The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Fri Jul 16, 2010 10:10 pm

You guys are going north. I'm going south.

C ést la vie Laughing

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Fri Jul 16, 2010 11:52 pm

That's because it's winter there. You should come visit me, it would warm you up considerably.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:25 am

Sharabella wrote:: I win the lottery-----we're going.

Whoo-hoo!

sami_stardust wrote:: seeing the northern lights is on my bucket list.

Now that would be something to see.

I'm really not into the cold, the snow, ice, 6 months of darkness, so I might skip the trip to Alaska.

Personally, my dream place to visit would be Australia. It's been for a long time.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:49 am

I'm afraid of drop bears in Australia.

The whale watching cruises are in the summer. The waterways in the glacial area freeze up in the winter, and the whales migrate south.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:52 am

I meant the visit to Alaska, not the cruise Wink

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:55 am

I don't want to be in Alaska in the winter in the dark either. I like snow and ice but not for a long time.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Sat Jul 17, 2010 10:16 am

LegoJulie wrote:: Do leprechauns grant wishes?

Maybe if they lived in lamps. scratch

Three wishes, according to an old Disney movie, but only if you hold one captive. Of course, presumably, every first wish would be for the pot of gold which every respectable leprechaun is hording. Or is that Lucky Charms? (Apparently the cereal leprechaun has turned his gold into hard little marshmallow pieces-------he must be a member of congress Rolling Eyes

)

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:36 pm

Another local firm has gone into insolvency here, a product of a slowing building industry. I purchased fencing timber from them fairly recently and had no hint of problems. An Auction (with no reserves) will be held at the end of the month.

On a sadder note, a local sawmill, 120 years after its inception, has also folded. All of its employees however have been looked after.

An unsually serious post from me, chickadees.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Sat Jul 17, 2010 6:51 pm

What is the economy like in Australia? Of course, you probably know about our struggles here.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Sat Jul 17, 2010 7:24 pm

Basically K, due to several factors/decisions - one of which is the previous government's healthy surplus at the end of its term - Australia has fared remarkably better than the USA, UK and European countries. Our banks also seem to have been stronger to begin with and we have strong relationships with our Asian trading partners. Our unemployment rate is currently just above 5.1%.

The 2009-2010 Federal Budget allowed for a return to surplus by the year 2015. This is obviously after billions were thrown at the economy in the form of stimulus packages (approx $83b??)to keep us out of dire straits. Controversy followed these packages in the form of corruption of spending etc.

Of course, our immediate future depends on a new Prime Minister, Cabinet and Federal Govt elected on 21st August. Who knows what that will entail.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Sun Jul 18, 2010 4:32 pm

Holy guacamole! 27 guests plus members. The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 - Page 4 166223

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:02 pm

Nay--37 guests plus members! Wow!

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:09 pm

i think i'll tweet about how we're the best group around. ok, dk?? heehee....

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Mon Jul 19, 2010 3:45 pm

We've exploded ... 26 guests .... 123 members ... What happened to our anonymity?

Remember what I said before though ... Spies p/ss off! Suspect

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Mon Jul 19, 2010 6:50 pm

sami_stardust wrote:: i think i'll tweet about how we're the best group around. ok, dk?? heehee....

Noooo!! We're the "not the best site around but we have fun" site. Remember...mediocrity rocks!

Proud

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:40 pm

three cheers for mediocrity!!!! hip hip hooray!!! what?

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:40 am

Mediocrity = Moderation. No totally obsessed fanatics. Relaxed but not laxed.

There are over 100 members here?

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:13 am

Have a read, ladies. I've highlighted the bits which seem to so perfectly suit us here.

http://www.physorg.com/news157029052.html

What is 'Real'? How Our Brain Differentiates Between Reality and Fantasy
March 23, 2009 By Lisa Zyga Enlarge

What criteria does the brain use for distinguishing between real people such as George W. Bush and fictional characters such as Cinderella? Recent research suggests that personal relevance may be a key factor, although there are exceptions.

Most people can easily tell the difference between reality and fantasy. We know that characters in novels and movies are fictitious, and we also understand that historical figures - even if we’ve never met them personally - were real people. As obvious as this distinction may seem, however, scientists know very little about the specific brain mechanisms that are responsible for our ability to distinguish between real and fictional events.

Recently, research has identified two areas of the brain that are more strongly activated when people see real characters than when they see fictional characters. These brain regions - in the anterior medial prefrontal and posterior cingulated cortices (amPFC and PCC) - are known to be involved during autobiographical memory retrieval and self-referential thinking. Based on this finding, scientists have hypothesized that our brains may distinguish between reality and fantasy because real things tend to have a higher degree of personal relevance than fictional things do.

A new study tests this hypothesis that personal relevance is the critical factor in differentiating between reality and fantasy by using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to compare the brain’s response when processing real and fictional characters. Anna Abraham of the Max Planck Institute for Human Brain and Cognitive Sciences in Leipzig, Germany, and the University of Giessen in Giessen, Germany, and D. Yves von Cramon of the Max Planck Institute for Human Brain and Cognitive Sciences and the Max Planck Institute for Neurological Research in Cologne, Germany, have published their results in a recent issue of PLoS ONE.

“Perhaps the greatest significance of the study is that it has enabled us to get a step closer to understanding what ‘realness’ captures,” Abraham told PhysOrg.com. “The categorical distinction between reality and fiction that we employ in daily life appears to be too simplistic and non-representative of our phenomenological experience. The term ‘real’ in itself does not have much explanatory power, as it means only that something objectively exists.”

The researchers’ experiments helped them investigate what “realness” is, as the brain defines it. Two weeks prior to the experiments, 19 volunteers were asked to submit names of their close friends and family, and also read through a list of famous people and fictional characters to confirm that they were familiar with them. During the experiments, the participants viewed names of individuals who were either friends/family (high personal relevance), famous people (medium personal relevance) or fictional characters (low personal relevance). The participants also answered questions, such as whether it was possible for someone to talk with one of the people/characters (interactions between real people and fictional characters were considered impossible).

As the researchers had predicted, the results showed that when participants answered questions about their friends and family (high personal relevance), stronger activation occurred in the amPFC and PCC regions, as compared with questions about famous people (medium activation) and fictional characters (low activation). As the scientists explained, our conceptual knowledge of real people is more extensive than our knowledge of famous people, and much more extensive than our knowledge of fictional characters. But this finding also raises further questions.

“I experience my mother and George Bush as being ‘more real’ than Cinderella, but why do I experience George Bush as being ‘less real’ than my mother?” Abraham said. “After all, both people objectively exist. Is it because I’ve never interacted with him? Is it because I know less about him? Would he have been more relevant for me if he waged war on my home country? These are all open questions that can only be answered when we define what constitutes ‘realness.’ And we have shown in this study that one factor that affects how real I perceive someone to be is modulated by how personally relevant the person is for me.”

“Our immediate plans are to verify our findings by exploring the modulation of personal relevance within fictional and real domains,” said Abraham. “An example of a within-fictional domain investigation, as stated in the paper, would be studying chronic gamers versus beginner gamers on group-relevant versus group-irrelevant information. An example of a within-reality domain investigation would be studying groups with different vocations/interests - for instance, political journalists would be expected to find information concerning politicians far more relevant than that of celebrities, whereas the situation would be expected to be vice versa for paparazzi journalists. There are several avenues to be explored. Once the findings have been verified across a variety of situations, we will be in a better position to dig deeper to uncover how our brains encode and store such categorical information in the first place, how malleable the reality-fiction distinction is, and so on.”

I firmly believe that in order for Pantry to have succeeded as it has, we've carefully and conscientiously straddled the barbwire fence between reality and fantasy. We're damn good at keeping each other 'real' and 'grounded'.

Just my opinion though.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:04 am

I believe you're right. I've been to several sites over the years have have a really creepy feel almost a stalker mentality. (including a couple for GB)
Here the attraction is as much, if not more, for the personal interactions as the news about the actor. Good looking and talented as he is, it's you guys that have drawn me back here.
I like a little fantasy mixed in with my reality, not the other way around. (no matter what you've heard Very Happy

)

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Tue Jul 20, 2010 4:02 pm

Sharabella wrote:: Here the attraction is as much, if not more, for the personal interactions as the news about the actor. Good looking and talented as he is, it's you guys that have drawn me back here.

HERE IT IS!!!!!!!!!! THE QUOTE OF THE WEEK!!!!!!!!!

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Tue Jul 20, 2010 4:04 pm

absolutely!!! you nailed it sharabella!

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Tue Jul 20, 2010 7:17 pm

I have lots of cousins I have never met and whose names I don't know. They are less real to me than you guys, GB and other celebs, and even Cinderella. At least I know Cinderella's name.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:53 pm

Very interesting, Nay. Thanks for sharing. Will have to mull over that whole piece some more.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Wed Jul 21, 2010 4:50 am

I thought it might intrigue you, Alice ... Particularly for your study.

Subject: Re: The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 2 Wed Jul 21, 2010 5:35 am

I'm touched that you thought of me, thanks! cheers

» The Clean Panty Thread Vol. 1
» Gerard Butler Rocks a Clean Shave for Lunch in Toronto
» The Ranting Thread
» The Dream Thread
» New Thread Added