View Full Version : Love Molecule Only Lasts For A Year
Kury Wagner
11-30-2005, 06:49 PM
Oh yes, it's true. Those little butterflies in your tummy, that fuzzy feeling you get when you fall head over feet for someone, all simply a chemical imbalance that'll only last for one year. Doesn't that sound so incredibly romantic?
Linkage: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4478040.stm
I swore at the television after seeing this on the news tonight. Love is not supposed to be a scientific fact. >_<
Scythemantis
11-30-2005, 07:29 PM
Well it is scientific, and there's nothing you can do about it. Scientists are just doing their job, they're not trying to take "magic" out of life. You would rather they tell a bunch of lies just so something remains "romantically inexplicable?"
There is NOTHING about humanity that isn't a tangible biological process. That is nothing new, it just goes without. Your "heart", your "soul"...it's all mucous membranes and chemical glands. We have always known this, and there's nothing wrong with it.
Artimus Gigan
11-30-2005, 07:50 PM
Oh yes, it's true. Those little butterflies in your tummy, that fuzzy feeling you get when you fall head over feet for someone, all simply a chemical imbalance that'll only last for one year. Doesn't that sound so incredibly romantic?
Linkage: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4478040.stm
I swore at the television after seeing this on the news tonight. Love is not supposed to be a scientific fact. >_<I knew this already
This is why I don't really succomb to the whole thing
Roman Legion
11-30-2005, 07:56 PM
Could have sworn this was old news... unless they're speaking of a different protein, which is entirely possible. I have to wonder, though, why no one ever seems to ask the obvious... what triggers the production of said molecule in the first place?
--Romey
Artimus Gigan
12-01-2005, 12:34 AM
Could have sworn this was old news... unless they're speaking of a different protein, which is entirely possible. I have to wonder, though, why no one ever seems to ask the obvious... what triggers the production of said molecule in the first place?
--RomeySight of boobies or butt
Actually it's there Pheremones from the other sex
Kury Wagner
12-01-2005, 12:41 AM
You would rather they tell a bunch of lies just so something remains "romantically inexplicable?"Yes, I almost would prefer that. I don't want every little thing to have an explanation just because they dissected the hell out of lamb.
Stewie
12-01-2005, 02:27 AM
Yes, I almost would prefer that. I don't want every little thing to have an explanation just because they dissected the hell out of lamb.True romantics don't read the news. Baaa.
Artimus Gigan
12-01-2005, 02:36 AM
Yes, I almost would prefer that. I don't want every little thing to have an explanation just because they dissected the hell out of lamb.Oedipus would disagree
Peter Paltridge
12-01-2005, 03:00 AM
Now we can develop a love-suppressing pill and make the world even HARSHER.
True Noir
12-01-2005, 06:33 AM
This is so riduculous, I laugh.
Scythemantis
12-01-2005, 06:39 AM
Yes, I almost would prefer that. I don't want every little thing to have an explanation just because they dissected the hell out of lamb.
But every little thing does have an explanation, and the goal of Science is solely to expand human understanding of the natural world whenever and wherever it can be expanded, no matter how trivial or even unpleasant it may seem.
I don't see what the big deal is. If you can feel something at all, it just goes without saying there's a physical, organic process at work. You can still cling to the magical mystery of why the universe exists in the first place. Yes, it's probably from an explosion of gas, but WHY THE GAS!!?? Oh, the questions that have taunted us since first we gazed up at the stars...why oh why the gas?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.