martycamp

Rank #6005 on Comments
martycamp Avatar Level 316 Comments: Wizard
Offline
Send mail to martycamp Block martycamp Invite martycamp to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 21
Consoles Owned: PS3, GameCube
Video Games Played: Skyrim, Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect
Interests: Reading, Writing, Masturbating, Videogames
Date Signed Up:3/05/2012
Last Login:1/29/2015
Location:Scotland
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#6005
Highest Content Rank:#3580
Highest Comment Rank:#171
Content Thumbs: 4012 total,  4484 ,  472
Comment Thumbs: 17594 total,  19893 ,  2299
Content Level Progress: 3% (3/100)
Level 140 Content: Faptastic → Level 141 Content: Faptastic
Comment Level Progress: 93.3% (933/1000)
Level 316 Comments: Wizard → Level 317 Comments: Wizard
Subscribers:1
Content Views:165952
Times Content Favorited:112 times
Total Comments Made:2373
FJ Points:20337
Favorite Tags: a (2) | pun (2) | tumblr (2)
I'm a genetics student at the University of Glasgow. I like to think I'm funny, and like to laugh, so here I am

latest user's comments

#17 - Awrite ya dobber?  [+] (1 new reply) 03/05/2014 on Relish +1
User avatar #18 - apothicary (03/05/2014) [-]
Fuckin' awryt!
#971 - Thanks man 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
#969 - University of Glasgow  [+] (2 new replies) 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
User avatar #970 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
Ahh okay, well I hope everything goes okay with your degree and what not
User avatar #971 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Thanks man
#967 - Comment deleted 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
#13 - Nah. Everything was all in glass jars inside glass cabinets. 03/05/2014 on Relish 0
#966 - Cancer cells also need to be able to spread around the body, s…  [+] (4 new replies) 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
User avatar #968 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
That's cleared a lot up, thanks. I always feel like the interesting topics we do in biology are brushed over too quickly and lightly and the boring stuff (imo) we spend too long on but I can never be bothered to go out of the way to find it out. Out of interest, where are you studying biology?
User avatar #969 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
University of Glasgow
User avatar #970 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
Ahh okay, well I hope everything goes okay with your degree and what not
User avatar #971 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Thanks man
#965 - Trust me, there's nothing simple about cancer. You're right in…  [+] (5 new replies) 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
User avatar #966 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Cancer cells also need to be able to spread around the body, so they have to "let go" - they lose their ability to adhere to other cells. They also need to be able to survive the shear forces of the blood while they're spreading - lung cells, for example, aren't designed to survive circulating in blood, and cancer cells need to gain this ability. And then, while they're circulating, they need to regain the ability to stick to other cells. Then, when they're at a new location, they do the same thing all over again. It's a continuous gain and loss of mutations. Something I forgot to mention was that they need to lose the signal for apoptosis, which is programmed cell death (or cell suicide). Normally, if cells are dodgy, the kill themselves. Cancers don't. So yes, it's more complicated than just p53 .

As for cancer cells dividing faster than healthy cells, that's a common misconception. They go through the cell cycle at the same speed as other cells. It's just that they're doing it constantly. They don't have the checkpoints to tell them to stop. If you look at cancer cells down a microscope, they're weird shapes and sizes, and that's due to not having the G1 checkpoint. But basically, cancers are considered fast growing because they're always dividing.
User avatar #968 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
That's cleared a lot up, thanks. I always feel like the interesting topics we do in biology are brushed over too quickly and lightly and the boring stuff (imo) we spend too long on but I can never be bothered to go out of the way to find it out. Out of interest, where are you studying biology?
User avatar #969 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
University of Glasgow
User avatar #970 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
Ahh okay, well I hope everything goes okay with your degree and what not
User avatar #971 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Thanks man
#963 - I'm glad I can help. It's useful for me too. It's pretty much … 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
#962 - To be honest, I only know the basics (they only taught the bio…  [+] (8 new replies) 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
User avatar #964 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
That makes more sense, thanks. Also, is cancer as simple as a mutation that stops p53 (or something) so the cell can't check for faults and it just divides a lot? And why do cancers divide faster than healthy cells?
#967 - martycamp has deleted their comment.
User avatar #965 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Trust me, there's nothing simple about cancer. You're right in saying that p53 is involved - almost all cancers have p53 mutated, and I'll come back to that in a bit - but cancers have to have a ridiculous number of mutations in order for it to work. And to add to the complexity, different cancers have (some) different mutations. I don't know if you've heard of BRCA1, but that's a major gene in breast cancers.

Ok, so. Cancer is a disease of the cell cycle. The cell cycle is very tightly controlled. Our cells don't need to divide all the time, so our cells need to be able to know when it's appropriate to divide. And if you know about the cell cycle, you'll know about the different stages. Interphase is the important bit when it comes to cancer, because that's where all the checkpoints are. Interphase is split into, G1 (G for Growth), S (synthesis) and G2 (growth 2). After each of these stages, the cell asks "can I move on to the next stage?" G1 checkpoint basically says "Am I big enough?" S phase is where DNA is replicated, and the S checkpoint asks "did I make any mistakes when I replicated the DNA?" and the G2 checkpoint is "is it still ok to divide?" If these checkpoints aren't there, that's what causes uncontrolled cell growth. But that's only ONE aspect of cancer. The cells also need to activate otherwise inactive sections of DNA - they need to produce their own growth signal, so they keep growing. Healthy cells stop replicating when they bump into other cells - cancer cells lose this self-control, and actively invade other tissues. They also need to be able to trigger angiogenesis - make blood vessels grow towards them. They do this by releasing a growth factor that tricks the body into thinking it should grow a capillary there (cancer cells have a massive oxygen demand. The inside of tumours always have necrosis - dead cells that starved from lack of oxygen).

Continued below (running out of characters )
User avatar #966 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Cancer cells also need to be able to spread around the body, so they have to "let go" - they lose their ability to adhere to other cells. They also need to be able to survive the shear forces of the blood while they're spreading - lung cells, for example, aren't designed to survive circulating in blood, and cancer cells need to gain this ability. And then, while they're circulating, they need to regain the ability to stick to other cells. Then, when they're at a new location, they do the same thing all over again. It's a continuous gain and loss of mutations. Something I forgot to mention was that they need to lose the signal for apoptosis, which is programmed cell death (or cell suicide). Normally, if cells are dodgy, the kill themselves. Cancers don't. So yes, it's more complicated than just p53 .

As for cancer cells dividing faster than healthy cells, that's a common misconception. They go through the cell cycle at the same speed as other cells. It's just that they're doing it constantly. They don't have the checkpoints to tell them to stop. If you look at cancer cells down a microscope, they're weird shapes and sizes, and that's due to not having the G1 checkpoint. But basically, cancers are considered fast growing because they're always dividing.
User avatar #968 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
That's cleared a lot up, thanks. I always feel like the interesting topics we do in biology are brushed over too quickly and lightly and the boring stuff (imo) we spend too long on but I can never be bothered to go out of the way to find it out. Out of interest, where are you studying biology?
User avatar #969 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
University of Glasgow
User avatar #970 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
Ahh okay, well I hope everything goes okay with your degree and what not
User avatar #971 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Thanks man
#960 - Essentially. As you can imagine, it's all very complicated. Ce…  [+] (2 new replies) 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
User avatar #961 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
Wow you're able to explain this much better than my professor, i'm majoring in zoology and have classes in genetics but it's generally very poorly explained to me.
User avatar #963 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
I'm glad I can help. It's useful for me too. It's pretty much revision, and almost essay practice
#957 - *about the genetics of intelligence 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
#956 - Something that's very crucial to understand is that genes make…  [+] (5 new replies) 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
User avatar #958 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
So what you're saying is that people use phenotype as a term to refer to the products of multiple genes carrying out specific functions together and outside influence from the enviroment such as stress, climate and nutrients can influence these products?

Ah i actually first thought that the increase in height was due to tall people being more likely to reproduce. I also remember a book that talked about race and intelligence called The Bell Curve but as expected it's a very controversial book.
User avatar #960 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Essentially. As you can imagine, it's all very complicated. Certain individual genes will have a major effect, but a combination of other genes could cancel it out. For example, there's a gene in fruit flies called eyeless (in case you don't know, genes are often named after their mutant phenotype). If this one gene is mutated, it causes the fly's eyes (haha that rhymes) to be so small as to be essentially not there. Normally, when you want to keep a certain mutation in a population, you use inbreeding. When my lecturer was investigating this, he found that after a number of generations, the flies would begin to reverse the mutant phenotype. If they left it for long enough, they flies would revert back to wild type (i.e. normal eyes) even though they were still mutant in the eyeless gene. This is because genes that gave even a slight increase in sight meant there was a higher chance of mating, so eventually all these sight genes would work together to give a wild type eye. But this fell apart when you outbred. So you'd breed the inbred fly with new flies without the congregation of the other eye genes, so it'd go back to being eyeless. This effect of other genes is called the genetic background, and it's very important on the impact of other genes because, again, everything is in a hugely complicated system.
User avatar #961 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
Wow you're able to explain this much better than my professor, i'm majoring in zoology and have classes in genetics but it's generally very poorly explained to me.
User avatar #963 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
I'm glad I can help. It's useful for me too. It's pretty much revision, and almost essay practice
User avatar #957 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
*about the genetics of intelligence
#955 - There's also epigenetic inheritance, though we don't really ha… 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
#951 - Non-Mendelian inheritance. But that would be too easy, wouldn'…  [+] (8 new replies) 03/05/2014 on /science/ board +1
User avatar #955 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
There's also epigenetic inheritance, though we don't really have a clue how that works right now. In mice, they exposed a male mouse to a smell, then gave it a minor electric jolt. Eventually, it would act scared when it smelled this smell, even if it wasn't jolted. At this point, the male mouse would be mated to a female who hadn't been exposed to the smell, and it was shown that the offspring and grandchildren were scared of the smell, even though they'd never been exposed to it before. Also, the receptor that detected that smell was expressed to a higher degree than in the parents.

Also, it was shown that males who were in the pre-diabetes stage were more likely to have offspring who would be at high risk of diabetes - this was true for several generations.

It's also been suggested that for human fathers who started smoking before they turned 11, their children are at higher risk for obesity, though for humans we can't entirely rule out environmental factors
User avatar #954 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
Those syndromes sound fascinating, pretty amazing how two opposite biological errors can also cause two opposite syndromes and personalities.

Also another thing i find very difficult to understand are phenotypes, since they say phenotypes are developed through both genes and enviroment and can refer to both physical or mental characteristics, but how does that process actually work? How can the enviroment shape your phenotypes, the closest thing i can think off is through the process of epigenetics but aside from that i'm not sure.
#956 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Something that's very crucial to understand is that genes make something (usually proteins, but sometimes RNAs that don't get turned into proteins) and this gene product carries out a function. But it's not the only one doing a job - it's like lots of cogs in a machine. That picture I uploaded is the sex determination pathway in the nematode worm called C. elegans. We use it as a model for development for a bunch of reasons. I'm not expecting you to understand it; it's just there to illustrate how complicated things can be. It's very very rare for it to be "one gene does one thing which causes this phenotype". If you're talking about single cells, then sure. But when you scale up to multicellular, it gets insanely complicated, because cells have to talk to each other as well to say "oh, you're there and you're THAT type of cell, and I'm here so... I must be THIS type of cell". So basically, it's to do with all the other genes involved in the same process too.

The complication when it comes to say height or intelligence is that it's also to do with the environment. I find it helpful to think of it as your genes are your potential. They set the maximum. They say you CAN be 6 foot 5, but if you're malnourished for example, you don't have the nutrients to get that tall, so you're 5 foot 6. That's why today we're generally taller than Victorians - they were malnourished, so couldn't grow as tall.

As for intelligence, there are so many different ways to measure it - you could have a brilliantly logical mind, and can follow and understand processes if they're laid out in front of you, but you aren't creative, and can't think up new ideas to explain things. Is that person smarter or less smart than a person less logical, but more creative? I hope you see the problem. And tbh, a lot of biologists are put off by any public blowback they'll get from their findings - what if intelligence correlates with race? Would that lead to increased racism? So we don't really know a lot
User avatar #958 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
So what you're saying is that people use phenotype as a term to refer to the products of multiple genes carrying out specific functions together and outside influence from the enviroment such as stress, climate and nutrients can influence these products?

Ah i actually first thought that the increase in height was due to tall people being more likely to reproduce. I also remember a book that talked about race and intelligence called The Bell Curve but as expected it's a very controversial book.
User avatar #960 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Essentially. As you can imagine, it's all very complicated. Certain individual genes will have a major effect, but a combination of other genes could cancel it out. For example, there's a gene in fruit flies called eyeless (in case you don't know, genes are often named after their mutant phenotype). If this one gene is mutated, it causes the fly's eyes (haha that rhymes) to be so small as to be essentially not there. Normally, when you want to keep a certain mutation in a population, you use inbreeding. When my lecturer was investigating this, he found that after a number of generations, the flies would begin to reverse the mutant phenotype. If they left it for long enough, they flies would revert back to wild type (i.e. normal eyes) even though they were still mutant in the eyeless gene. This is because genes that gave even a slight increase in sight meant there was a higher chance of mating, so eventually all these sight genes would work together to give a wild type eye. But this fell apart when you outbred. So you'd breed the inbred fly with new flies without the congregation of the other eye genes, so it'd go back to being eyeless. This effect of other genes is called the genetic background, and it's very important on the impact of other genes because, again, everything is in a hugely complicated system.
User avatar #961 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
Wow you're able to explain this much better than my professor, i'm majoring in zoology and have classes in genetics but it's generally very poorly explained to me.
User avatar #963 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
I'm glad I can help. It's useful for me too. It's pretty much revision, and almost essay practice
User avatar #957 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
*about the genetics of intelligence
#949 - Hey guys. Just because I'm bored, and admin is trying to big u…  [+] (24 new replies) 03/05/2014 on /science/ board 0
User avatar #1003 - soundofwinter (03/06/2014) [-]
Are there races of humans i.e. isolated Polynesians which lack common mental diseases found in the western world?
User avatar #1005 - martycamp (03/06/2014) [-]
That's a really hard thing to determine. Not only are true rates of metal disease hard to determine In the west- many people won't come forward either because of the stigma, or because they simply don't know they have one - but it's even harder to determine rates in Eastern populations. There's much less support for even physical health care, never mind mental health care, so we basically don't know.

If you're thinking that recently mental health problems have become more common, consider this - it might be that our diagnoses techniques, combined with a reduction in the stigma compared to, say, 80 years ago, we're just diagnosing more - the rates are the same, but we just know about more of them. This isn't necessarily true, but it seems very likely to me to be the case.
User avatar #1000 - ihatem (03/06/2014) [-]
How abundant is the discussion/acceptance of abiogenesis in the biology community?
User avatar #1004 - martycamp (03/06/2014) [-]
To be honest, in my course they haven't really told us much about the origins of life, the primary reason for which is that we simply don't have a theory can definitively been proven - or disproven, for that matter. What information we have suggests that it's possible that amino acids can form naturally (through electrical discharge). It's also been shown that lipids, in solution, can form spontaneous structures. However, even if we have a membrane with amino acids inside, that doesn't go to having a living cell - the amino acids aren't arranged into proteins, and there's no DNA or RNA to code for proteins. There's also no mechanism to do anything with the DNA or RNA were it there. And there's nothing to bring nutrients from outside the cell to the inside. Right now, we're pretty clueless about how life began, and I haven't seen a theory that satisfies me. However, you'll find that there are still plenty of people out there really attached to their particular theory despite any holes.

Basically, to answer your question, abiogenesis hasn't been ruled out, which is as much as can be said for any theory at the moment.
User avatar #959 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
How do genes get 'switched on' or 'off'? I'm doing A-level biology, and that's the extent they've told us as to why not all the 30,000 (again what they said) genes code for things and I feel like if I understood roughly how that happens it'd make more sense
User avatar #962 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
To be honest, I only know the basics (they only taught the biochemists the nitty-gritty of it) but if I've picked up on it right main method is methylation.

Methylation, is where a methyl group is added to the cysteine and/or adenine bases. This stops gene expression by physically stopping proteins like transcription factors binding to the DNA. And conversely, it can allow other proteins to bind to the DNA, but these proteins essentially wind the DNA up tightly to prevent the genes in that stretch from being expressed.
User avatar #964 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
That makes more sense, thanks. Also, is cancer as simple as a mutation that stops p53 (or something) so the cell can't check for faults and it just divides a lot? And why do cancers divide faster than healthy cells?
#967 - martycamp has deleted their comment.
User avatar #965 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Trust me, there's nothing simple about cancer. You're right in saying that p53 is involved - almost all cancers have p53 mutated, and I'll come back to that in a bit - but cancers have to have a ridiculous number of mutations in order for it to work. And to add to the complexity, different cancers have (some) different mutations. I don't know if you've heard of BRCA1, but that's a major gene in breast cancers.

Ok, so. Cancer is a disease of the cell cycle. The cell cycle is very tightly controlled. Our cells don't need to divide all the time, so our cells need to be able to know when it's appropriate to divide. And if you know about the cell cycle, you'll know about the different stages. Interphase is the important bit when it comes to cancer, because that's where all the checkpoints are. Interphase is split into, G1 (G for Growth), S (synthesis) and G2 (growth 2). After each of these stages, the cell asks "can I move on to the next stage?" G1 checkpoint basically says "Am I big enough?" S phase is where DNA is replicated, and the S checkpoint asks "did I make any mistakes when I replicated the DNA?" and the G2 checkpoint is "is it still ok to divide?" If these checkpoints aren't there, that's what causes uncontrolled cell growth. But that's only ONE aspect of cancer. The cells also need to activate otherwise inactive sections of DNA - they need to produce their own growth signal, so they keep growing. Healthy cells stop replicating when they bump into other cells - cancer cells lose this self-control, and actively invade other tissues. They also need to be able to trigger angiogenesis - make blood vessels grow towards them. They do this by releasing a growth factor that tricks the body into thinking it should grow a capillary there (cancer cells have a massive oxygen demand. The inside of tumours always have necrosis - dead cells that starved from lack of oxygen).

Continued below (running out of characters )
User avatar #966 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Cancer cells also need to be able to spread around the body, so they have to "let go" - they lose their ability to adhere to other cells. They also need to be able to survive the shear forces of the blood while they're spreading - lung cells, for example, aren't designed to survive circulating in blood, and cancer cells need to gain this ability. And then, while they're circulating, they need to regain the ability to stick to other cells. Then, when they're at a new location, they do the same thing all over again. It's a continuous gain and loss of mutations. Something I forgot to mention was that they need to lose the signal for apoptosis, which is programmed cell death (or cell suicide). Normally, if cells are dodgy, the kill themselves. Cancers don't. So yes, it's more complicated than just p53 .

As for cancer cells dividing faster than healthy cells, that's a common misconception. They go through the cell cycle at the same speed as other cells. It's just that they're doing it constantly. They don't have the checkpoints to tell them to stop. If you look at cancer cells down a microscope, they're weird shapes and sizes, and that's due to not having the G1 checkpoint. But basically, cancers are considered fast growing because they're always dividing.
User avatar #968 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
That's cleared a lot up, thanks. I always feel like the interesting topics we do in biology are brushed over too quickly and lightly and the boring stuff (imo) we spend too long on but I can never be bothered to go out of the way to find it out. Out of interest, where are you studying biology?
User avatar #969 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
University of Glasgow
User avatar #970 - moolfle (03/05/2014) [-]
Ahh okay, well I hope everything goes okay with your degree and what not
User avatar #971 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Thanks man
User avatar #950 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
According to Mendel’s law phenotypical characteristics would be determined by pair of factors (alleles) that separate independently in gametes. What are the main types of inheritances that are exceptions to Mendel’s rules?
User avatar #951 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Non-Mendelian inheritance. But that would be too easy, wouldn't it?

A famous example is the passing on of mitochondria. Mitochondria - the parts of the cell that make energy - have their own DNA. There's barely any - I THINK it's about 37 genes. When a sperm fuses with an egg, only the head of the sperm, containing the paternal DNA goes into the cell. This fusion is called a zygote. The zygote contains only mitochondrial DNA (mDNA) from the mother and, as such, there's only one copy of each gene. If you've heard in the news recently, they've been talking about 3 person IVF. It's when the DNA is taken from two parents and inserted into an unrelated woman's egg, and thus gains her mitochondria (and mDNA). This is a way for parents to have children that are genetically theirs, but stop the mother from passing on a mitochondrial disease.

There's also a process called imprinting. Basically, a section of either a maternal or a paternal chromosome is turned off by a process called DNA methylation. I'm not going to go into how it works, but it basically prevents the genes on that part of the chromosome from being expressed, so the child only uses the gene from the other parent. There are diseases associated with this.

If a section on chromosome 15 is deleted on the paternal chromosome, while the maternal section is silenced, it causes something called "Prader-Willi syndrome". But if the opposite is true - i.e. the paternal chromosome is imprinted, and the maternal section has a deletion - it causes something called "Angelman Syndrome".
The two are separate because they cause different symptoms - while both cause a level of mental retardation, Prader-Willi causes the individual to be chronically hunger, resulting in obesity. Angelman is the opposite, in that they generally don't eat a lot. Another opposite is their mood - Prader-Willi individuals seem depressed and avoid people, while Angelman individuals seem very happy and interact with people a lot.
User avatar #955 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
There's also epigenetic inheritance, though we don't really have a clue how that works right now. In mice, they exposed a male mouse to a smell, then gave it a minor electric jolt. Eventually, it would act scared when it smelled this smell, even if it wasn't jolted. At this point, the male mouse would be mated to a female who hadn't been exposed to the smell, and it was shown that the offspring and grandchildren were scared of the smell, even though they'd never been exposed to it before. Also, the receptor that detected that smell was expressed to a higher degree than in the parents.

Also, it was shown that males who were in the pre-diabetes stage were more likely to have offspring who would be at high risk of diabetes - this was true for several generations.

It's also been suggested that for human fathers who started smoking before they turned 11, their children are at higher risk for obesity, though for humans we can't entirely rule out environmental factors
User avatar #954 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
Those syndromes sound fascinating, pretty amazing how two opposite biological errors can also cause two opposite syndromes and personalities.

Also another thing i find very difficult to understand are phenotypes, since they say phenotypes are developed through both genes and enviroment and can refer to both physical or mental characteristics, but how does that process actually work? How can the enviroment shape your phenotypes, the closest thing i can think off is through the process of epigenetics but aside from that i'm not sure.
#956 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Something that's very crucial to understand is that genes make something (usually proteins, but sometimes RNAs that don't get turned into proteins) and this gene product carries out a function. But it's not the only one doing a job - it's like lots of cogs in a machine. That picture I uploaded is the sex determination pathway in the nematode worm called C. elegans. We use it as a model for development for a bunch of reasons. I'm not expecting you to understand it; it's just there to illustrate how complicated things can be. It's very very rare for it to be "one gene does one thing which causes this phenotype". If you're talking about single cells, then sure. But when you scale up to multicellular, it gets insanely complicated, because cells have to talk to each other as well to say "oh, you're there and you're THAT type of cell, and I'm here so... I must be THIS type of cell". So basically, it's to do with all the other genes involved in the same process too.

The complication when it comes to say height or intelligence is that it's also to do with the environment. I find it helpful to think of it as your genes are your potential. They set the maximum. They say you CAN be 6 foot 5, but if you're malnourished for example, you don't have the nutrients to get that tall, so you're 5 foot 6. That's why today we're generally taller than Victorians - they were malnourished, so couldn't grow as tall.

As for intelligence, there are so many different ways to measure it - you could have a brilliantly logical mind, and can follow and understand processes if they're laid out in front of you, but you aren't creative, and can't think up new ideas to explain things. Is that person smarter or less smart than a person less logical, but more creative? I hope you see the problem. And tbh, a lot of biologists are put off by any public blowback they'll get from their findings - what if intelligence correlates with race? Would that lead to increased racism? So we don't really know a lot
User avatar #958 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
So what you're saying is that people use phenotype as a term to refer to the products of multiple genes carrying out specific functions together and outside influence from the enviroment such as stress, climate and nutrients can influence these products?

Ah i actually first thought that the increase in height was due to tall people being more likely to reproduce. I also remember a book that talked about race and intelligence called The Bell Curve but as expected it's a very controversial book.
User avatar #960 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Essentially. As you can imagine, it's all very complicated. Certain individual genes will have a major effect, but a combination of other genes could cancel it out. For example, there's a gene in fruit flies called eyeless (in case you don't know, genes are often named after their mutant phenotype). If this one gene is mutated, it causes the fly's eyes (haha that rhymes) to be so small as to be essentially not there. Normally, when you want to keep a certain mutation in a population, you use inbreeding. When my lecturer was investigating this, he found that after a number of generations, the flies would begin to reverse the mutant phenotype. If they left it for long enough, they flies would revert back to wild type (i.e. normal eyes) even though they were still mutant in the eyeless gene. This is because genes that gave even a slight increase in sight meant there was a higher chance of mating, so eventually all these sight genes would work together to give a wild type eye. But this fell apart when you outbred. So you'd breed the inbred fly with new flies without the congregation of the other eye genes, so it'd go back to being eyeless. This effect of other genes is called the genetic background, and it's very important on the impact of other genes because, again, everything is in a hugely complicated system.
User avatar #961 - kanadetenshi (03/05/2014) [-]
Wow you're able to explain this much better than my professor, i'm majoring in zoology and have classes in genetics but it's generally very poorly explained to me.
User avatar #963 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
I'm glad I can help. It's useful for me too. It's pretty much revision, and almost essay practice
User avatar #957 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
*about the genetics of intelligence
#6 - That's nothing. At the University of Glasgow, where I'm a stud…  [+] (158 new replies) 03/05/2014 on Relish +375
#209 - arcticastronaut (03/06/2014) [-]
#208 - anonymous (03/06/2014) [-]
Neat.
User avatar #205 - CubanPete (03/06/2014) [-]
That museum freaks me the fuck out. I've gone in once out of curiosity and just walked straight back out again.

Also: Greetings fellow Glasgow student!
User avatar #206 - martycamp (03/06/2014) [-]
I wasn't expecting so many Glasgow students to be on FJ
#203 - anonymous (03/06/2014) [-]
Hey i'm at strathclyde.
User avatar #202 - goldenfairy (03/06/2014) [-]
Ah. Thank you. I enjoyed my dinner. And that's not a sarcasm.
#201 - hairibar (03/06/2014) [-]
GOID. FUCKING. DAMMIT. Those two last ones...
#200 - olesc (03/06/2014) [-]
So this museum of porn is in Glasgow, you say
User avatar #199 - savmg (03/06/2014) [-]
That's glasgowweins for you problem parts of neds lol
#198 - savmg has deleted their comment.
User avatar #197 - melwach (03/06/2014) [-]
Time to bomb Glasgow.
#195 - minntas (03/06/2014) [-]
User avatar #194 - captainfuckitall (03/06/2014) [-]
Does it get worse?
#193 - anonymous (03/06/2014) [-]
Pics?
#189 - lambocj (03/06/2014) [-]
Sounds like a set off of a horror movie.
#188 - ujellybro (03/06/2014) [-]
Oh god, that was great. And terrifying.
#179 - hydraetis (03/06/2014) [-]
What in the name of fuck
#178 - dudewitharake (03/06/2014) [-]
MFW I see the comment train just keeps rollin on however, my biology/science side is fascinated with this kind of shit because pathology and human anatomy/physiology was always a passion of mine
#177 - terrorturtle (03/06/2014) [-]
holy shit it actually got worse
#176 - terrorturtle (03/06/2014) [-]
holy shit it actually got worse
User avatar #175 - slyve (03/06/2014) [-]
Take some pictures of that shit and upload them. This sounds interesting.
User avatar #180 - martycamp (03/06/2014) [-]
I'm not allowed to. If I did, and I got caught, I'd get kicked out of uni
User avatar #181 - slyve (03/06/2014) [-]
Oh, well that sucks. You better not get caught, then!
#174 - jeej (03/06/2014) [-]
omfg why
#172 - carrotpotato (03/06/2014) [-]
Meh. I'd still say that the head of a serial killer in a jar is cooler than penises, vaginas, babies or wombs with babies.
#173 - Exar (03/06/2014) [-]
Sounds exactly like that baby wall from Dead Space.
#171 - diroccodoodleedoo (03/06/2014) [-]
#170 - sybo (03/06/2014) [-]
#168 - rockamekishiko (03/06/2014) [-]
yfw you entered the room.

but how do they manage to get those babies and torsos of pregnant women?
#167 - anonymous (03/06/2014) [-]
I can't describe the huge boner i have right now.
#166 - funnychunk (03/06/2014) [-]
My highschool Biology teacher had a jar with a fetus in it. He showed it around during sex ed one time.

Shit was so cash.

(Apparently he had gotten it as a gift from my school during the seventies.)
User avatar #161 - dinosaurballs (03/06/2014) [-]
why isn't this stickied?
#158 - tightastic (03/06/2014) [-]
#155 - juanlove (03/06/2014) [-]
My friend works at a specimen processing lab. She sees a wide variety of tissues/fluids taken from human bodies. She had to process an asshole the other day. Like the outer 'hole,' the sphincter, and some of the large intestinal wall that leads up to it. Fucking strange.
User avatar #160 - stealingbikes (03/06/2014) [-]
Pic related, amirite?
User avatar #154 - chrispoot (03/06/2014) [-]
What kind of fucked up school do you go to?
#150 - swarlsbarkley (03/06/2014) [-]
#148 - anonymous (03/06/2014) [-]
This post was 1000000x better than the funny junk post.
#147 - noonesperfect (03/06/2014) [-]
We had such a show here in Finland, in a place called Heureka. It was quite... interesting
#146 - chandaman (03/06/2014) [-]
#145 - dnf (03/06/2014) [-]
bro
#144 - AdamBaum (03/06/2014) [-]
Do you attend Hell?
#143 - envinite (03/06/2014) [-]
Now the question is, is there any preserved cutted-open hairy pregnant women stomach, that still has an erected horse sized dick in the vagina?
User avatar #141 - thedungeonmaster (03/06/2014) [-]
You can pretty much do anything as long as it's in the name of science
User avatar #140 - Inkcatcher (03/06/2014) [-]
What the literal fuck.
User avatar #138 - fukkentyranitar (03/06/2014) [-]
This post makes Berserk seem tame.
#136 - bigdaddyok (03/06/2014) [-]
i know i should have stopped at the penises but i just went on reading....................
#135 - givememoarpony (03/06/2014) [-]
**givememoarpony rolled a random image posted in comment #21 at do u even zombie desu ka? ** yeah right, i need to be as rich as bill gates to buy that amount of bullshit
#134 - shineydragonite (03/06/2014) [-]
I'm intrigued. Pics?
User avatar #182 - martycamp (03/06/2014) [-]
I'm not allowed to take pictures. If I did, and I got caught, I'd get kicked out of uni. Some legal thing about what the uni is allowed to do with the samples because they were genuinely living people once
#142 - dwaynejon (03/06/2014) [-]
#133 - anonymous (03/06/2014) [-]
I once saw something like that in a public museum in my country, except it was worse.
They had a decent collections of fetuses and dicks in jars, all of them affected with horrible diseases, talking about 2 headed deformed babies, rotting disgusting penises and so.
Most of the "samples" were about 50-100 years old, so they were pretty much rotting (even though they were on that preservation liquid) inside of the jars.
It was really groce, but strangely interesting
User avatar #132 - skorve (03/06/2014) [-]
What the actual fuck, please tell me that's not real
User avatar #183 - martycamp (03/06/2014) [-]
I'm afraid it's true
User avatar #131 - supercookieduster (03/06/2014) [-]
that's pretty gnarly bro. i would like to see the conjoined twin though
#129 - uniden (03/06/2014) [-]
mfw getting closer and closer to the end
#128 - ryojelon (03/06/2014) [-]
I don't know if I want pics to prove it's real, or just believe in you.
#127 - musclemarinade (03/06/2014) [-]
What the actual Fuck.......
#126 - RedHulk (03/06/2014) [-]
**RedHulk rolled a random image posted in comment #8032679 at Safe For Work Random Board ** Sounds kinda sexy.
User avatar #125 - jammingjam (03/06/2014) [-]
You should take pics and put them up.
#123 - greenthegunstar (03/06/2014) [-]
I hope you plan on taking responsibility for the fact that I'm not gonna sleep tonight.
User avatar #122 - icecreamonnips (03/06/2014) [-]
jesus fucking christ man
#121 - doctorprofessornv (03/06/2014) [-]
Meh. After working the bodies revealed exhibit, very little phases me.
<just look at this sexy mofo (you could say he has a split personality)
#118 - volcanicdiarrhea (03/06/2014) [-]
But wait, THERE'S MORE!
#115 - furiousmarshmellow (03/06/2014) [-]
User avatar #114 - xXneoXx (03/06/2014) [-]
That's some Frankenstein stuff right there.
#112 - furiousmarshmellow has deleted their comment.
User avatar #111 - bitey (03/06/2014) [-]
post pics
User avatar #108 - sparkajh (03/06/2014) [-]
Metal
User avatar #107 - DrPeppir (03/06/2014) [-]
Part of me wants OP to take pictures and post...
but another part of me is saying FUCK THAT FUCK THAT FUCK THAT.
#109 - DrPeppir (03/06/2014) [-]
Pic related. I drew it.
#104 - oceanfrank (03/06/2014) [-]
#103 - chandlermx (03/06/2014) [-]
#99 - morskoj (03/06/2014) [-]
#98 - garymotherfingoak (03/06/2014) [-]
This is his mom
#97 - hurzg (03/06/2014) [-]
What could be worse than dead babies still inside their mothers you ask? There was jizz on them.
#163 - anonymous (03/06/2014) [-]
a peeled baby in a jar full of salt
#96 - garymotherfingoak (03/06/2014) [-]
But wait, it gets worse.

This is a mummified 100+ year old 6 month (at time of death) fetus in Guanajuato, Mexico.
User avatar #124 - zuel (03/06/2014) [-]
strangely that looks cute as hell
#95 - xsnowshark (03/06/2014) [-]
That's some nasty shit.
User avatar #93 - bateking (03/06/2014) [-]
But did you or did you not fap
#92 - bateking has deleted their comment.
User avatar #91 - haydn (03/06/2014) [-]
Does the collection often travel? I remember about 7-8 years ago a very familiar collection in Manchester for a couple of weeks. We went with school. They gave us organ doner cards after
#90 - hudis (03/06/2014) [-]
#89 - oxki (03/06/2014) [-]
jesus fucking christ
#88 - ordog (03/06/2014) [-]
That sounds like an awesome medschool.
#86 - holywarstpd (03/06/2014) [-]
#85 - faggetmaister (03/06/2014) [-]
Any university with a med school that's actually any good would be extremely happy/satisfied having anything similar to this. Made me jealous actually.
User avatar #84 - perform (03/06/2014) [-]
BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE
User avatar #82 - sirfiiddlesticks (03/06/2014) [-]
Why did this give me a boner...
#81 - kaboozle123 (03/06/2014) [-]
#80 - swampwaterjack (03/06/2014) [-]
that left a bad taste in my mouth
#79 - kaliban (03/06/2014) [-]
YFW explaining this
#78 - bamsebjornen (03/06/2014) [-]
no sleep 2nite
#77 - zackenia (03/06/2014) [-]
#76 - niggasaurus (03/06/2014) [-]
#74 - wontforget (03/06/2014) [-]
User avatar #73 - Durp (03/06/2014) [-]
Ok I know this is really messed up, but despite how disgusting that all sounds, I think it would be interesting to see.
#72 - misterobotunicorn (03/06/2014) [-]
#71 - coconuthat (03/06/2014) [-]
That's fucked up in so many ways...But so damn cool.

Take pictures!
User avatar #69 - emokoneko (03/06/2014) [-]
Considering it is an anatomy museum, this actually doesn't shock or upset me a bit. Now, describe this in your professor's basement, then we have a problem of Ed Gein proportions.
User avatar #68 - bobmarles (03/06/2014) [-]
post pics pls
User avatar #67 - captainrattrap (03/06/2014) [-]
Take a symbolic thumb down for the horror and a real thumb up for the knowledge.
#66 - qwertyninja (03/06/2014) [-]
User avatar #65 - ignatiuz (03/06/2014) [-]
right now, I am imagining a midget. A midget, smaller than the average midget, but only to think of a possible scenario when a penis gets bigger than an arm....
User avatar #64 - thegirlyoudespise (03/06/2014) [-]
pics please
#62 - morkoelorko (03/06/2014) [-]
where they get this kind of shit?
dead hobos or something?
User avatar #61 - blobboy (03/06/2014) [-]
No baby penises man?
I expected baby penises.
#60 - lanterns (03/06/2014) [-]
yfw
User avatar #59 - milthyfoustache (03/06/2014) [-]
University of Glasgow? Sounds like your average Glaswegian kebab shop
#58 - copycopy (03/06/2014) [-]
Well fuck.
User avatar #57 - mrcowll (03/06/2014) [-]
You keep wondering how it could get worse and then it does *Cries*
#56 - nought (03/06/2014) [-]
**nought rolled a random image posted in comment #150 at Magic ** mfw
#55 - axeul (03/06/2014) [-]
I didn't need to picture that
#54 - yourafaggotharry (03/06/2014) [-]
#52 - martycamp has deleted their comment.
User avatar #51 - infinitereaper (03/06/2014) [-]
sounds like a great place to masturbate
#50 - anonymous (03/06/2014) [-]
Bet they'd taste nice deep-fried
#49 - MasterManiac (03/06/2014) [-]
I ... um ... wtf.
#48 - youmotherfather (03/06/2014) [-]
floating vaginas you say? put your dick in them and post pics
#44 - lolzordz (03/05/2014) [-]
whaat
User avatar #34 - ariscorp (03/05/2014) [-]
yasss man

l2strathclyde scrub
User avatar #35 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
I'm sorry, but I can't hear you. We're too busy being the 51st best uni in the world.
User avatar #37 - ariscorp (03/05/2014) [-]
sorry cant hear you over superior business school
COUGH the only courses that matter COUGH
User avatar #38 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Are you honestly saying that business is more important than science?
#46 - ariscorp (03/05/2014) [-]
#42 - amuzen (03/05/2014) [-]
Depends on the objective, if you wanna make lots of money and aren't afraid of being a spineless asshole business is the most important, if you want to make a difference and try to make the world a better place through blood, sweat and tears science is the most important.

Of course I'm an art student so what would I know?
User avatar #43 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
If I would like fries with that?

I kid.
#45 - amuzen (03/05/2014) [-]
Digital art, even we have a better success rate than most science students. ;)
User avatar #47 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Apparently, University of Glasgow has a graduate employment rate of nearly 95% across all degrees. It doesn't say if it's in a related field, and not everyone answered, but it's still impressive
#120 - amuzen (03/06/2014) [-]
Ehhhh most colleges I looked at said they had absurdly high employment rates on their web pages and questionaires as well as most representatives.
British columbia institute of tech, university of fairbanks, University of Juneau, the art institute of Vancouver, Devry washington, and a couple of colleges whose names who I've forgotten all told me they had employment rates of 90-99% within 6 months of graduation but I find this doubtful because it doesn't seem like they would be paying attention to 99% or really even like 10% of their students 6 months after graduation.
User avatar #33 - ariscorp (03/05/2014) [-]
yassssss mannnnnn

l2strathclyde ya wank
User avatar #30 - pixmantle (03/05/2014) [-]
What a time to have dinner early.
User avatar #28 - confusedasian (03/05/2014) [-]
Sounds like the museum we have in North America. I forgot it's name, it started with an s, h, or m. I don't remember it's been 5 or 6 years since I've heard of it. I'll get back to you whenever I remember it.
User avatar #116 - MercurySenshi (03/06/2014) [-]
mutter museum. It use to be on Ripley's believe it or not.
User avatar #29 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
You really are confused, aren't you?
#31 - confusedasian (03/05/2014) [-]
I got this. Just give me a moment. It had a c in it too.
User avatar #32 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Don't forget the vowels. Bitches love vowels.
#36 - confusedasian (03/05/2014) [-]
It had the word macabre in it. I just don't remember the other parts of it.


FELLOW MURICANS HELP A BROTHER OUT! It's in New York.

I think. Some where there.
#39 - confusedasian (03/05/2014) [-]
martycamp, I found it. It's called the Mutter Museum and it was in Philadelphia.

www.visitphilly.com/museums-attractions/philadelphia/mutter-museum/
User avatar #40 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
So you were fairly close, then
#41 - confusedasian (03/05/2014) [-]
Yes.


I am getting smarter.
#25 - jackknapp (03/05/2014) [-]
#23 - ohhh (03/05/2014) [-]
User avatar #22 - nauthizsangster (03/05/2014) [-]
I'm near glasgow... I want to visit the university for this
#21 - hennuuss (03/05/2014) [-]
I study at University of Glasgow as well! where is that place? I want to see iiiit
#24 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
The big bit is Hogwarts (the main building). Uni avenue is at the top of the picture. The circle is where the anatomy museum is
#27 - hennuuss (03/05/2014) [-]
coool, thanks! I need to check that out
#20 - otroviciado (03/05/2014) [-]
yup, thats a nope
#19 - manbearpiglet (03/05/2014) [-]
>Walk into that room
User avatar #16 - apothicary (03/05/2014) [-]
Sweet! A fellow Gleswegian!
User avatar #17 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Awrite ya dobber?
User avatar #18 - apothicary (03/05/2014) [-]
Fuckin' awryt!
#15 - anonymous (03/05/2014) [-]
Sounds like you found admin's house.
User avatar #14 - TexMex (03/05/2014) [-]
My dad used to have a baby sawed in half a long time ago, got it from an old hospital. Some random weird dude bought it from him though.
#12 - anonymous (03/05/2014) [-]
So... did you put your dick in anything?
User avatar #13 - martycamp (03/05/2014) [-]
Nah. Everything was all in glass jars inside glass cabinets.
#9 - anonymous (03/05/2014) [-]
that is a pretty well stocked house, I would not experience the munchies from russkie wakey gas with as much pickled treats
#4 - Just google image search "Jennifer Anniston nude". I… 03/05/2014 on Tags +4
#9 - Because I can  [+] (16 new replies) 03/03/2014 on u cringin wut m8 +12
#10 - mohawkwarrior (03/03/2014) [-]
Bitches ain't shit...
#13 - danware (03/03/2014) [-]
we've gone so deep i cant see shit no more
#15 - ilbacondeity (03/03/2014) [-]
#18 - unknowntablets (03/03/2014) [-]
#22 - walcorn (03/03/2014) [-]
#25 - insiderainbowdash (03/03/2014) [-]
#39 - kulamia (03/03/2014) [-]
#23 - acksl (03/03/2014) [-]
FJ: We know reposts
User avatar #20 - sinonyx (03/03/2014) [-]
when this get's posted as content... they better take a picture instead of a screenshot
#19 - vanpika (03/03/2014) [-]
User avatar #26 - lieutenantbuzzkill (03/03/2014) [-]
And over to your left you can see a shit ton of purple lines
User avatar #34 - dildodude (03/03/2014) [-]
**dildodude rolled a random comment #7996851 posted by strangemoo at Safe For Work Random Board ** :
Just got done Fappin'.

let the nonsense purple lines breed
#40 - lanttu (03/03/2014) [-]
#41 - heylaprof (03/03/2014) [-]
I love you
#43 - carnivoreapples (03/03/2014) [-]
well truck you too
#44 - mohawkwarrior (03/04/2014) [-]
This is too easy...
#2 - That guy may be destined to kill Macbeth 03/02/2014 on Happy removal day 0
#175 - I'm pretty sure that's Obama's face 03/02/2014 on (untitled) +2
#8 - there's no comments like that because everyone knows it's made-up 03/02/2014 on Greentext +28
#182 - Almost half don't believe in evolution 02/26/2014 on Americans 0
#9 - I can't see because the kid's hands are in the way, but the si…  [+] (4 new replies) 02/16/2014 on kid finds his sister's dildo +6
User avatar #80 - juventud (02/17/2014) [-]
picture should read, "What's your take on femdom?"
User avatar #75 - jacksipian (02/17/2014) [-]
it is, in the video you can see both ends clearly and it is a double ended dildo.
#33 - crosskill (02/16/2014) [-]
Or she just uses it with her husband?
#27 - madcoww (02/16/2014) [-]
**madcoww rolled a random image posted in comment #57 at Stratogale ** One woman can very easily use double-dildo by folding it back on itself. Pic related.
#2 - Most Christians probably haven't read it either. The …  [+] (18 new replies) 02/12/2014 on Oh yes. +221
User avatar #135 - waaw (02/13/2014) [-]
On the other hand, I'm sure many atheists haven't read the scientific papers supporting theories like the Big Bang and evolution. I'm not saying that those theories are wrong, but you can't read everything. At some point, you do have to take things on faith. Creationists choose to accept that their text is true, and people who believe in the Big Bang choose to accept that the scientists who wrote those papers knew what they were doing.
#138 - xxmemosxx (02/13/2014) [-]
Atheism has nothing to do with those theories though, many will use them verify their "beliefs" but it isn't a necessity to be an atheist. Atheism is a rejection of religion.
User avatar #140 - waaw (02/13/2014) [-]
You're right. I was using atheism as a sort of shorthand for people who believe in scientific theories while disbelieving in the supernatural. That's not totally correct, but I think the general point is still understood.
User avatar #110 - christmouth (02/13/2014) [-]
This is one of the problems I've had with Christianity. I mean, I was born in a more or less religious village, and went to Sunday school and other religious gatherings, so we're more or less born Christians(I'm acnostic-atheist of some kind, but I was Christian when I was younger), and being an atheist is unheard off.
A girl moved in to town, and a rumour started to flood that she was an atheist, so some of the kids of the "higher ups" in the Christian community, started to ask her question regarding the bible, like if she wasn't afraid of going to hell etc.

The funny part of this was, was that she had read infinitely more about the bible, and she knew what it was that she believed, or what it was that she didn't believe in, which was more than these kids had been spoonfed their entire lives through someone reading up some passages from the bible for them.
The problem I mentioned at top is, how can you call yourself a Christian if you haven't read the bible, the books that documents the man you hold your faith in? Is it okey to just to believe in what other tell you about Jesus Christ? Aren't you then more faithful to that person, than you are to Jesus?

I know this might offend someone, but it wasn't my intention.
#83 - Haane (02/13/2014) [-]
I used to go to Christian private school, and we were required to study the Bible. I doubted my beliefs, and started studying a ton....I've read it about 13 times since my freshman year. There's some crazy shit in there son.
#72 - anonymous (02/13/2014) [-]
That's not at all true
#57 - squeejee (02/13/2014) [-]
#46 - anonymous (02/13/2014) [-]
Of course, of course.
Spill out everything Richard Dawkins and other athiest heroes have taught you.
#19 - rabidaardvark (02/13/2014) [-]
I have won so many arguments with christian idiots (distinct and seperate from regular christians) simply by justifying my argument with a random name and two numbers; 'its in the bible; James 13:29'. They either accept it or go away to look it up, by which time the arguments been over for so long nobody really cares anymore.
#13 - LloydIrving (02/13/2014) [-]
To be fair, most read some of it, get spoon-fed the rest, and pick-and-choose what they want to believe. Terms and conditions you really just scroll to the bottom and accept.

I'm a Christian and tried reading all the way through, and now I know why many churches give a prize for finishing the whole thing within a year. Still, your simile is true enough to be saddening.

Gif is my reaction to other Christians not even trying to read the book they're basing they're life off of and supposedly using for reference.
#141 - aerosol (02/13/2014) [-]
I went to a catholic school. It's funny, I actually used to sit in the hall and read some of it just out of interest(and to study for theology) and teachers would walk and be like "Are you just reading the Bible?" Dis a Catholic school nigga! What else would I do?
#98 - lvlonemeepo (02/13/2014) [-]
I agree with you but I've read alot of the Bible and I take all the scriptures and put them into logic. I believe in a creator but I also believe in the building blocks of life, evolution and a bit of the big bang theory. I won't make fun of anyone's religion like atheists nor will I ridicule another for believing in something I don't It makes life more enjoyable and whimsical when you believe in angels and demons and things! FOR SCIENCE-ish!
#119 - rdobet (02/13/2014) [-]
fun fact, this is a throne (Type of angel) according to the bible.
#121 - lvlonemeepo (02/13/2014) [-]
Looks cool! I never read about them, time to open the book HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHng
#122 - rdobet (02/13/2014) [-]
wut
#127 - lvlonemeepo (02/13/2014) [-]
Thats the sound of opening up a Bible dude. Of course I haven't found it yet so it was a bit premature.
#50 - mayoroftownsville (02/13/2014) [-]
THE SOUND! IT'S IN MY HEAD!
#3 - olizandri (02/13/2014) [-]
i have never read a simile so perfect.
#1 - Picture  [+] (3 new replies) 02/12/2014 on Breaking News +41
#12 - anonymous (02/13/2014) [-]
Glaswegians don't take any shit!
User avatar #11 - folkflunky (02/13/2014) [-]
The whole deal with Osama Bin Laden would've ended way faster if USA hired this guy.
User avatar #9 - ciacheczko (02/13/2014) [-]
This actually made me back away from my monitor. 2badass4me.
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 6205 / Total items point value: 7265
[ 50 items Total ]

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #62 - martycamp (06/12/2014) [-]
**martycamp rolls 809**
User avatar #61 - martycamp (06/12/2014) [-]
**martycamp rolls 362**
User avatar #60 - martycamp (06/11/2014) [-]
**martycamp rolls 748**
User avatar #59 - martycamp (06/11/2014) [-]
**martycamp rolls 042**
User avatar #58 - martycamp (06/11/2014) [-]
**martycamp rolls 376**
User avatar #57 - martycamp (06/11/2014) [-]
**martycamp rolls 186**
User avatar #56 - martycamp (06/11/2014) [-]
**martycamp rolls 589**
User avatar #55 - martycamp (06/11/2014) [-]
**martycamp rolls 930**
User avatar #54 - martycamp (12/09/2013) [-]
congrats man.
User avatar #53 - martycamp (08/30/2013) [-]
test
User avatar #52 - martycamp (08/27/2013) [-]
**martycamp rolls 14**
User avatar #51 - martycamp (08/23/2013) [-]
**martycamp rolls 081**
User avatar #50 - martycamp (08/18/2013) [-]
**martycamp rolls 50**
#48 - thechosentroll (07/25/2013) [-]
This image has expired
Good day. Have you accepted Slaanesh as your lord and drug dealer yet?
User avatar #49 to #48 - martycamp (07/26/2013) [-]
Uh, you know, I meant to, and then I just got really busy...
User avatar #17 - twi (06/16/2013) [-]
<3
User avatar #10 - owmowmow (06/12/2013) [-]
Friending for results... post link plz.
User avatar #14 to #12 - owmowmow (06/12/2013) [-]
Its gonna 404 sheeeiiiit.
User avatar #15 to #14 - martycamp (06/12/2013) [-]
oh well
User avatar #16 to #15 - owmowmow (06/12/2013) [-]
good times, lol
#13 to #12 - owmowmow (06/12/2013) [-]
Daym, Thought it would have gone two ways.   
   
My finger when.
Daym, Thought it would have gone two ways.

My finger when.
User avatar #9 - martycamp (03/08/2013) [-]
**martycamp rolls 2**
 Friends (0)