this content.

Wheat, you sexual beast, you have fallen into my trap!

Despite your knowledge of geologic erogenous zones, you have giftwrapped and delivered the exact evidence needed to prove that the 6 and 9's are indeed stick figure positions and you have carelessly discarded the one weapon you held for your cause.

For you see, there was a fundamental flaw in my proclamation that the circles were the heads and the dangly bits were the legs:

6 legs do not bend that way 9

However, in your defense of the circle-torso theorem you stated:

the lower half of at least one person is often bendy or curled so as to give space

In order to give that space, the legs must bend back towards the person which reveals that the furthest most point of the "6" or "9" is not the base of the body, but the bent KNEES of an enraptured lover.

In your interpretation of 69 the line of the "head" would be reaching for the succulent knees of their partner. While I do hate to disappoint, some cursory research reveals that knees, while enticing, are not the face bound goal of our position.

But what about the proof of the "circle-parts-are-heads" theory? I direct you to the very evidence you just presented:

SpoilerShow

No, you are not.

In your own representation, where is the mouth?

Now...where does that line up in our contentious number?

69

It lines up with the juncture of the base of the circle and the start of the dangle bit.

And what could be there I wonder? We have seen this before. Humanity has seen this before.

The Lascaux Birdman

A 17,000 year old painting of a man with an EAGLE'S HEAD and PROMINENT JUNK protruding from the juncture of circle and line.

In number "69", the circle parts are the head and the dingly parts are the bent legs, with the junk just at the base of the circle.

deathnote.gif

it's actually neither of those and both the 6 and the 9 are yo-yos. a simple, innocent, non-sexual metaphor that you have forever sullied with your talk of ancient heads and dingle-dongles

You must be registered to view this content.

I agree.

You must be registered to view this content.

You must be registered to view this content.

Science chat with Sanzh Schaz and Sfou:

SpoilerShow

<schazer> so out of curiosity Sanzh
<schazer> what kind of thing are you trying to lay a claim on exactly
<schazer> is it a meme
<schazer> are you trying to patent a meme
<TheBlueAvenger> You should patent a meme.
<sfou> glorious
<sfou> just slap a 2 million dollar lawsuit on anyone who posts a misspelled lolcat
<schazer> parody is a thing though
<Sanzh> "A method of increasing yield of active protein during translation of a protein from a source organism in a heterologous host by adjusting translation kinetics of mRNA encoding the protein"
<schazer> fuck ok lemme uh
<TheBlueAvenger> ...wow.
<Sanzh> lol
<schazer> go get coffee so I cna read that without my eyeballs sliding off it
<TheBlueAvenger> Like,
<Sanzh> ha ha welcome to my life
<Sanzh> at least I'm using my degree
<TheBlueAvenger> I know what those words mean individually
<TheBlueAvenger> but all together?
* TheBlueAvenger shakes her head grimly
<schazer> what is "active protein"
<schazer> is that like, enzymes, or stuff that does shit rather than being structural ,or
<Sanzh> it's like activated almonds
<schazer> lmao
<schazer> so best as I understand this
<Sanzh> https://www.google.com/patents/US20130149699
<schazer> this is micro-viagra for mRNA
<Sanzh> here's the application
<schazer> that makes it get jiggier with the ribosomes
<Sanzh> i think so
<Sanzh> it's made by the guy who discovered RNA interference
<schazer> so you get more activated almonds out of your amino acid soup
<Sanzh> i think it's like that, yeah
<schazer> is the viagra an actual chemical, or a training regime, or some kind of prayer
<sfou> you missed the part about hetrologous hosts
<sfou> and translation kinetics
<schazer> "translation kinetics" is to my understanding, the physical properties of the molecules that are involved in the translation process
<sfou> so like
<Sanzh> i'll be honest schazer
<Sanzh> i have no fuckin' idea
<sfou> throw the protein harder at the thing and it will eat more protein
<sfou> it's basically like a nourishment bullet
<schazer> wherein translation is where you feed a strand of mRNA (butt or face) through a ribosome (photocopier) which uses those instructions to join up a specific chain of amino acids (2 dimensional rendition of butt or face) which then becomes folded into a protein (paper airplane)
<sfou> a device to fire high-velocity nourishment bullets
<sfou> the hunger-sniper
<schazer> this is my high quality science metaphor
<schazer> I'm laying a claim on this shit do not steal
<schazer> so translation kinetics is like, maybe, in this case, a stool
<schazer> so it's easier to get on and off the photocopier safely
<sfou> wait
<sfou> doesn't it just mean that you slam your face or butt harder at the photocopier
<sfou> or like, just adjust the speed and angle
<schazer> no, because that'll damage the mRNA
<schazer> I really think this is some kind of stepladder he's invented
<schazer> or maybe handrails to hold onto
<sfou> like gently rub your buttcheeks against the glass without squishing them so that you get a good 3D image rather than an inferior squished copy
<schazer> I dunno, I think part of the charm of photocopying your face/butt is to get the squished look
<schazer> like if you wanted an accurate rendition you should just take a photo
<sfou> but then you wouldn't need the handles you could just sit on the thing
<sfou> and there's no need for a patent
<schazer> no, this is about making the copying process easier
<schazer> it's already possible, but we've invented a thing to make it more efficient
<sfou> ahh! i get ya.
<schazer> so, a stepladder/stool so you can get on and off the photocopier easier
<schazer> so you can hit the controls to actually print it properly
<sfou> beautiful
<schazer> Sanzh how many standard amino acids out of 20 do you give my explanation
<sfou> brb
<schazer> oh ok! I just looked up what heterologous hosts are
<schazer> they are cells that are producing a mRNA sequence->amino acid sequence->protein that it normally wouldn't
<schazer> so someone's genetically engineered the thing so it has this "foreign" DNA in it
<schazer> a fantastic example is E. coli producing insulin
<Sanzh> i'm gonna go grab dinner
<Sanzh> see you guys later :>
<schazer> Sanzh no
<schazer> wait
<schazer> tell me how good my science is
<Sanzh> iunno
<schazer> aw
<Sanzh> i'd say like maybe an aspartic acid out of 20
<schazer> woooooooo
← Sanzh has quit (Quit: https://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client)

<schazer> wherein translation is where you feed a strand of mRNA (butt or face) through a ribosome (photocopier) which uses those instructions to join up a specific chain of amino acids (2 dimensional rendition of butt or face) which then becomes folded into a protein (paper airplane)

Oh my god you have just revolutionized the way I teach translation from now on.

ur welcome

You must be registered to view this content.

The take-away is that "correct object photocopied in the right way" (non-garbled DNA sequence, transcripted/copied into a non-garbage mRNA sequence) when folded correctly, might result in an interesting/cohesive pattern on the wing surface (correctly-"shaped" regions of the protein so it does the thing it was designed to do) when the resulting sheet of paper (polypeptide) is folded into a plane (protein).

A garbage DNA sequence (haphazard ass on xerox), conversely, could still produce a polypeptide (printout), but folding it up just results in a paper airplane that doesn't even look cool and rubs off photocopier ink onto your fingers when you handle it.

You must be registered to view this content.

Well, ribosomes (the cellular machine that, via translation, makes a tangible product out of lines of code) produce a polypeptide according to the mRNA sequence that got fed through them.

The polypeptide is a chain of amino acids, and amino acids are just molecules. Different points in the chain have different dangly bits, different regions that repel or attract and generally restrict the polypeptide from scrunching up however the fuck it pleases.

The specific chemical/atomic/molecular properties of the polypeptide chain (similar properties that cause water and oil to not mix unless you add soap) will dictate how it folds up, kind of like how:

are the exact lines you fold in a sheet of paper to produce a cup which Actually Holds Real Water. Put seven creases in different positions on the paper and you're either going to get something Less Good At Holding Water, something which Can't Hold Water For Shit, or maybe even something That Does Something Really Good That Isn't Holding Water*.

To distort the metaphor somewhat for the sake of scientific clarity, imagine photocopying something 3-dimensional (butt, face, artfully arranged collection of office stationery) then folding along the lines on the resulting 2-dimensional printout. Most of the time, according to your rules (in the photocopier metaphor, artistic license and consistent decisions about what constitutes a "fold line"; in gene expression, chemical/physical properties like activation energy/hydrophilic or -phobic regions), you're just going to get crumpled-up bullshit. Photocopy a cup and you're not going to get a piece of paper that intuitively folds into a cup.


*Obviously, in origami, the order in which you make the creases is just as important - this applies somewhat to proteins too; many "organelles" in the cell (chiefly the golgi bodies, and the rough and smooth endoplasmic reticulums) act as micro-"climates" that make certain amino acids in the chain more or less disposed to repel/attract, or certain regions to end up on the "inside" or "outside" of the resulting molecule.

I am not nearly competent enough in science to be able to comment on this, but I will say that this sort of thing makes me super-glad I joined these forums.

You must be registered to view this content.

Thats certainly a new look for Daisy

<Granola> I assumed mine was an std. instead it's a lizard. learn something new every day

SpoilerShow

The card was Gharials.

You must be registered to view this content.

<DragonFogel> Bob, am I destroying your grasp of language?
<btp__> You are destroying several things
<btp__> like my tolerance for space consortiums