<p>bahaha, yet they are and will remain a mystery to men and many even to themselves. The students that read enough about art, literature, psyche etc. who finally get the cosmic joke from stories and studies typically score the hotties over the squares. Although they will have an advantage on supporting a female that wants or needs to be taken care of over the more independent females. Really all depends on the person tho.</p>
<p>I took a psyche of woman class one time and it was a total joke. They spent more time dissing solid science because was done by men and more time talking about transvestites and how men keep women down yada yada yada. Instead of science or ANYTHING of substance, it was mainly PC BS, so dropped it. Realize, I read and side with a lot of feminists and sympathize with the issues they deal with since know many dudes are d.icks. That said I like the older ones in history who were much more intelligent and had way more class then the A-sexual revolution gender confused young feminists who view men as the great Goliath yet no nothing concerning their own minds and bodies. </p>
<p>Even though it’s called ‘persuasive suggestion’ now instead of ‘hypnotic suggestion’ the essence is the same. When someone is entering a suggestive state, certain parts of their physical brain start shutting down. Defense mechanisms are an evolutionary residue effect and can be easily bypassed. NEVER become defensive or reactionary when up against a wombmans natural defense mechanisms. If you do as a guy, you have already failed the test. Once past the defense mechanisms, its all about warming up and slowly cooking those eggs to how you like em done. </p>
<pre><code>Truth is, girls like nice guys but won’t put up with pushovers. Courting is much like a dance and every living creature consciously or unconsciously is hardwired and driven towards the big O (not the “One” bahahaha unless are considered mutually the same).
</code></pre>
<p>Again…working harder and being smarter in a particular subject does not beget intelligence. Of course Cal’s COE is their crown jewel but not their only hidden gem. </p>
<p>My issue was not to demean the humanities or start a science vs non science major flame war. There are way too many contingent factors to reduce humans to automatons. I’ve met country bumpkins that could hardly read and had horrible spelling that were more intelligent than Cal intellectuals and people with PhD’s. This is not an exaggeration or meant to be a put down since many time truth IS stranger than fiction.</p>
<p>Yup at SMC and loved every minute of it. I can also explain how waves function, what are the good waves for surfing, best times and a whole bunch about the how the ocean works. Most natural and environmental science and engineering stuff I excel at as well.</p>
<p>I could also tell you about the chemical properties of film and used to develop, what is a good gamma ratio for contrast, and how light (and color) work upon the medium. Maybe you interested in optics or silicon? How about CMOS vs 3-CCD chips? I wouldn’t want to get too complicated with ISO, ANSI, or SMPTE scientific standards on you though. That is only engineering of light boxes and not sound which I know on a scientific level too. The Stanford guys already beat you in FM and silicon I’m afraid.</p>
<p>lol you think you actually understand the science behind surfing and photography because you took introductory classes at community college?</p>
<p>It’s easy to take a photography class (or surfing class) and memorize some vocabulary words and say “I know science!”. The difference between you and me is that I know that my education in scientific subjects is extremely elementary (even though I’ve taken more and more advanced science classes than you). </p>
<p>I opened my biochem book today and flipped through the pages. Even after taking a year of ochem, gchem, and bio each…i still know that I (and most undergrads) cannot understand complex scientific processes. What makes you think that you can?</p>
<p>I know you have the tendency to write long rambling posts about nothing so I’ll just tell you ahead of time that I’ve got more productive or more fun things to do with my time than to read any essays on this website.</p>
<p>See, if you were an engineer kamazza, you’d realize that stuff like CMOS vs 3-CCD chips or etc doesn’t really matter because technology changes fast. What’s 1000x more important and what the engineering professors emphasize is learning how to learn the content. Do you even understand what it means to “know on a scientific level?” It can take any engineering student max 1 hour to learn about how certain chips work.</p>
<p>Knowing what is not as important as knowing how. As for engineering stuff you excel at well…well, I hope you realize the last paragraph you wrote is hardly a justification of being good at engineering (whatever that means).</p>
<p>The fact that you’re so defensive just shows your lack of insecurity and (probably) lack of skill in technical areas.</p>
<p>Honestly, you sound like one of those journalists who write persuasive writings and act highly knowledgeable when all they did was read a half-baked textbook.</p>
<p>Soz choppy… on the road… from crap cell. Answer: im not a human bio major…no interest in med field. Flora, fauna, geophysics, planetary, atmospheric, maps of earth n space, hydrology,ocean, soil n water science stuff…i love life. Mining and oil koo too but no more in cali or cal, gotta go to ubc or aus for that. People like maxwell where my childhood heros. He even made 1st color photo, his friend the polarizer…check it out…cool stuff. I wrote and did college level work in gradeschool. I do this stuff, goto class and read scientific journals for fun. No tv just read thousands of grad level books on art/history,history, lit greats, theology, poetry, music, math, poli sci, econ, anthro, evolution, philosophy etc. Not armchair…Classic education…all great stuff…not enough time to do it all. Travel all around…make friends and make money. Been doing broadcasting, film, making music, taking photos of us since 12 yo…why stop now? Balance science and art…biz n technology.</p>
<p>I agree thats why i read ee and not major in it. Same with cs and those other subjects. I let u fatheads do that so i can live a longer healthier life with less bs to contend with.Was more into civil and arch and drafting up plans platts n blowing **** up. Now its cheap labor n materials. Not as fun. More into gis gps remote sensing and life now. Tech trained to digitize, catalog, and archive just about anything…books, serials, thesis, maps, music, photos, art , film, tv tapes etc. Good gov jobs and pays ok…entertainment pays better and the get togethers are more fun.</p>
<p>Sorry but these days id go to stanford not cal. Stanford students are nicer, more mature and collaborate better with more openness and less attitude. Better jobs, research opps, perks plus nicer campus. Honestly, its the twerps n whiners that ruin cals rep cuz they let in too many mollycoddled californians. No disrespect to the chill natives, many who know this to be true too just like others across the us do.</p>
<p>You don’t stand a chance at Stanford admission, actually any of the top 20 schools.
You got in to CAL(hillarious) because California UC schools have generous thing(?) for inferior CC students. I don’t even know how one gets into top school with 3.5 gpa in a CC…now, that’s really hillarious. You take intro class at SMC(what a school! lol) and claim you’ve mastered the material?</p>
<p>Think about yourself. You don’t even deserve to be here. I bet freshman admits at UCSD or even UCI would be way better than you, and they actually are. I can even say any UC freshman admit would be more deserving than you are. 3.5-3.7 gpa at a CC? what a joke!</p>
<p>no I took surfing and my environmental science at SMC and film and photography in northern California. In honesty, I found the teachers and classes at SMC to be of good quality for a college institution. In my adjustment to SMC, I did receive B’s the first semester until got into the flow and had more a grip on the material and confidence of my ability in regards to the material. I have no regrets nor do i feel ashamed that I attend CCC’s or my GPA just because some lil’ twerp like you gets off being a cockgobbler. My grades aren’t a good representation of me in what I learn outside the classroom but are closer to actuality then the curves that have been going on at many UC’s LAC’s and privates and admissions recognizes this fact. Teachers and admins also notice that I understand the material in depth and not just some surface memory game.</p>
<p>Believe me, I raise my voice a lot that they have reduced the quality of education at CCC’s making it much easier for frosh, too easy IMHO. I have mentioned many times that I think they are not teaching enough science in the classroom and letting the local California kids run the classroom. Many CALIFORNIAN so called “college” students will drop classes if they think there is too much science or studying involved. Many Californian students also seek out the easier teachers while many OOS and internationals actually tend to seek out the more challenging instructors because are paying money to be taught, not buck the system. This is not an over generalization and the issue is more in regards to the unprepared and immature frosh. I’ve learned to live with it and thankful some teachers are starting to crack the whip more since many felt their hands where tied to do anything about it.</p>
<p>As it has been explained to me its more of a business thing and that these local Californian students are ‘entitled’ ‘clients’ and that there parents complain too much if precious miracle child doesn’t get into the UC of their dreams. They also have said that due to PC cultural sensitivity issues they cannot tell a student they are wrong. This has caused the shifting of the burden from teaching to merely administering the classroom. It has turned the idea of SLO’s into a shell game with the state. Many also have been told to merely herd the sheepish frosh through the system, help them out where possible and wish them luck. That basically means I have to basically educate myself and use the institution as a catalyst for my interests, ambitions, and goals. Most of what I study and do is on the grad level since am more interested in educating myself, which is why I attend college, instead of needing to knock units out of the way. I allow the apathy of bored frosh who feel they have to go to class like they did in HS and find it amusing now. All that matters is my relation to the instructor and many know me as an excellent student. I actually look forward to going to my classes and really enjoy and learn from the teachers I take and that is what matters to me as a student. I already know that the learning curve in a dynamic high tech society is steep and that students who are doing the minimal and not studying will be screwing themselves in the short and long run. </p>
<p>Since it is still an institution and that I understand that merely sitting in the classroom means very little, it offers me the chance to network, utilize the facilities for work and school purpose, as well as build a portfolio and accrue production hours that can attributed towards union based requirement hours just not schedule 29 steps. </p>
<p>Also in regards to me attending Stanford, it was actually people who work there who offered the suggested of some programs and scholarships that I should look into. Because of institutional priorities and certain labor laws, it is difficult for me to work in certain departments because of needing to service the students first and foremost. The only way around that is too create a third party non profit agency to place me or become a student. I mentioned that I was not hip on third party agencies but was interested in assisting them in current projects. I really don’t know why I share this with such an ignorant person but for the record do like to clarify issues. I really could care less where I attend since already have experience, degrees, certificates, and an education that matches what position I occupy. I never wanted to be a feckless manager and as a educated and skilled senior technician earn close to what supervisors and lower rung to mid managers make. If someone has a issue with computers, fixing something, and getting it done right, they don’t go to a manager with the masters degree they refer such issues to the technician.</p>
<p>I also look at education as an investment into myself as a product. The amount of economic capital that I have invested into social capital in the form of education for what I do offers a healthy rate of return in dollar amounts. It may not be the social capital in the form of prestige that would create the same exchange as cultural capital as say paying $100,000 to go to a big name school I admit. I suppose I am a happy hedonist because having fun, working hard, and just living my life in a balanced manner is more important to me than killing myself and worrying about what other people do or think.</p>
<p>I can only laugh at your position and disposition, and these common perceptions for one to feel superior amongst their peers and think it works on someone with life experience. I have no problem playing the meek position and disposition when dealing with hubris and inexperienced players. For what I do, even at a CCC I am still creating social capital in the form of cultural production whereby a tangible service is offered in a rather niche field with a rather steep learning curve which increases the amount and exchange between economic and cultural capital. Basically I get a great deal for what I put in and get out of my time/money and efforts. Realistically speaking, I could stay in a CCC forever and it wouldn’t make a bit of difference. I am only interested in doing my BA so could do certain internships for fun and study masters level work more so then worrying about obtaining a masters sheepskin, except for certain government positions. To me, the government, and my employers it makes little difference if I do Chem at SMC, a CSU, or a UC and certainly doesn’t matter at which one since they know the routine. I’m also in no rush since am waiting for more boomers to retire and actually have no problem with younger managers, in fact look forward and encourage it. I know there are a lot of sharp young people out there without the ****ty attitude and that I get along fantastic with. Sure, there has been a few occasions of similar perceptions that some of you hold towards workers or different generations but those people don’t seem to be as proactive and successful in life I’ve noticed. I contract myself out within a mutual relationship that benefits everyone because understand no man is an island and more profit can be made as a whole when working together instead of being adversaries. Everything in USA Inc. is business and such petty issues are self defeatist if you think you can carry such a poor attitude into the work world, unless work in retail i guess.</p>