Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

"All Natural"

Just Like ThatJust Like That Registered User
edited February 2010 in Debate and/or Discourse
allnatural_watermark.gif

So, the word "natural" gets thrown around a lot, particularly in the context of food or medicine. Merriam-Webster gives it this beast of a definition:
Main Entry: 1nat·u·ral
Pronunciation: \ˈna-chə-rəl, ˈnach-rəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French naturel, from Latin naturalis of nature, from natura nature
Date: 14th century

1 : based on an inherent sense of right and wrong <natural justice>
2 a : being in accordance with or determined by nature b : having or constituting a classification based on features existing in nature
3 a (1) : begotten as distinguished from adopted; also : legitimate (2) : being a relation by actual consanguinity as distinguished from adoption <natural parents> b : illegitimate <a natural child>
4 : having an essential relation with someone or something : following from the nature of the one in question <his guilt is a natural deduction from the evidence>
5 : implanted or being as if implanted by nature : seemingly inborn <a natural talent for art>
6 : of or relating to nature as an object of study and research
7 : having a specified character by nature <a natural athlete>
8 a : occurring in conformity with the ordinary course of nature : not marvelous or supernatural <natural causes> b : formulated by human reason alone rather than revelation <natural religion> <natural rights> c : having a normal or usual character <events followed their natural course>
9 : possessing or exhibiting the higher qualities (as kindliness and affection) of human nature <a noble…brother…ever most kind and natural — Shakespeare>
10 a : growing without human care; also : not cultivated <natural prairie unbroken by the plow> b : existing in or produced by nature : not artificial <natural turf> <natural curiosities> c : relating to or being natural food
11 a : being in a state of nature without spiritual enlightenment : unregenerate <natural man> b : living in or as if in a state of nature untouched by the influences of civilization and society
12 a : having a physical or real existence as contrasted with one that is spiritual, intellectual, or fictitious <a corporation is a legal but not a natural person> b : of, relating to, or operating in the physical as opposed to the spiritual world <natural laws describe phenomena of the physical universe>
13 a : closely resembling an original : true to nature b : marked by easy simplicity and freedom from artificiality, affectation, or constraint c : having a form or appearance found in nature
14 a : having neither flats nor sharps <the natural scale of C major> b : being neither sharp nor flat c : having the pitch modified by the natural sign
15 : of an off-white or beige color

Obviously, they have no idea what the fuck it means either. But most people seem to think it means "something that appears in nature, unaltered by human beings," usually with the inference that anything nature produces is superior to that of mankind.

Nature:
ExtraordinaryHighresolutionImagesOf.jpg

I find it interesting that, of everything on Earth, humans are the only unnatural creatures. If a beaver builds a dam, it is natural. If a dude builds a skyscraper, it's either "unnatural" or "artificial" (the two arch nemeses of Nature). The original ingredients of the skyscraper are natural-- that much is for sure-- but somewhere in between the time they are collected and the time they are put together in the form of a completed building, they exit this ambiguous realm. Only humans have this power to remove things from the natural world.

Similarly, medicine that is created by man through once-natural ingredients, through chemical processes (debatable in their naturalness, but nonetheless permitted by nature), is unnatural. And naturally, they are bad for you because Prozac is nowhere to be seen growing amongst the trees. Bears don't take Klonopin, to my best knowledge. No, much better are the natural gifts of Mother Nature, such as the lovely Belladonna plant. Oh, sweet deadly nightshade, I love how you let me talk to ghosts!

But I digress. On to food, which nowadays are loaded with artificial colors artificial flavors. Remember, artificial means bad. Why are they bad? Because I haven't been able to find any in my local woods, and I've been looking for weeks. These days I only buy 7Up because it contains natural flavors, just like the 7Up my grandmother used to get from the old well.

....Basically, the idea is that "natural" products are better for you than something that has been made 'artificially' or 'processed'. I see it all the time, increasingly so-- "New blankety-blank, now with all natural ingredients, the way that nature intended it." I call bullshit, and postulate that everything is natural. Humans came from it, and therefore everything they do is natural as well. Something found in 'nature' has an equal chance of being bad for you as something created or altered by people. Your body can't tell the fucking difference. An example of something unnatural would be defying physics by floating a pen with your mind (please don't hesitate to try this). To review:

Natural:
DoritosHeatL_228x298.jpg

Natural:
tory.jpg

Unnatural:
ghostbusters_l.jpg

Just Like That on
«134

Posts

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The word "natural" is literally devoid of any meaning when it comes to food advertising and packaging in the U.S.

  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Death Groupie Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Arsenic is natural.

    It's also something you wouldn't want to find in your food.

    steam_sig.png
  • CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The interesting part about "all natural" bragging rights is that nature really doesn't care if you die.
    Thanatos wrote: »
    The word "natural" is literally devoid of any meaning when it comes to food advertising and packaging in the U.S.

    This too. There are all sorts of quirks and loopholes in technical definitions that mean the labels products self-apply don't actually tell you anything.

    The libertarian response to anything is, "Sure, that works fine in practice, but it doesn't fly in theory."
  • YougottawannaYougottawanna Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    I used to have this exact same argument with some Taoists I knew. They would argue that certain things shouldn't be done because they weren't "natural", and I never heard them give any definition of "natural" that didn't amount to a tautology.

    Note that I don't necessarily have anything against Taoism, which seems cool in a lot of ways. But these two were especially intractable.

  • SmokeStacksSmokeStacks License Number 137596Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    On the food end, "All Natural" is nothing more than a marketing buzzword that gets slapped onto anything it can to try to entice buyers.

    Unless I am wrong, don't other descriptors like "Organic" and "Whole Grain" have legal requirements, but "Natural" does not?

    SUP ISORN
    STEAM ME, BABY / PSN: ghjfghdfgcvb
  • bsjezzbsjezz Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Just so we're clear OP, you contend everything that exists natural in every single context?

    PSN: allenquid
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    On the food end, "All Natural" is nothing more than a marketing buzzword that gets slapped onto anything it can to try to entice buyers.

    Unless I am wrong, don't other descriptors like "Organic" and "Whole Grain" have legal requirements, but "Natural" does not?

    "organic" is regulated moderately well here, but not so much in the US, as I recall.

    "natural" flavours and the like tend simply to be not the freaky ones invented in mid-C20 and later linked to, like, hyperactivity and such. These 'natural' compounds may be produced by the batch in labs in some cases, but the molecular formula is actually found in nature.

    That's mostly becuase a lot of 'natural' compounds are still too complicated to synthesise and have to be isolated from wild or grown products.

    tmsig.jpg
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    Quid wrote: »
    Just so we're clear OP, you contend everything that exists natural in every single context?

    Its more that he's deliberately ignoring context in order to sound edgy.

    Edgy guy is not my favourite forum character.

    tmsig.jpg
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Just so we're clear OP, you contend everything that exists natural in every single context?

    Its more that he's deliberately ignoring context in order to sound edgy.

    Edgy guy is not my favourite forum character.

    What is your favorite forum character?

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • Just Like ThatJust Like That Registered User
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Just so we're clear OP, you contend everything that exists natural in every single context?

    Its more that he's deliberately ignoring context in order to sound edgy.

    Edgy guy is not my favourite forum character.

    How would the context change anything?

    And yes, my point was that anything can be defined as natural, in any likely context.

  • dlinfinitidlinfiniti Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    this thread is disappointing in the lack of

    robert-redford-the-natural-photograph-c10103386.jpg

    or

    randy-couture.jpg

    or even

    Nature%2BBoy%2BRic%2BFlair.jpg

    AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Ric Flair wins the thread.

    Other than that, who cares. Advertising is advertising.

    (Mostly) Competitive Gaming Blog Updated December 10th. "Second Chances" (Short Story)
    stream
  • Premier kakosPremier kakos Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    Feral wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Just so we're clear OP, you contend everything that exists natural in every single context?

    Its more that he's deliberately ignoring context in order to sound edgy.

    Edgy guy is not my favourite forum character.

    What is your favorite forum character?

    Tubby communist.

    SuperKawaiiWillSig.jpg
  • CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    "natural" flavours and the like tend simply to be not the freaky ones invented in mid-C20 and later linked to, like, hyperactivity and such. These 'natural' compounds may be produced by the batch in labs in some cases, but the molecular formula is actually found in nature.

    That's mostly becuase a lot of 'natural' compounds are still too complicated to synthesise and have to be isolated from wild or grown products.

    From what I read in I believe What Einstein Told His Barber, in America at least "natural flavors" means that the compounds were originally in a plant/animal/fungus/what-have-you while "artificial flavors" are the exact same compounds synthesized in a lab.
    The Cat wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Just so we're clear OP, you contend everything that exists natural in every single context?

    Its more that he's deliberately ignoring context in order to sound edgy.

    Edgy guy is not my favourite forum character.

    How would the context change anything?

    And yes, my point was that anything can be defined as natural, in any likely context.

    Which means that natural becomes utterly meaningless and might as well not exist.

    As humans we happen to think of humans as special, and we certainly do affect a lot of the universe around us, so it makes sense to me to come up with a concept to separate what we've done from what we didn't. The only problem is when people get too caught up in this distinction.

    The libertarian response to anything is, "Sure, that works fine in practice, but it doesn't fly in theory."
  • MetroidZoidMetroidZoid Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Man I get to deal with shit like this all the time working in a nursery

    "But I want something natural to kill these bugs, not chemicals"
    ...
    "Ma'am, Pyrethren is a concentrated component, eg, chemical, found in African species of flowers. Regardless, you pour this on the earth in all it's concentrated glory, and you'll fuck up more than most synthetic chemicals in this aisle"

    And when it comes down to 'which potting soil is best for my plants', well your houseplant doesn't give a rats ass if it's organic or not because you're not going to eat that spider plant later, are you? And Oregon law (I'm 90% sure) has fucked up regulations like most other places I'm assuming. Let's see ... to use 'Organic' in a products name (at least, non-food wise), it only has to contain 51% organic components; the rest can be powdered concrete and donkey shit for all it matters. To have 'Natural' in the name, it's a much higher rate, closer to 90%, but no one gives a flying silly goose about 'natural' anymore, it has to be Organic only. More on that in a sec. But about those names; if it's not the name of the product per say, but a description on the bag? Even if it's in giant bold letters over the name? Completely up to the manufacturer. Like it's solely on their opinion. And as much as you try to tell people to know the shit they put in their garden and around their kids, to read packages and actually think about these things, they'll buy up whatever fertilizer has the best picture of kids playing on a green lawn, even if that package contains reprocessed human feces.

    That part is absolutely true.

    And as far as 'Organic' goes, there's a good cluster-gaggle of silly geeses who aren't sold on organic alone, but it has to be 'OMRI certified'. Okay, well OMRI is it's own corporation, not a government institution (which could be good or bad depending on how you look at it), and there profit comes from getting companies to jump through their loopholes to be OMRI certified. For as many good intentions as they might have as a whole, they're not a volunteer corp slapping peace and love stickers on packages of reprocessed human feces. God how I hate that we carry that.

    Me, I garden in a way that just feels better to me. I don't label it. I don't buy 'organic plant starts' because hell it's a two-day old seedling, it hasn't had time to be dowsed in horrible pesticides. It doesn't even have growing problems yet. But I'll grow it in soils sans synthetic fertilizers. With a proper balance, I don't have to fertilize all season, synthetic or not. And so when I pick my luscious peppers of the plant, I know I can bite into it then and there without a care. Unless there's slugs around. Because those little sons of silly gooses are a nuisance and I'll resort to napalm if necessary.

    9UsHUfk.jpgSteam
    3DS FC: 4699-5714-8940 Playing Pokemon, add me! Ho, SATAN!
  • SenjutsuSenjutsu fiddy too Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    why is the natural building from my campus

    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm gonna get a PhD in incest.
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Feral wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Just so we're clear OP, you contend everything that exists natural in every single context?

    Its more that he's deliberately ignoring context in order to sound edgy.

    Edgy guy is not my favourite forum character.

    What is your favorite forum character?

    Tubby communist.

    Really? I'm a fan of drunken sailor and his saucy ginger wench, myself.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • Al_watAl_wat Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    I hate when people are like "thats chemicals they aren't natural" or otherwise talking about those evil "chemicals", not understanding that almost every single thing they are familiar with is made of chemicals.

    I... I really want to strangle them.

  • CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Al_wat wrote: »
    I hate when people are like "thats chemicals they aren't natural" or otherwise talking about those evil "chemicals", not understanding that almost every single thing they are familiar with is made of chemicals.

    I... I really want to strangle them.

    Convince them that the only way to avoid chemicals is to breathe pure noble gas. I mean, they want to avoid those nasty oxidants, right?

    The libertarian response to anything is, "Sure, that works fine in practice, but it doesn't fly in theory."
  • Al_watAl_wat Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Cervetus wrote: »
    Al_wat wrote: »
    I hate when people are like "thats chemicals they aren't natural" or otherwise talking about those evil "chemicals", not understanding that almost every single thing they are familiar with is made of chemicals.

    I... I really want to strangle them.

    Convince them that the only way to avoid chemicals is to breathe pure noble gas. I mean, they want to avoid those nasty oxidants, right?

    Using intelligence to combat such stupidity is futile.

    I prefer to just tell them they are completely retarded, or use a language they are most likely familiar with: violence.

  • VariableVariable Ted Hitler Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited February 2010
    I used to argue what the OP is saying to a friend of mine mostly to annoy him.

    the issue with abuse of the word is fine. saying that the idea it represents to some people doesn't exist is not.

    BNet-Vari#1998 | WiiU-Variable | 3DS-3866-8105-7478 | Steam | Twitch
    Sig%20-%20Hearthstone%20DoA.png
  • MetroidZoidMetroidZoid Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    To a degree, I can understand people looking for a healthier / less ... artificial? product. But sometimes it's irrelevant, and people want to fight you on it, especially when some company out there realizes this irrelevancy, makes an alternative 'Natural' product, but charges more for it. Therefore, it must be better! And I'm either ignorant for not buying it, or worse an earth-hurting monster.

    9UsHUfk.jpgSteam
    3DS FC: 4699-5714-8940 Playing Pokemon, add me! Ho, SATAN!
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Just so we're clear OP, you contend everything that exists natural in every single context?

    Its more that he's deliberately ignoring context in order to sound edgy.

    Edgy guy is not my favourite forum character.

    How would the context change anything?

    And yes, my point was that anything can be defined as natural, in any likely context.

    What? You tried to define a goddamn skyscraper as a natural product by noting that its composed of materials found in nature. That degree of wall-eyed stupidity is something I find amazing, and by amazing I mean shameful. Its like, we could talk about the naturalistic fallacy and that's totally fine, but you're not operating on a level where that can be accomplished.

    tmsig.jpg
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    Al_wat wrote: »
    I hate when people are like "thats chemicals they aren't natural" or otherwise talking about those evil "chemicals", not understanding that almost every single thing they are familiar with is made of chemicals.

    I... I really want to strangle them.

    You must know what they mean, though. Unless you lack all appreciation of context, like our OP. They mean they don't trust stuff that's been synthesised and produced en masse by various commercial interests without adequate testing.

    And sometimes they're wrong, because a lot of modern synthetics are freaking awesome, but sometimes they're not wrong, because look at what a mess we've made with our plastics and refined heavy metals and deformity-inducing medications and on the list goes.

    tmsig.jpg
  • SmokeStacksSmokeStacks License Number 137596Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    So define "natural".

    Is a beaver dam natural?

    SUP ISORN
    STEAM ME, BABY / PSN: ghjfghdfgcvb
  • Al_watAl_wat Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Yeah I do know what they mean, they're thinking shit like the toxic cleaners you've got under your sink and pollutants and stuff.

    But a lot of the time they are just retarded; like people who believe in purely homeopathic medicine because regular medicine is "chemicals".

  • MetroidZoidMetroidZoid Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    So define "natural".

    Is a beaver dam natural?

    If the curtains match the rug

    By which I mean the beaver, having an eco-conscious mind, made sure to purchase only 100% cotton draperies and floor adornment.

    9UsHUfk.jpgSteam
    3DS FC: 4699-5714-8940 Playing Pokemon, add me! Ho, SATAN!
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    So define "natural".

    Is a beaver dam natural?

    As opposed to?

    tmsig.jpg
  • SmokeStacksSmokeStacks License Number 137596Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    So define "natural".

    Is a beaver dam natural?

    As opposed to?

    A log cabin.

    SUP ISORN
    STEAM ME, BABY / PSN: ghjfghdfgcvb
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    So define "natural".

    Is a beaver dam natural?

    As opposed to?

    A log cabin.

    Why a log cabin?

    tmsig.jpg
  • SmokeStacksSmokeStacks License Number 137596Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    So define "natural".

    Is a beaver dam natural?

    As opposed to?

    A log cabin.

    Why a log cabin?

    Because it's something an animal built.

    SUP ISORN
    STEAM ME, BABY / PSN: ghjfghdfgcvb
  • MblackwellMblackwell Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Ingredients: High Fructose Corn Syrup, Corn Syrup, Sugar Syrup, Water, Pure Maple Syrup, Salt, Artificial Flavors, Cellulose Gum, Sodium Hexametaphosphate, Sodium Benzoate, and Sorbic Acid, (Preservatives) Caramel Color.

    Edit: Yes, I'm a smart ass.

    Just because something is "natural" in the sense that "it exists" doesn't mean anyone knows what the heck it will do since it wasn't something we evolved along side. Hence why people question things.

    Music: The Rejected Applications | Nintendo Network ID: Mblackwell

  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    So define "natural".

    Is a beaver dam natural?

    As opposed to?

    A log cabin.

    Why a log cabin?

    Because it's something an animal built.

    *shrug* they're probably roughly on the same level in terms of environmental impact, provided the log cabin is entirely empty except for a pile of human shit in one corner and a pile of naked humans in another. Is this going anywhere interesting?

    tmsig.jpg
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2010
    Mblackwell wrote: »
    Ingredients: High Fructose Corn Syrup, Corn Syrup, Sugar Syrup, Water, Pure Maple Syrup, Salt, Artificial Flavors, Cellulose Gum, Sodium Hexametaphosphate, Sodium Benzoate, and Sorbic Acid, (Preservatives) Caramel Color.

    Edit: Yes, I'm a smart ass.

    Is that, like, food? Or some kind of glue?

    tmsig.jpg
  • MblackwellMblackwell Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    Mblackwell wrote: »
    Ingredients: High Fructose Corn Syrup, Corn Syrup, Sugar Syrup, Water, Pure Maple Syrup, Salt, Artificial Flavors, Cellulose Gum, Sodium Hexametaphosphate, Sodium Benzoate, and Sorbic Acid, (Preservatives) Caramel Color.

    Edit: Yes, I'm a smart ass.

    Is that, like, food? Or some kind of glue?

    It's Log Cabin Original Maple Flavored Syrup!

    So both!

    Music: The Rejected Applications | Nintendo Network ID: Mblackwell

  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    Al_wat wrote: »
    I hate when people are like "thats chemicals they aren't natural" or otherwise talking about those evil "chemicals", not understanding that almost every single thing they are familiar with is made of chemicals.

    I... I really want to strangle them.

    You must know what they mean, though. Unless you lack all appreciation of context, like our OP. They mean they don't trust stuff that's been synthesised and produced en masse by various commercial interests without adequate testing.

    And sometimes they're wrong, because a lot of modern synthetics are freaking awesome, but sometimes they're not wrong, because look at what a mess we've made with our plastics and refined heavy metals and deformity-inducing medications and on the list goes.

    I can't think of a good example off of the top of my head, but there's a tricksy thing about botanical synthesis where plants don't generally make racemic mixtures of a chiral molecule - they only make a single enantiomer, whereas lab synthesis gets you a racemic soup.

    But that's the trick about fallacies. Fallacies aren't necessarily wrong, in fact they're often right, they simply give us no way of knowing whether they're right or not. That's why we need SCIENCE!

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    a pile of naked humans in another. Is this going anywhere interesting?

    It started going somewhere interesting by the last several words, yeah.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    It's like I always say... if humans were meant to be naked, screaming, and covered in blood, we would have been born that way.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • CycloneRangerCycloneRanger Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    The Cat wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    So define "natural".

    Is a beaver dam natural?

    As opposed to?

    A log cabin.

    Why a log cabin?

    Because it's something an animal built.

    *shrug* they're probably roughly on the same level in terms of environmental impact, provided the log cabin is entirely empty except for a pile of human shit in one corner and a pile of naked humans in another. Is this going anywhere interesting?
    I don't know. One is constructed according to instinct, whereas the construction of the other is a learned behavior. I could see a meaningful definition of "artificial" falling along that divide, although it might be hard to tell in some cases.

    Not that it would be relevant to some kind of value judgment. The whole "natural" thing is just a bunch of people thinking that for some reason a particular aesthetic ("natural" like the picture in the OP) is more than just an aesthetic.

    It goes the opposite way, too, though. Some people get a huge science-boner from anything involving, say, fission, or maybe genetic engineering. I fall into this trap myself at times.

    MWO User Name: Gorn Arming
    StarCraft II User Name: DeadMenRise
«134
Sign In or Register to comment.