God damn fucking hippies
God damn fucking hippies
I know I chat some drivel but Jesus Christ I wanna machine gun my facebook wall
[lvlshot]http://www.laughingbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/eco-vs-ego.jpg[/lvlshot]
BRB eating wimmin nom nom nom
[lvlshot]http://www.laughingbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/eco-vs-ego.jpg[/lvlshot]
BRB eating wimmin nom nom nom
[color=red] . : [/color][size=85] You knows you knows [/size]
Re: God damn fucking hippies
so sharks and mushrooms are equals in the ecosystem?
and in the 'egosystem' hens and little fishes are of higher order than sharks? rofl
also women and whales are equal
and in the 'egosystem' hens and little fishes are of higher order than sharks? rofl
also women and whales are equal
Re: God damn fucking hippies
om nom nomlosCHUNK wrote:nom nom nom
Thick, solid and tight in all the right places.
Re: God damn fucking hippies
Nice spotLawL wrote:om nom nomlosCHUNK wrote:nom nom nom
[lvlshot]http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/c0.82.403.403/p403x403/44569_490701830961756_479090080_n.jpg[/lvlshot]
That's the whole picture, notice how the panda and lion live together in harmony, and like a Whale has a fucking ego ?
I got a headache, nose bleed soon no doubt
[color=red] . : [/color][size=85] You knows you knows [/size]
Re: God damn fucking hippies
surely EGO vs EMO amirite?
Re: God damn fucking hippies
Well, the sharks bit could be true depending on how you look at it. If in terms of genetic complexity, some species of shark may be much less complex than the fish of today. Sharks have been around for about 450 million years. Maybe not the sharks we see today, but it would stand to reason that their DNA may be simpler than more recently evolved species.andyman wrote:so sharks and mushrooms are equals in the ecosystem?
and in the 'egosystem' hens and little fishes are of higher order than sharks? rofl
also women and whales are equal
Just putting an idea out there. NFI what an egosystem is.
Re: God damn fucking hippies
Nah not really you're pretty wrong.
Nothing is "more evolved" than anything else.
But not in like a hippy way or anything. Kinda like how a wizard is never late.
Nothing is "more evolved" than anything else.
But not in like a hippy way or anything. Kinda like how a wizard is never late.
Re: God damn fucking hippies
talking at andy many, psyche911 is right about complexity in dna potentially but that's different than somehting being a "higher order" or w/e
Re: God damn fucking hippies
Pandas and fucking lions, don't you cunts start 
[color=red] . : [/color][size=85] You knows you knows [/size]
Re: God damn fucking hippies
I agree.EtUL wrote:Nothing is "more evolved" than anything else.
Where for instance jelly fish didn't need to evolve for millions of years, mammals *did* to adapt to their environment.
Doesn't mean mammals are somehow "more evolved".
Just means they took longer to get there.
Re: God damn fucking hippies
Good contribution, MKJ 
Re: God damn fucking hippies
'sWhat I'm here for.
-
Don Carlos
- Posts: 17515
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Re: God damn fucking hippies
hahahahahahahafeedback wrote:You can't hug your children with nuclear arms!
Re: God damn fucking hippies
I don't think you get it Chunk...
I interpret that picture as the difference between living in a world where you think everything belongs to you, IE: the EGO as opposed to living in harmony with the world in a functional ecosystem... the EGO side of the pic has nothing to do with evolution and is more about labels and "ownership" or self identity.
I interpret that picture as the difference between living in a world where you think everything belongs to you, IE: the EGO as opposed to living in harmony with the world in a functional ecosystem... the EGO side of the pic has nothing to do with evolution and is more about labels and "ownership" or self identity.
Re: God damn fucking hippies
i dont like where they positioned the pork 
i got trolles
i got trolles
it is about time!
Re: God damn fucking hippies
So it's either a hippy or a dike ?Κracus wrote:I don't think you get it Chunk...
I interpret that picture as the difference between living in a world where you think everything belongs to you, IE: the EGO as opposed to living in harmony with the world in a functional ecosystem... the EGO side of the pic has nothing to do with evolution and is more about labels and "ownership" or self identity.
Not sure when cows owned a chicken either, try explaining that to the Mushroom too
[color=red] . : [/color][size=85] You knows you knows [/size]
Re: God damn fucking hippies
Indeed, because usually mushrooms are open to suggestion.
Re: God damn fucking hippies
It has nothing to do with cows owning chickens.
Re: God damn fucking hippies
So the pyramid scheme is for fun ?
Pandas and lions yo
Pandas and lions yo
Last edited by losCHUNK on Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[color=red] . : [/color][size=85] You knows you knows [/size]
Re: God damn fucking hippies
I think this is all an elaborate way of equating some people's wives with large ocean going mammals.
[size=85][color=#0080BF]io chiamo pinguini![/color][/size]
Re: God damn fucking hippies
e.g.: YourGrandPa
Re: God damn fucking hippies
losCHUNK wrote:So the pyramid scheme is for fun ?
Pandas and lions yo
It's just a way of representing how a "man" which is to say a human sees everything else below him as belonging to him. The individuals things below don't own each other.
That isn't to say however that we see ourselves as literally owning these things but rather by using labels to associate with they become a part of you. Like say you like Coca Cola and you like that brand. You might get upset if someone insults coke and that's because someone is insulting a label you've associated yourself with, thus they're attacking your self identity when poking fun at coke.
In that way, that pic is saying those things below represent the man above and that is a classical definition of the ego.