Find better matches with our advanced matching system
34 / M / Straight / Single
- Last Online
- May 14
- 5′ 8″ (1.73m).
- Body Type
- When drinking
- Aquarius but it doesn’t matter
- Graduated from college/university
- Medicine / Health
- Has a kid, but doesn’t want more
- Has dogs
- English (Fluently)
brooklynokie Tulsa, Oklahoma less adventurous
CrewcutHippie Tulsa, Oklahoma more attentive
pizzamafia Tulsa, Oklahoma more spiritual
Circusofsouls Tulsa, Oklahoma less kinky
goodtimes2come71 Tulsa, Oklahoma more adventurous
BigD_13 Tulsa, Oklahoma more spiritual
ta2nerd Tulsa, Oklahoma more artsy
Bas5639 Tulsa, Oklahoma more adventurous
I am a cytogeneticist at Saint Francis Hospital by trade. Maybe one day I'll go for a higher science degree.
I'm really confused about the last Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest. I was really proud when Joey Chestnut brought the trophy back to American soil back in 07, and was happy to hear that he had won his fifth consecutive in 2011 with 62 dogs down the pipe. Then I heard that former champ Takeru Kobayashi was not allowed to compete because he refused to sign an exclusive contract with Major League Eating. Kobayashi had a problem with the contract because it would not allow him to compete in non-sanctioned events. In protest, he held his own even, where in sync with the Nathan's event, he ate 69 hot dogs, not only beating Chestnut for that year, but also breaking Chestnut's previous world record of 68. At this point I thought that he deserved the trophy hands down, Major League Eating be damned. But wait. It turns out that, upon studying the video footage of Kobayashi's feat, he did not eat 69 hot dogs, but only 65. Still enough to have defeated Chestnut, but not break the record. Normally I would still be on his side, but why the lying? Why the deceit? Was it an honest mistake of an inexperienced judge, or was it planned deception designed to cause drama? Ever since he stormed the stage at the 2010 contest, I have wanted Kobayashi to make a powerful combat, but this turn of events causes me much sadness and confusion. The message to you, o' potential daters, is that I may have some trust issues from all this, so please be gentle.
Jokes that no one else gets. (See above and below)
I also have the balls to ask you out in person.
Music: Ween, Mr Bungle, Secret Chiefs 3, Of Montreal, Animal Collective, Titus Andronicus, The Melvins, Spank Rock, Negativland, Tom Waits, Smog, Big Business...you can extrapolate from there
Books: Non-fiction, mostly science. Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, Mary Roach, Bart Ehrman, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Lawrence Krauss, etc
Written some time ago: Some people contemplate the soul and ask themselves if the lower animals have one. Even if they take for granted that the animals are alive. One would say that their heart or liver or hand is "alive" in that it is made from living flesh, but they would not consider the organ living if it was out of the body, lying on a plate. Out of its enviroment it ceases to function and thus ceases to live. The organ's definition of life binds it to its surroundings. Are animals or humans any different. Just as an organ would not function outside of a body, a man could not live on the moon. The earth is the body. (Just as we can keep an organ "alive" outside of the body with technology, so can we send a man to space, but it requires a large amount of external energy and could not be sustained without that constant input.) So should we contemplate if our organs have souls? What about the cells of the organs? What does it mean to be alive? Do the cells have life? Do the organelles? Are the DNA molecules themselves alive? DNA strands can easily be manipulated and synthisized in a laboratory. Most of us would not say that something made in a test tube has a soul or is even alive. Where do you draw the line? Its a trick question. There is no line. There is no such thing as life. Our illusion of life is just a reaction to a percieved difference between various states of matter responding to the enviroment. The idea of a soul that continues on as the body ceases to function is ridiculous.
That was all ranted down by me several years ago...
but furthermore, it is a mistake to think of the self (or conscious, or soul, etc) as a thing at all. In fact, it is not a noun but a verb. Your mind is what your brain does. When we begin to realize this, we see that the idea of an after life is nonsensical. For instance when a runner stops running, what happened to the running? Do we ask where is went? Do we imagine that there is another dimension in which that running still exists? No. We simply say that the running stopped. So when we die, the brain stops making the mind. It stopped. It didn't go anywhere.
I can't imagine that reading this bullshit is turning anyone on. haha
*stolen from xkcd
- Girls who like guys
- Ages 22–36
- Near me
- Who are single
- For new friends, long-term dating, short-term dating, activity partners, long-distance penpals, casual sex