well, are we talking about languages or origins of languages?

holy cow! spider goat

and i thought spider-pig was bad enough...




===============================================

thank you for your comment on this Jaan
i wrote this post exactly to provoke thought into the subject

there is no question that parenting is a major factor in the lives of children...as well as the environment they are placed in.

media is a platform for a lot of agendas, and media is already the environment that kids are in today. and the fact is, it is already a global phenomenon and electronic media grows exponentially every second.
this can highly affect kids thru exposure to different "ideals". it is also a fact that advertising and marketing do use sexualized and violent images as well as fantasy/too-good-to-be-true ideas to sell a commodity or service.

the question now:
is media a good experience or an adverse experience for kids?
again this will boil down to both external dialogue and internal dialogue of the child/adolescent/teen, as well as the body's reaction to the media images presented.
On one hand, it exposes them to a variety of different cultures, learnings and ways of life.
On the other hand, it can promote the wrong ideas and fanaticism and rebelliousness.
it has been my observation that "bad eggs" and "black sheeps" emerge because of children's internal feelings of un-reciprocated or under-reciprocated love from parents, regardless what the parents do or don't.
Media becomes a sort of gratifying experience to lessen the pain of "feeling not loved enough"...just like substance ab/use and sexual promiscuity.

to bring it back to topic, we all know that kids at a certain age do pass thru stages of rebelliousness and will actively seek for like-minded individuals and ideals to feed and justify that feeling of rebellion. the developing brain, constantly exposed to certain images and ideals put forth by media will cause permanent fixations into adulthood without proper intervention. and eventually, it could become a patterned behavior passed down from parent to child.

the question now:
what if the idea of epigenetics will eventually be used as a means to that end?

on one hand, it seems to be an emerging "devil-made-me-do-it" reason for choosing one thing over another, therefore lessening personal accountability for choices made.
on the other hand, it can supposedly assist in understanding and treating or preventing certain "unwanted" predispositions.

================

use and development of GM products and preservatives will definitely affect us all. but then again, it has already become a necessity to sustain global needs and wants.

are mushroom rings only found in the british isles?

i don't know of any other culture linking the mythic creatures and magic with mushroom rings.

mushrooms, yes, but not mushroom rings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiR5UGAdlMA

some men secretly really want Jessica Rabbit ^^

Spanish
Portugese
Dutch
Nordic (norwegian, swedish, danish, finnish)
Russian
Greek
Polish

yes, privately owned restrooms are sometimes locked especially when they are located outdoors because it can be abused by the general public. these are the usually the companies that have the general public as their customers. and usually also by the stores that operate 24/7.

you never know what kind of people can walk into an individual stall and what things can do...throw whatever junk into the toilet, use up the water supply of the store, etc...

=========

i dunno about starbucks having a security code for their restroom tho...i know it is usually indoors, at the very opposite end of the entrance, and it's not as if just anybody will be walking into their stores anyways...

heck, did the barista even know if the officer would be ordering anything AFTER she had gone to the restroom? the "bathroom experience" might make her want to have a "coffee experience" after...lol

same here. but gas station restrooms are usually outdoor from the shop, and i can understand why they would lock it.

so it seems more like an isolated incident by an employee that did not give consideration to a police officer (for whatever reason she may have had)...

i guess Starbucks can't fire the employee since she could always claim it is part of company policy...i doubt they would change that policy in writing either since that could cause a problem with the general public using their restrooms...

company image training should probably go hand in hand with their barista customer service training...

is this just an issue with the US?

i have entered Starbucks a few times and politely requested to use their restrooms before, without ordering anything. They don't have their restrooms locked here. of course, i dont do it all the time tho...that wouldn't be right...but the couple of times that i have, they never made a fuss out of it. they even let me park in their parking space for that few minutes...

funny you should mention Compton...

i literally just finished watching this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1omPNEVOIaM


i will take a looksee at the link you posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2DgwPG7mAA

Public Morals

Edward Burns looks real good on this...

LC learns series



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-UXVZt_FNA&spfreload=10

heehee....oh the things you do not know about people

yes, it depends on both external interactions as well as internal dialogue. not only in the familial upbringing, but also in peer group interactions.
i didn't follow my upbringing(hence i am the "bad egg" ), and as far removed from it that i am, i am still very much affected by it.

http://visboo.com/facts-y%D0%BEu-w%D0%BEnt-%D0%B2%D0%B5li%D0%B5v%D0%B5.html

58 facts

The story of two elderly people

This is the story of two elderly people living in a Florida mobile home park. He was a widower and she a widow. They had known one another for a number of years.

Now, one evening there was a community supper in the big activity center. These two were at the same table, across from one another. As the meal went on, he made a few admiring glances at her and finally gathered up his courage to ask her, "Will
you marry me?" After about six seconds of' careful consideration,' she answered. "Yes, Yes, I will." The meal ended and with a few more pleasant exchanges, they went to their respective places.

Next morning, he was troubled. Did she say' yes' or did she say' no'? He couldn't remember. Try as he would, he just could not recall. Not even a faint memory. With trepidation, he went to the telephone and called her. First, he explained to her that he didn't remember as well as he used to. Then he reviewed the lovely evening past.

As he gained a little more courage, he then inquired of her, "When I asked if you would marry me, did you say' Yes' or did you say' No'?" He was delighted to hear her say, "Why, I said,' Yes, yes I will' and I meant it with all my heart." Then she continued, "And I am so glad that you called, because I couldn't remember who had asked me."

They are prejudicing the case. Im surprised they allow it.

First of all...thank you so, so much for your comment and observation, PacStar.

One of the core studies cited states that the research is ongoing, so it is actually a prospective study covering a wide range of backgrounds.

The way i read it and the way it was presented, it did not aim to determine or predict outcome. It's purpose is to find an objective basis as to why certain people are predisposed to certain conditions compared to others, such that two concepts are presented...

1) undesired effects can be prevented thru specific intervention during specified times of highest neural and psychological development (executive function and neurophysiology) in children up to their teens.
2) presentation of traits (whether to the negative or the positive) are determined not only by psychic development, but thru activation of specific genetic sequences.

It basically says that humans are social creatures as well as biological ones and being such, can adapt to change, thru both, psyche and genetics. One as a process of choice and the other as a process of evolution.

The study itself does not propose this, but many do lobby the premise that sexual orientation is not a function of choice, but rather has a genetic reason. It has also been proposed that a criminal mind is not solely a function of psychologic reasoning but rather of arbitrary neural connections and biologic drives.

Since there is always a great divide between what constitutes as "moral" or "religion-based choices", vs what is "scientific fact" of life, the premise of the post is one that removes moral boundaries and leaves all reasoning to science. Hence, the mention of epigenetics as the reasoning and justification behind people's primary mental processes.

Science vs philosophy.