Here we go. I found it rather quickly. They rush her through the subject because of the time factor. It's fun to watch Whoopie's face through this. She's just not buying it.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
coalition for equality
Open Access Site
Blog Archive
Labels
- Academy Awards (1)
- activism (1)
- atheism (2)
- Bible (2)
- bigotry (5)
- biological evolution (1)
- bird (1)
- boycott (1)
- brain (1)
- California (1)
- censorship (1)
- channel suspension (1)
- Charles Darwin (1)
- comments (1)
- community activism (2)
- creationism (5)
- DMCA (1)
- Dustin Black (1)
- finger length (1)
- flagging (2)
- freedom of speech (2)
- fundamentalism (1)
- Gathering Storm (2)
- gay rights (3)
- Google (1)
- Hang Waiting (1)
- Harvey Milk (1)
- hate (1)
- Helen Fisher (3)
- homophobia (14)
- homosexuality (8)
- human rights (1)
- Internet (1)
- kissing (1)
- LDS (1)
- love (6)
- mormon (1)
- music (1)
- natural selection (1)
- New York Times (1)
- NOM (2)
- Offense taken (1)
- personality (3)
- Prop Hate (2)
- proposition 8 (2)
- relationships (7)
- religion (6)
- Sean Penn (1)
- sensory homunculus (1)
- sex (9)
- spam (1)
- SSM (5)
- The View (1)
- third party (1)
- trolls (4)
- UMG (1)
- Vevo (1)
- video (1)
- votebots (3)
- What Do Women Want (1)
- WMG (1)
- YouTube (9)
- YT contact (2)
Closed
YT channels
Dictionaries
4 comments:
Thanks, O, 'cos I'm like obsessed with science and the body.
I still have not found time to listen to the sciencenetwork talk again.
Thankfully she's much less nervous than she was at TED. She's much less relaxed than she was with Roger Bingham, but he's such a soothing guy.
In a sense, she's saying something similar to what the "colors" personality test says - we are a blend, though we have predominant characteristics.
We certainly don't fit into four neat little boxes, though it would be a place to *start* on a dating site. Don't ask me to date a 'gold', for example.
As to not jumping into bed with someone in order to avoid a flood of dopamine, I say Viva les Chemicals.
Ms Fisher (imo) is rather disappointing in this interview.
Her presentation is wishy-washy and her findings are not as interesting (to me) as I first thought. I increasingly get a feeling of scientific sell-out (I agree O x4).
Thank goodness for Joy....and her *explorers finding the G-spot* contribution to the discussion. I enjoyed Joy's responses (and Whoppie's facial expressions).
I wonder how all of this *chemistry* influences the high break-up divorce rate/falling out of love?
First impressions don't always coincide with subsequent impressions, do they?
Yes, I think that she enjoyed Joy.
As to your question:
1. think about fMRIs and their snapshot of a moment in brain activity.
2. We have about 100 billion neurons, each with an average of 1000 interconnections.
3. Ultimately, the limbic system and associated structures are slaves to the neocortex -- think differently, feel differently, produce less chemicals.
No they don't.
I find the subject matter/research findings quite interesting, though I'm not much interested in it's application to a dating service.
I agree with Ox4 that this could/does arguably diminish the scientific aspect of her work.
Saph, your 3 points are well taken.
Post a Comment