Another name for women that are “hot” or “fashionable” is Mirana
Another great video. Keep up the intelligent and very sexy work
blueskies13 on
July 30th, 2008 3:19 am
marina you are just too hot for words i love my teacher i watch lessons every day or in my case every morning when i cant sleep i watch.i watch every chance i get i love to learn i would like to hear any mexican to english words
hum3wade on
July 15th, 2008 4:14 pm
You know what’s hot is you youa re the spicyness of the food and just hot!!!!!!!!.
hello received your message and clear that always vote because of you, you are my teacher and one of the best I always will be your student.
I love your classes and by God if you once beautiful even my good teacher you command many kisses, and if I come late and I das an arrest does not matter as long as these ahi to punish me much better prefer your punishment my teacher, and kisses cuidate.
tedt on
July 8th, 2008 2:42 pm
Well done, I had to find the old German one first , made me sweat at this one. I saw it before but wasn´t sure about it, thought you made a writing mistake.
donfelipegonzales on
July 6th, 2008 1:44 pm
Dear teacher,,
I’m hot for this hot lesson about the hot word from hotforwords!
Thank you for this lesson,
Don Felipehot
Due to the recent death of George Carlin, I think it would be great for Marina to do a tribute and answer one of his questions…
Why do we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?
kneeling_nothing on
June 23rd, 2008 9:23 am
If anybody is entitled to explain the meaning of “hot”, it is Marina! Not just because she is “hot for words” Marina, you are a legend!
errin on
June 23rd, 2008 8:31 am
People say hot or cute because their perspicacity is such that words like gorgeous or beautiful are too much for them.
I can see why hot would be akin to clothing in most women’s eyes, as a handsome man to them is the same thing as a nice pair of shoes. Many women’s favorite accessory is called ‘the boyfriend’, a title I never use because I know better. Oh ya, and I’m hott (majorly and mega, I’ve been told), and I know how to work it. Some women will do anything for a nice pair of shoes…
pennsyltucky9 replied on June 24th, 2008 3:35 am:
“in most women’s eyes, a handsome man to them is the same thing as a nice pair of shoes?”
That’s real perspicacious… It pretty much explains why “boyfriend” is a “title you never use.”
okay4now replied on June 24th, 2008 5:43 am:
prospero811 replied on June 24th, 2008 11:48 am:
Perspicacity: keen understanding?
prospero811 on
June 23rd, 2008 8:04 am
Didn’t you do a video on the word “pulchritudinous?” That means “hot,” doesn’t it?
And, I think prospero811 is a synonym for “hot” too - which is clearly why Marina chose to make me her Pet on the video for “hot.” It’s obvious, isn’t it? She thinks I’m “hot,” and the rest of you are “not.”
rylankeeper replied on June 23rd, 2008 12:46 pm:
I would just like to know prospero how many times over and over you watched her say your name!
prospero811 replied on June 24th, 2008 4:23 am:
twice, actually. I memorized it.
pennsyltucky9 replied on June 24th, 2008 4:43 pm:
RE: Perspicacity: keen understanding?
Yeah, Proz.
A fairly transparent effort at cognoscibility…
hutchiee on
June 23rd, 2008 6:27 am
No matter what the definition, nobody can say the word “hot” as hot as Marina.
prospero811 on
June 23rd, 2008 5:07 am
Someone can be “smoking,” or “hot,” or “smoking hot.”
prospero811 on
June 23rd, 2008 5:06 am
I can’t believe it!
I made it!
Thank you, Marina!
pedantickarl replied on June 23rd, 2008 5:49 am:
Congratulations again prospero811,
That was way too kewel that you had just requested
to be the teachers pet the other day, too.
Server is back in business…
prospero811 replied on June 23rd, 2008 5:59 am:
Thank you. Thank you.
I knew it was only a matter of time before Marina recognized my genius intelligence and my rapier-like wit, as well as my devastating good looks, and my god-like physique (even though she’s never seen me, I am sure she can sense these qualities). By choosing me as Teachers Pet, Marina proves once again that she is as kind, generous, smart, and educated as she is incredibly beautiful and alluring.
hutchiee replied on June 23rd, 2008 6:27 am:
Was just looking through the comments and was thinking how ironic that you were the last to notice you were the Teacher’s Pet. Congratulations.
Congratulations!
We’ve been wondering where you’ve been.
Nice surprise wasn’t it?
prospero811 replied on June 23rd, 2008 7:58 am:
Much appreciated. Thank you to all my fans, and all their support over the last several months.
I am really thrilled that Marina finally decided to Pet me…. err… I mean… make me Teacher’s Pet. It’s a great honor, and proves that I am awesome and the rest of you can just wait in line behind me! Bam!
buzzword replied on June 23rd, 2008 2:18 pm:
yeah yeah it’s great to be you. i’m discussing evolution versus creationism down below. back me up?
BillyB replied on June 23rd, 2008 2:53 pm:
“I am not young enough to know everything.” - Oscar Wilde 1854-1900
Never trust anyone over thirty?
Actually I ammended that for me when I got to 30…40…working on a new ammendment for 50 “Never trust anyone with more answers than questions.”
roadrunrnch replied on June 24th, 2008 12:33 am:
buzz ard ,
You asked, and hey, my nipple comment… that was a damn good point. answer that one. ….. this is so cute. Your knowledge of anatomy is stellar.
We all start female then change to male in the uterus. Like buying a car, It’s the extras that make the difference.
Look up hermaphrodite , scary shit
BillyB replied on June 24th, 2008 12:42 am:
Scientists can solve some problems, but the nipple is a spiippery issue.
prospero811 replied on June 24th, 2008 6:07 am:
I’m not sure if anything is getting through. It’s as if no matter how many times one says it, some people will not understand that the “origin of life” is not the same thing as “evolution of life.” We really don’t know how life came from non-life, yet. The key word being “yet.”
One thing is for sure, though, nobody is saying that “life” springs out of “nothing” like in the vacuum of a light bulb. So, roadrunmch keeps asking, “can you create life in a light bulb,” and my only answer to that is “no, of course not. Whoever said you could? Certainly not the theory of evolution.” But, his argument is “if you can’t show me how life is created in a light bulb, then evolution is bunk.” I’m not sure how that can make sense to anyone, though, since evolution is not premised on life being created in vacuums of any kind, let alone light bulbs.
Am I missing something? I thought DonExodus and AronRa’s videos on youtube do a pretty darn good job (better than me, for sure) at explaining the science involved and using non-jargon terms.
Note, also, Thunderf00t’s series “Why do people laugh at creationists?” The title is inflammatory, but his debunking of creationist arguments is excellent.
Ok when I first clicked on it there was a picture of your gravatar on her big chest. The next time I clicked on the site the shirt had changed. Sorry to have alarmed you.
prospero811 replied on June 25th, 2008 6:07 am:
I’m not getting any cohesive response from roadrunrmch. He continues to claim, after I point out to the contrary and link to explanatory material that backs me up, that scientists think life just “popped” into existence out of nowhere (like in a light bulb).
Here’s a pretty good non-jargon video on the origin of life. I posted it in a reply to roadrunnr somewhere else, but thought you might like it: The Origin of Life Made Easy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozbFerzjkz4&feature =related
Clearly, the only ones claiming that life just “poofed” into existence are creationists, who claim that god used his supernatural power to do the poofing (in some undetectable way). Science does not claim that anything just poofed or popped into existence.
buzzword replied on June 25th, 2008 10:56 am:
yea, i agree. as always you respond in a very constructive manner. the links are also very well selected but i don’t think anything gets through his mental filter. i like discussing evolution but the debate between evolution and creationism gets old fast. and i don’t have the time.
i’ve just started summer classes and am getting really busy, medical terminology, physiology, developmental psychology, and physics. ugh. by the way, if you don’t mind, what is your background and what the hell do you do? you know enough to be a real pain in the ass.
micheldiego replied on June 25th, 2008 12:36 pm:
Hi guys, I’m still arguing with RRR in the “Hara-kiri” thread.
RRR: “In a last effort to end this let me just make one concession, God started and evolution took over.”
So the question is no more evolution but the initial spark the “anomaly” geting something from “nothing” (no place no time).
prospero811 replied on June 25th, 2008 4:01 pm:
Well, buzz - my friends all tell me the same thing…..I just consider myself a nerd (but, good looking).
prospero811 replied on June 25th, 2008 4:13 pm:
micheldiego - I figured that’s where we were headed. If God started it and evolution took over, then I guess we’re in agreement that evolution happens. Game - set - match.
Now, if we want to talk about theories on the origin of the universe, I already responded to that portion by posting some well constructed summary videos that discuss the matter. I’m not going to spend more time organizing thoughts while my posts go ignored by the guy who asked the questions and wanted to “swim in the deep end of the pool.”
Suffice to say that roadrunr is arguing the “god of the gaps.” And, I have no answer for that, scientifically. My only answer to the god of the gaps (god exists where there are gaps in scientific explanations), is that there has been a long progression of filling in gaps and god never seems to be there. 10,000 years ago, God was in the wind and the rain, the sun and the moon, the clouds, the volcanoes the earthquakes and the tidal waves. He was in the ocean and meteors and comets, etc. etc. Over time, man found out how these things worked, and we were able to let go of sun gods and wind gods and rock gods and volcano gods. When planets were first discovered, we thought that god held them in place - we know better now. More and more the gaps become fewer and fewer,and there is never a need for god to cause the happenings.
We’re down really to two main gaps: (1) the initial “origin” of the universe (if indeed it had one), and (2) the initial “spark” of life on Earth. Those are basically just two mysterious volcano gods, and one day we will know how those volcanoes really work.
In any case, let’s take the second gap - the spark of life. We now know that there are thousands of other planets in the universe, and probably millions of billions of them in all likelihood. If life could arise on another planet, will god have to point his finger and cast supernatural powers to make self replicating materials? Or, is there a natural explanation for how self-replicating materials may form under the right conditions? If you were a betting person, what would you think is the likely outcome of our explorations in that regard? God sprinkles “life force” onto a planet, or there are reactions that can take place where nucleotides will combine and form self-replicating compounds which will evolve from there?
I guess there will always be a gap in our knowledge, and god can live there. But if there is a god, he will not punish scientific inquiry, and he will not require you or me to believe things because they are written in an old book, or because our parents told us it was so. That’s just my humble opinion.
I’m expecting my results any day now. This is awesome. What genetics have done to support natural selection and human evolution in general is amazing.
Thought you might like it.
craigs_70345 on
June 22nd, 2008 2:58 pm
I have always liked the phrase “smoking hot” which makes perfect sense because most things that are very hot tend to smoke as well. I have never seen you smoking yet but you are definitely “smoking hot”.
I’m going to request “cocky” again. I’m really curious about this one.
murdoc129 on
June 22nd, 2008 2:32 pm
Dear Teacher:
This time i don’t wanna request a word. As you’ve been saying that you love to play GTA IV. I wanna ask you: How do you pronounce GRAND THEFT AUTO 4 in russian???
Site going down for an hour in an hour! Moving the database to a new server.. hopefully it will speed things up!
roadrunrnch replied on June 22nd, 2008 3:11 pm:
say it not so , Withdrawals , shakes, Teach BZW’s Started a very controversial theory of the Eye. Are you up to something like this. A little out of your expertise. You have a mind and can use it well. ie, The Eye, Did it evolve or was it created. A little deep but I believe you are up to it……ru?
pennsyltucky9 replied on June 23rd, 2008 11:21 am:
Did you say Buzzword started a very controversial theory? That’s a riot. But before you embarrass yourself engaging our busy teacher, get out your fifth grade biology textbook, or steal one from a 10 year-old. Read about light-sensing cells in earthworms. Do the planaria exercise on page 220. It’s “A little deep but I believe you are up to it…” This time don’t just copy your neighbors’ answers. Maybe you’ll learn something, unless eyes are just a theory and yours haven’t been created yet…
buzzword replied on June 23rd, 2008 1:24 pm:
dude, um… the theory is evolution and charles darwin deserves some of the credit.
Roadrunmch, I wanted to give you a couple of other good summations for you. Here’s one that answers one of your propositions (why can’t life form in a light bulb?). This video starts with a similar proposition about a jar of peanut butter. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_RXX7pntr8
The video also addresses your concern about things popping into existence like eyes and hands (the video uses an image of a cell to a brain just happening), and explains how it doesn’t “just happen.” Hopefully this will help clear it up.
The genographic project is amazing. Lots of scientific proof for man’s distant history. It’s only dealing with human migrations on the scale of hundreds of thousands of years, but it is illustrative of where science has come in this area.
Hello Marina,
I have all of your Radio Shows downloaded. If you can’t recover them maybe I can send them to your “contact” address.
prospero811 replied on June 23rd, 2008 5:54 am:
I want to thank the Academy and all of the little people who have supported me throughout these many months on my trek to become the Teachers Pet. Most importantly, I’d like to thank Marina, who saw the potential in me to be a fine Teachers Pet. I am very grateful to her for her confidence and trust that I am worthy of this wonderful honor.
Keep the faith, everyone, and you too can reach the pinnacle of recognition and have your name pass gently over the soft, pouty, bee-stung lips of our lovely, talented, and eminently trusty, teacher (the aptly names, Hot for Words).
prospero811 replied on June 23rd, 2008 6:00 am:
Would it be asking too much if I became the first student to become Teacher’s Pet twice?
pennsyltucky9 replied on June 23rd, 2008 11:22 am:
Uh, yes.
prospero811 replied on June 24th, 2008 11:50 am:
Come on, PAtuck9! I deserve it! If only from all the abuse I take from the gang around here….
pennsyltucky9 replied on June 25th, 2008 10:18 am:
Good point, but be that as it may, your tenure as TP seems to have extended for quite a while now, so perhaps you’ll consider that a sufficient, uh, bonus, shall we say. Regardless, I still offer congratulations and readily acknowledge your contributions to the site as substantial and relevant. Thanks for interceding in the latest debate, especially.
roadrunrnch replied on July 6th, 2008 12:00 pm:
PP811,
If you want to believe that a skin cell was able to evolve into to the eye,Great.
But why is that so easy to buy, But a god is stupid? It is just that, a skin cell can but a god can not, seems so ridiculous.
RRR???
prospero811 replied on July 6th, 2008 1:24 pm:
A couple of points, buzz:
1. It’s not a question of “wanting” to “believe” anything at all. It has to do with looking at the observations, testing and evidence, reading the explanations and conclusions, and accepting it as good science. That’s all. Understand the difference?
2. It’s most certainly NOT anything at all to do with believing, concluding, theorizing or even hypothesizing that a skin cell was able to evolve into the eye. Nobody thinks that’s the case. Nobody. At all. Ever.
3. None of this is “easy.” Physics, Calculus, Differential Equations, Chemistry, Thermodynamics and other such subjects were not “easy” and neither is evolutionary biology. But, it is understandable, and nobody is making shit up to trick you into believing it.
4. None of this is something you should “buy.” Skepticism is great. Heck, dispute Einstein’s theory of universal gravitation, the theories of plate tectonics, and any other theory you want question. However, when you do so you shouldn’t say things like “if you want to believe skin cell was able to evolve into an eye.” Why? Because that’s about as incisive a challenge to evolutionary theory as saying “if you want to believe that planets reach out invisible arms to grab onto other things and pull them in towards them….” That statement about gravity has as much to do with gravitational theory as your statement about skin to eyes has to do with evolution.
5. This has nothing to do with whether there is a God. Biological evolution does NOT say, theorize or require that there not be a god, or gods. There are plenty of god-believers that also accept evolution, including MOST Christians. The Catholic church officially accepted evolutionary science a long time ago, and over 50% of all Christians are Catholic. Most protestant denominations do not require one, either as an avoidance of sin or an acceptance of dogma, to reject the theory of evolution - the one I was born into doesn’t require rejection of evolution (Lutheran), I know Unitarians don’t have to, Anglicans (Church of England) don’t have to reject it (and most don’t), Methodists allow one resort to one’s own conscience in interpretation of Genesis.
So, this is not a battle between evolution and god unless YOU make it one. I will tell you flat out right now that the theory of evolution, again, does not dismiss god, does not pretend to theorize about his existence or nonexistence, and is ONLY in conflict with SOME concepts of god.
6. The theory of evolution does not require a belief that god, if he exists, is stupid. A god that could create planets, galaxies, warped space-time, elements and nuclear reactions (like the billions of years processes inside of stars), chemicals and chemical reactions/processes, and a process by which life may change and adapt over time would not be a “stupid” god.
7. Lastly - “seems so ridiculous” that god can’t. You’ve presented a false choice. Nobody said god can’t make things evolve. He didn’t, though, as far as everything that’s been studied make a process by which skin cells evolved into eyes. Even if their is no God, skin cells did not evolve into eyes. Things have evolved, though, and there is so much proof of that that it is as certain to be essentially correct as is Einstein’s theory of relativity. Thus, there are two choices. A- there is no god or gods and the process came about naturally, or B- there is a god or gods and he/they created that process. Either way, the process remains the same.
prospero811 replied on July 6th, 2008 1:32 pm:
err… I mean - roadrunmch….not buzz… I’m used to arguing with buzz… ha!
Look, roadrunmch, a question that I have for you is why don’t you learn something about evolution before you dismiss it?
I mean, you would KNOW that skin cells are not thought to evolve into eyes, and you would KNOW the explanation?
I am not saying you have no right to question the theory, but isn’t it important to you to challenge the actual theory, and not some other theory?
If I was to say to you that Christianity is false, you might say to me - “hey, Prose Perro, what’s your basis for saying it’s false?” And, then if I said to you, “Well, if you want to believe that Jesus was a warrior king who liberated the Israelites from their Roman oppressors…..” that’s fine, but it seems ridiculous to me….. what would you do?
You’d say, “Prose Perro! Do you even KNOW what Christianity is? Have you even bothered to read the New Testament? Christianity never says that Jesus was a warrior king or that he freed the Israelites from Roman oppressors!”
And, wouldn’t I have done NOTHING to dispute Christianity with that argument? Well, that is PRECISELY what you did with your “eyes evolve from skin cells” statement.
Am I making any sense?
prospero811 replied on July 6th, 2008 2:13 pm:
Here are some websites, roadrunmch, if you care to learn what evolution is, and why so many people are so certain about it.
Teacher.
I read your post below and I would like you to keep in mind one thing. The Jackals on Utube like nothing more then to tear People down. Build them up and then Gang Bang, Tear them to pieces like Perona.
Let them come here and try it . Like errin we’ll send them home with their Head stuffed up their ass.
In the nicest way possible
gio.forever on
June 22nd, 2008 12:49 pm
That software is programmed with a sofistical algoritm which is the base of its artificial intelligence
ArgonTheAware replied on June 22nd, 2008 1:09 pm:
It certainly would assist with the spelling since it’s algorithms are sophisticated enough to have rules dealing with that and to offer suggestions on synonyms.
How much that qualifies as intelligent is depends on how broadly you define it since it’s limited in it’s interactions
gio.forever on
June 22nd, 2008 12:35 pm
I’m interested adquiring “Whitesmoke” software because as you can see, my vocabulary is short and I have a lot of problems with redaction and Gramatical building. Don’t ya konw if there’s a trial version of it ???
ArgonTheAware replied on June 22nd, 2008 12:40 pm:
Yes it’s available for trial now just click on the link above. I recently installed it and it seems to work reasonably well
gio.forever replied on June 22nd, 2008 12:48 pm:
Reasonably well, It means the software has artificial intelligence ???
ArgonTheAware replied on June 22nd, 2008 1:03 pm:
I guess it depends on how broadly you define artificial intelligence. Behaviorists would probably give it high marks but it wouldn’t pass the Turing Test
so, if a dragon smokes a cigarette, is a dragon takin’ a drag on a cig?
and if it’s a mariuwanna? cig, would the dragon bogart? would u tell ‘im if he did? you might get him all fired up, ya know…
lastly, if a dragon taking a drag on a cig enjoys dressing in a female dragon’s clothing, does that make him a dragon drag queen taking a drag on a cig? Or a dragon dragon queen taking a drag on cig?
Okay, this has dragged on one dragon joke too long…
what a drag!…
pagedoll replied on June 22nd, 2008 2:33 pm:
dragon
c.1220, from O.Fr. dragon, from L. draconem (nom. draco) “serpent, dragon,” from Gk. drakon (gen. drakontos) “serpent, seafish,” from drak-, strong aorist stem of derkesthai “to see clearly.” But perhaps the lit. sense is “the one with the (deadly) glance.” The young are dragonets (14c.). Obsolete drake “dragon” is an older borrowing of the same word. Used in the Bible to translate Heb. tannin “a great sea-monster,” and tan, a desert mammal now believed to be the jackal. Dragonfly is from 1626.
pat_the_dog on
June 22nd, 2008 12:19 pm
How about “embuggerance”?
annuddermale replied on June 22nd, 2008 12:52 pm:
i don’t think it’s a recognized word yet…
and that bugs me…
i’m gonna bugger off now, though…
bobsully on
June 22nd, 2008 10:01 am
You are a visual definition of hot.
pedantickarl on
June 22nd, 2008 9:30 am
Hello My Dear Teacher Marina,
I am sorry for posting a response to your questions on YT here
regarding the spelling of hot in German, “Heiß”. I don’t have a YT
account yet, and there is someone over there who is hogging every
imaginable user name not taken. Grrrrr.
First, your spelling of hot in German, “heisz” is correct, with the
exception that it should have been capitalized. For you Germans
(I am one) who just had a heart attack, calm down. I can’t go into
a long dissertation due to the format, but will make two points that
indicate that Marina is correct in her writing it the way it was.
In German, the double “ss” is replaced by a letter called “es zet”,
whose symbol is “ß”. According to the new rules, “Heiß” would have
been correct, but had you written it “Heiss”, as many YT comments suggested, then that would not be correct, unless you were Swiss
German.
So, Marina, you were correct writing it “heisz” on two counts.
(except for the capitalization)
1. Your OED showed it as “heisz” which is the Old German way
of spelling it. So, historically, you are correct.
2. It is assumed, and by edict, it is said that if one cannot write the
special symbol “ß”, then one would use the double “ss”. But, that
would violate the rules. Therfore, many people use the literal
sound of the symbol “ß”, as “es zet” which would be written as “sz”,
meaning “ß”.
As an aside, Poland and Hungary are two countries that use the
letters “sz” in their language.
On the Mac, you would use Option+s to create the “ß”, but that
may or may not be true, depending on the software.
The debate and controversy regarding the letter “ß” will continue in
Germany and there is a ton more interesting things to be said about it.
Here are two links.
Hello Marina,
Now that prospero811 has had his day I would like to vote for:
annudermale, pennsyltucky9 and Bob
as one of your next “Teacher’s Pet”.
They have shown intelligence and wit in many ways that seems to flow naturally instead of reading/copying from a book.
The way that they get their point across is very exact and intuitive all the while showing a depth that is admirable.
Thank you.
Oh, and of course thank you for another excellent show.
Bob replied on June 22nd, 2008 9:37 am:
Thank you for your vote, Warren, but I’m quite happy to let everyone else jump the queue, in the belief that Marina is saving the best till last.
Anyway, since she named the Crane after me, I regard myself as Teacher’s Pet for Life.
Yea Bob. I do think your TP for life. Need to see the crane again in a vid.
pennsyltucky9 replied on June 23rd, 2008 4:39 pm:
I can see it now, Bob. Long after we’re dead, you’ll receive your teacher’s pet award posthumously as little old wizened Marina delivers her final vid from her deathbed at age 151 or so….
You can’t vote for teachers pet…not earned, except for being signed up. Bob’s comming up soon, I’m sure. I’m just curious as to which name he will have?
pennsyltucky9 replied on June 22nd, 2008 11:46 am:
No problem, you guys deserve it more since you’re not just rambling on. I actually learn a bit more here because of you guys.
annuddermale replied on June 22nd, 2008 1:07 pm:
why, thank you, Warren…that is a surprising post to me…
Bob and hill..’er, penn should be far ahead of me in that race, me being a relative newcomer…
and then there’s the ol’ saying…
age before beauty…
or, to be fair…
pearls before swine…
pennsyltucky9 replied on June 23rd, 2008 4:46 pm:
Hmmm. It was never a race for me, nudder, I’m just here to have fun crackin’ wise. Sometimes I slip up and say something intelligent by mistake. But on another note, if you look over toward the south end of the trough there’s some lovely slop over there for ya.
Hot - there used to be a lot of feline-type synonyms for this e.g. slinky, and some others I don’t recall. How far back goes one trace the implicit identification of female sexuality with cats - I imagine it goes back to Ancient Egypt or Babylon. Dogs on the other hand (although we love them) are definItily not sexy and are synonyms for ugliness. There is an underlying assumption that dogs have ‘male’ virtues - or at least those that women would like men to have(steadfast, brave, loyal) whilst cats have ‘female’ qualities - the qualities that men find attractive in women on first meeting - elegance, intuition, curiousity, caprice (that would be a good word to do), self-regard, enigmatic eyes, the sense of being on a different plane. What is so nice in Russian women is that this female tradition has been kept alive, whereas in much of the West it has been lost.
buzzword replied on June 22nd, 2008 8:58 am:
woo hoo, stereotyping women of various cultures… let’s do asian women next and black ones after that!
leonidas1111 replied on June 22nd, 2008 9:18 am:
Dear Buzzword
Thank you for your considered comment. I happen to be a Russian myself. Are you saying that I cannot make a (friendly) generalisation about women in my own culture without being accused of ’stereotyping women of various cultures’. Secondly you seem to assume that culture and ethnicity are the same thing. Russia, like France or Germany, is a nation/culture about which some generalisations can be made, although we should always be careful. You can see differences between the behaviour of men and women in Russia as opposed to Austria as opposed to Greece and so on. This is nothing to do with ethnicity - my generalisation would apply to Russian regardless of their ethnicity, as it would be a product of their upbringing and cultural heritage.
This is nothing like making generalisations about asian or black women - there is no single asian or black culture, and so any such generalisation would be about ethnicity not culture.
Bob replied on June 22nd, 2008 9:26 am:
Your wish is my command, Buzz, and as I’m married to an Asian woman (Thai) I feel qualified to comment.
I don’t like stereotyping of anyone any more than you, but I do know what leonidas1111 means. Asian women, in my experience, are mostly of small or petite stature, have soft voices and gentle dispositions and a tradition of acting in a subservient manner, since that is generally what their male dominant societies require. These are the qualities that western women, in their quest for “equality”, have abandoned, in the belief that they are demeaning, and the qualities that western men, not finding them at home, find so attractive in oriental women.
Note that Thai women, at least those living in the large cities and with a modern education, have all the equality of opportunity that western women enjoy, but they are intelligent enough to know what men like and to pander to them.
BillyB replied on June 22nd, 2008 9:37 am:
Do them all
“If women didn’t exist, all the money in the world would have no meaning.” - Aristotle Onassis 1906-1975
buzzword replied on June 22nd, 2008 10:09 am:
ethnicity is an identification with an ethnic group and exclusion from certain other groups because of the affiliation. now an ethnic group is distinguished by cultural similarities and differences. members of an ethnic group share beliefs, values, habits, customs, and norms, and a common language, religion, history and kinship. culture is a difficult term to define as it describes all that is human. at its most basic culture is the traditions and customs that govern behavior and beliefs. stereotypes are the fixed ideas about what the members of a group are like. so, yes you were stereotyping russian women, and yes you may continue to stereotype russian women and all other women. but as an obnoxious smart ass i was expressing my lack of enthusiasm for stereotyping as it rarely achieves any deep understanding of a person or their culture, ethnicity, etc… however i do question how specific the qualities of self-regard, enigmatic eyes and the sense of being on a different plane are to russian women alone. what the hell does a sense of being on a different plane mean? having traveled a good bit i can say that individual differences exceed the descriptions provided by the stereotypes of various cultures and ethnic groups. i could take 100 women from various cultures and group them together again using different characteristics that would relate them all into another group. and i could then stereotype that group as well. not saying stereotyping is wrong just saying it’s just a tired means of generalizing a people to a few simple characteristics that are often found throughout human culture. woo hoo.
@ Bob, I don’t minded equality. I just don’t like the women that are brain washed by commercials thinking they need this and that to be truly happy. This is one reason I don’t like to date women from the US.
rodace on
June 22nd, 2008 8:25 am
What does Fetish mean in BDSM lifestyle.
Rodace
prospero811 replied on June 24th, 2008 11:53 am:
as i’ve pointed out before….fetish is when you’re not really “fet” — you’re just fet-ish.
lennyboy on
June 22nd, 2008 8:08 am
Hey
I was wondering what the word cup means. There are many synonymes of cup. you can
drink coffee from a cup and I also know that there is world cups. You now - sports events.
There is also bra cups. I acctually choosed to ask you about the word cup when I saw your beautiful torso. Don´t take me for a pervert now. I just think you are a beautiful women and your breasts are one of the thinks that makes you wonderful
Best regards Lennart from Sweden.
vasdrugleonard on
June 22nd, 2008 8:07 am
Thanks Marina, your the best English teacher I ever had!~ Since Ron Paul has started one, I’d like to know the origin of the word: “Revolution”
homework: Smokin, PHAT (pretty hot and tempting) Gorgeous, beautiful, HEY!~ all these words describe you Hotforwords!~ This homework had a twist~
Hey_ would you be willing to proofread the website, http://www.campaignforliberty.com ? Just kidding!~, just wanted to get in a free digg designed at saving the last few liberties of the average American citizen. Please Marina, sign our petition. Thank you my teacher , sorry to interrupt class Vasdrugleonard
okay4now on
June 22nd, 2008 7:35 am
ooh homework: tangerine or tangy or tanginess
e.g. Look at her walkin’ down the street with all that tanginess.
levocombi on
June 22nd, 2008 6:33 am
I disagree about the assessment of “hot” referring to looks. I believe that this use of “hot” refers to sexual attractiveness or being fertile. I think it refers to being “in heat”, when a female is the most fertile and invites sexual advances.
levocombi, and the term “being in heat” refers to the temperature of the genitals of the animal that is in heat? Are they hotter when the animal is “in heat”?
levocombi replied on June 22nd, 2008 8:10 am:
Ohhhhhhhhhhh! Shit.
You sure put me in my place.
There’s no challenge too great for Hot for Words.
Bob replied on June 22nd, 2008 8:30 am:
Isn’t it more to do with the reaction of the viewer feeling “hot under the collar” when they encounter someone attractive?
lindridge replied on June 22nd, 2008 9:47 am:
Tempareture is not mentioned as a characteristic of a cat or dog in heat in the following two webites (assuming I can insert them correctly). The characteristics are behaviorial.
Wearing attractive clothing seems analogous to an animal in heat trying to attact a mate. Could not “hot” in the sense of attractive be related entymologically to “in heat?”
Marina, am I dumb or just lost? Don’t be honest, ok be somewhat honest. Are some of the maxim radio shows miising? ie 2-4…
Oh & how about “Viral” as in exteme heat.
annuddermale replied on June 22nd, 2008 1:39 pm:
estrus is, of course, the formal term for a female animal “in heat”…according to sources, it is from the Latin oestrus, meaning “frenzy, gadfly” and from Greek oistros
so perhaps being “in heat” came about from the frenzied actions of the female leading up to, and perhaps during, mating?…
not being female, i can’t vouch for any frenzied activity, but i’m pretty sure i’d be willing to unfrenzy a few…
(okay, we all know human females have menstrual cycles that have replaced estrus, but, hey, that was the best shot i had to poke a lil’ fun Marina’s way today…)…
pennsyltucky9 replied on June 22nd, 2008 1:45 pm:
“Heat” relates directly to “excitement” on a molecular level. Similarly, animals in heat (estrus) tend to generate excitement in the form of heightened social or sexual activity levels as well. Amazing how the terminology we used to refer to heightened social or sexual activity since the days well before molecular physics were precisely understood ended up as a parallel to the physical properties of molecules. Wild, huh? Now how do you suppose we intuited that connection?
I’m hot for HotforWords.
Another name for women that are “hot” or “fashionable” is Mirana
Another great video. Keep up the intelligent and very sexy work
marina you are just too hot for words i love my teacher i watch lessons every day or in my case every morning when i cant sleep i watch.i watch every chance i get i love to learn i would like to hear any mexican to english words
You know what’s hot is you youa re the spicyness of the food and just hot!!!!!!!!.
hello received your message and clear that always vote because of you, you are my teacher and one of the best I always will be your student.
I love your classes and by God if you once beautiful even my good teacher you command many kisses, and if I come late and I das an arrest does not matter as long as these ahi to punish me much better prefer your punishment my teacher, and kisses cuidate.
Well done, I had to find the old German one first
, made me sweat at this one. I saw it before but wasn´t sure about it, thought you made a writing mistake.
Dear teacher,,
I’m hot for this hot lesson about the hot word from hotforwords!
Thank you for this lesson,
Don Felipehot
very good but way are uyou soooo mmmmm “HOT” you make my laptop melt with your awsome looks [opps words] HUGSSS
smokin’…cutie just like u…
Yada yada yada…
Blah blah blah….
Hello Marina,
Hot for words
Hot for love,
Hot for beauty,
Hot for you,
Hot is in the eye of the beholder when I look at you!
Delicious dear lady delicious would meet thy beauty!
Your loving student, jcnick.
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Due to the recent death of George Carlin, I think it would be great for Marina to do a tribute and answer one of his questions…
Why do we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?
If anybody is entitled to explain the meaning of “hot”, it is Marina! Not just because she is “hot for words”
Marina, you are a legend!
People say hot or cute because their perspicacity is such that words like gorgeous or beautiful are too much for them.
I can see why hot would be akin to clothing in most women’s eyes, as a handsome man to them is the same thing as a nice pair of shoes. Many women’s favorite accessory is called ‘the boyfriend’, a title I never use because I know better. Oh ya, and I’m hott (majorly and mega, I’ve been told), and I know how to work it. Some women will do anything for a nice pair of shoes…
“in most women’s eyes, a handsome man to them is the same thing as a nice pair of shoes?”
That’s real perspicacious… It pretty much explains why “boyfriend” is a “title you never use.”
Perspicacity: keen understanding?
Didn’t you do a video on the word “pulchritudinous?” That means “hot,” doesn’t it?
And, I think prospero811 is a synonym for “hot” too - which is clearly why Marina chose to make me her Pet on the video for “hot.” It’s obvious, isn’t it? She thinks I’m “hot,” and the rest of you are “not.”
I would just like to know prospero how many times over and over you watched her say your name!
twice, actually. I memorized it.
RE: Perspicacity: keen understanding?
Yeah, Proz.
A fairly transparent effort at cognoscibility…
No matter what the definition, nobody can say the word “hot” as hot as Marina.
Someone can be “smoking,” or “hot,” or “smoking hot.”
I can’t believe it!
I made it!
Thank you, Marina!
Congratulations again prospero811,
That was way too kewel that you had just requested
to be the teachers pet the other day, too.
Server is back in business…
Thank you. Thank you.
I knew it was only a matter of time before Marina recognized my genius intelligence and my rapier-like wit, as well as my devastating good looks, and my god-like physique (even though she’s never seen me, I am sure she can sense these qualities). By choosing me as Teachers Pet, Marina proves once again that she is as kind, generous, smart, and educated as she is incredibly beautiful and alluring.
Was just looking through the comments and was thinking how ironic that you were the last to notice you were the Teacher’s Pet. Congratulations.
It was a nice surprise this morning!
Congratulations!
We’ve been wondering where you’ve been.
Nice surprise wasn’t it?
Much appreciated. Thank you to all my fans, and all their support over the last several months.
I am really thrilled that Marina finally decided to Pet me…. err… I mean… make me Teacher’s Pet. It’s a great honor, and proves that I am awesome and the rest of you can just wait in line behind me! Bam!
yeah yeah it’s great to be you. i’m discussing evolution versus creationism down below. back me up?
“I am not young enough to know everything.” - Oscar Wilde 1854-1900
Never trust anyone over thirty?
Actually I ammended that for me when I got to 30…40…working on a new ammendment for 50 “Never trust anyone with more answers than questions.”
buzz ard ,
You asked, and hey, my nipple comment… that was a damn good point. answer that one. ….. this is so cute. Your knowledge of anatomy is stellar.
We all start female then change to male in the uterus. Like buying a car, It’s the extras that make the difference.
Look up hermaphrodite , scary shit
Scientists can solve some problems, but the nipple is a spiippery issue.
I’m not sure if anything is getting through. It’s as if no matter how many times one says it, some people will not understand that the “origin of life” is not the same thing as “evolution of life.” We really don’t know how life came from non-life, yet. The key word being “yet.”
One thing is for sure, though, nobody is saying that “life” springs out of “nothing” like in the vacuum of a light bulb. So, roadrunmch keeps asking, “can you create life in a light bulb,” and my only answer to that is “no, of course not. Whoever said you could? Certainly not the theory of evolution.” But, his argument is “if you can’t show me how life is created in a light bulb, then evolution is bunk.” I’m not sure how that can make sense to anyone, though, since evolution is not premised on life being created in vacuums of any kind, let alone light bulbs.
Am I missing something? I thought DonExodus and AronRa’s videos on youtube do a pretty darn good job (better than me, for sure) at explaining the science involved and using non-jargon terms.
Note, also, Thunderf00t’s series “Why do people laugh at creationists?” The title is inflammatory, but his debunking of creationist arguments is excellent.
Part 10 is good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aGEXMyFWyg
So is part 9 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzDYVFa1TR0
But, they are all great.
Here is a few more vids that are good on the basics - his whole series of vids is very good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w57_P9DZJ4&feature =related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_RXX7pntr8&feature =related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCayG4IIOEQ&feature =related
Hey BW you look good on the front of this womans chest
http://www.urbandictionary.com/
Ok when I first clicked on it there was a picture of your gravatar on her big chest. The next time I clicked on the site the shirt had changed. Sorry to have alarmed you.
I’m not getting any cohesive response from roadrunrmch. He continues to claim, after I point out to the contrary and link to explanatory material that backs me up, that scientists think life just “popped” into existence out of nowhere (like in a light bulb).
Here’s a pretty good non-jargon video on the origin of life. I posted it in a reply to roadrunnr somewhere else, but thought you might like it: The Origin of Life Made Easy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozbFerzjkz4&feature =related
Clearly, the only ones claiming that life just “poofed” into existence are creationists, who claim that god used his supernatural power to do the poofing (in some undetectable way). Science does not claim that anything just poofed or popped into existence.
yea, i agree. as always you respond in a very constructive manner. the links are also very well selected but i don’t think anything gets through his mental filter. i like discussing evolution but the debate between evolution and creationism gets old fast. and i don’t have the time.
i’ve just started summer classes and am getting really busy, medical terminology, physiology, developmental psychology, and physics. ugh. by the way, if you don’t mind, what is your background and what the hell do you do? you know enough to be a real pain in the ass.
Hi guys, I’m still arguing with RRR in the “Hara-kiri” thread.
RRR: “In a last effort to end this let me just make one concession, God started and evolution took over.”
So the question is no more evolution but the initial spark the “anomaly” geting something from “nothing” (no place no time).
Well, buzz - my friends all tell me the same thing…..I just consider myself a nerd (but, good looking).
micheldiego - I figured that’s where we were headed. If God started it and evolution took over, then I guess we’re in agreement that evolution happens. Game - set - match.
Now, if we want to talk about theories on the origin of the universe, I already responded to that portion by posting some well constructed summary videos that discuss the matter. I’m not going to spend more time organizing thoughts while my posts go ignored by the guy who asked the questions and wanted to “swim in the deep end of the pool.”
Suffice to say that roadrunr is arguing the “god of the gaps.” And, I have no answer for that, scientifically. My only answer to the god of the gaps (god exists where there are gaps in scientific explanations), is that there has been a long progression of filling in gaps and god never seems to be there. 10,000 years ago, God was in the wind and the rain, the sun and the moon, the clouds, the volcanoes the earthquakes and the tidal waves. He was in the ocean and meteors and comets, etc. etc. Over time, man found out how these things worked, and we were able to let go of sun gods and wind gods and rock gods and volcano gods. When planets were first discovered, we thought that god held them in place - we know better now. More and more the gaps become fewer and fewer,and there is never a need for god to cause the happenings.
We’re down really to two main gaps: (1) the initial “origin” of the universe (if indeed it had one), and (2) the initial “spark” of life on Earth. Those are basically just two mysterious volcano gods, and one day we will know how those volcanoes really work.
In any case, let’s take the second gap - the spark of life. We now know that there are thousands of other planets in the universe, and probably millions of billions of them in all likelihood. If life could arise on another planet, will god have to point his finger and cast supernatural powers to make self replicating materials? Or, is there a natural explanation for how self-replicating materials may form under the right conditions? If you were a betting person, what would you think is the likely outcome of our explorations in that regard? God sprinkles “life force” onto a planet, or there are reactions that can take place where nucleotides will combine and form self-replicating compounds which will evolve from there?
I guess there will always be a gap in our knowledge, and god can live there. But if there is a god, he will not punish scientific inquiry, and he will not require you or me to believe things because they are written in an old book, or because our parents told us it was so. That’s just my humble opinion.
Have you seen the National Geography Genographic project? https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/in dex.html
I’m expecting my results any day now. This is awesome. What genetics have done to support natural selection and human evolution in general is amazing.
Thought you might like it.
I have always liked the phrase “smoking hot” which makes perfect sense because most things that are very hot tend to smoke as well. I have never seen you smoking yet but you are definitely “smoking hot”.
Craigs-70345
I’m going to request “cocky” again. I’m really curious about this one.
Dear Teacher:
This time i don’t wanna request a word. As you’ve been saying that you love to play GTA IV. I wanna ask you: How do you pronounce GRAND THEFT AUTO 4 in russian???
THANKS in advance.
Site going down for an hour in an hour! Moving the database to a new server.. hopefully it will speed things up!
say it not so , Withdrawals , shakes, Teach BZW’s Started a very controversial theory of the Eye. Are you up to something like this. A little out of your expertise. You have a mind and can use it well. ie, The Eye, Did it evolve or was it created. A little deep but I believe you are up to it……ru?
Did you say Buzzword started a very controversial theory? That’s a riot. But before you embarrass yourself engaging our busy teacher, get out your fifth grade biology textbook, or steal one from a 10 year-old. Read about light-sensing cells in earthworms. Do the planaria exercise on page 220. It’s “A little deep but I believe you are up to it…” This time don’t just copy your neighbors’ answers. Maybe you’ll learn something, unless eyes are just a theory and yours haven’t been created yet…
dude, um… the theory is evolution and charles darwin deserves some of the credit.
My iguana had a light sensing third eye.
Roadrunmch, I wanted to give you a couple of other good summations for you. Here’s one that answers one of your propositions (why can’t life form in a light bulb?). This video starts with a similar proposition about a jar of peanut butter. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_RXX7pntr8
The video also addresses your concern about things popping into existence like eyes and hands (the video uses an image of a cell to a brain just happening), and explains how it doesn’t “just happen.” Hopefully this will help clear it up.
Here’s another video called - “Evolution Made Easy” which is very good as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w57_P9DZJ4&feature =related
Take a look at this: https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/in dex.html
The genographic project is amazing. Lots of scientific proof for man’s distant history. It’s only dealing with human migrations on the scale of hundreds of thousands of years, but it is illustrative of where science has come in this area.
Hello Marina,
I have all of your Radio Shows downloaded. If you can’t recover them maybe I can send them to your “contact” address.
I want to thank the Academy and all of the little people who have supported me throughout these many months on my trek to become the Teachers Pet. Most importantly, I’d like to thank Marina, who saw the potential in me to be a fine Teachers Pet. I am very grateful to her for her confidence and trust that I am worthy of this wonderful honor.
Keep the faith, everyone, and you too can reach the pinnacle of recognition and have your name pass gently over the soft, pouty, bee-stung lips of our lovely, talented, and eminently trusty, teacher (the aptly names, Hot for Words).
Would it be asking too much if I became the first student to become Teacher’s Pet twice?
Uh, yes.
Come on, PAtuck9! I deserve it! If only from all the abuse I take from the gang around here….
Good point, but be that as it may, your tenure as TP seems to have extended for quite a while now, so perhaps you’ll consider that a sufficient, uh, bonus, shall we say. Regardless, I still offer congratulations and readily acknowledge your contributions to the site as substantial and relevant. Thanks for interceding in the latest debate, especially.
PP811,
If you want to believe that a skin cell was able to evolve into to the eye,Great.
But why is that so easy to buy, But a god is stupid? It is just that, a skin cell can but a god can not, seems so ridiculous.
RRR???
A couple of points, buzz:
1. It’s not a question of “wanting” to “believe” anything at all. It has to do with looking at the observations, testing and evidence, reading the explanations and conclusions, and accepting it as good science. That’s all. Understand the difference?
2. It’s most certainly NOT anything at all to do with believing, concluding, theorizing or even hypothesizing that a skin cell was able to evolve into the eye. Nobody thinks that’s the case. Nobody. At all. Ever.
3. None of this is “easy.” Physics, Calculus, Differential Equations, Chemistry, Thermodynamics and other such subjects were not “easy” and neither is evolutionary biology. But, it is understandable, and nobody is making shit up to trick you into believing it.
4. None of this is something you should “buy.” Skepticism is great. Heck, dispute Einstein’s theory of universal gravitation, the theories of plate tectonics, and any other theory you want question. However, when you do so you shouldn’t say things like “if you want to believe skin cell was able to evolve into an eye.” Why? Because that’s about as incisive a challenge to evolutionary theory as saying “if you want to believe that planets reach out invisible arms to grab onto other things and pull them in towards them….” That statement about gravity has as much to do with gravitational theory as your statement about skin to eyes has to do with evolution.
5. This has nothing to do with whether there is a God. Biological evolution does NOT say, theorize or require that there not be a god, or gods. There are plenty of god-believers that also accept evolution, including MOST Christians. The Catholic church officially accepted evolutionary science a long time ago, and over 50% of all Christians are Catholic. Most protestant denominations do not require one, either as an avoidance of sin or an acceptance of dogma, to reject the theory of evolution - the one I was born into doesn’t require rejection of evolution (Lutheran), I know Unitarians don’t have to, Anglicans (Church of England) don’t have to reject it (and most don’t), Methodists allow one resort to one’s own conscience in interpretation of Genesis.
So, this is not a battle between evolution and god unless YOU make it one. I will tell you flat out right now that the theory of evolution, again, does not dismiss god, does not pretend to theorize about his existence or nonexistence, and is ONLY in conflict with SOME concepts of god.
6. The theory of evolution does not require a belief that god, if he exists, is stupid. A god that could create planets, galaxies, warped space-time, elements and nuclear reactions (like the billions of years processes inside of stars), chemicals and chemical reactions/processes, and a process by which life may change and adapt over time would not be a “stupid” god.
7. Lastly - “seems so ridiculous” that god can’t. You’ve presented a false choice. Nobody said god can’t make things evolve. He didn’t, though, as far as everything that’s been studied make a process by which skin cells evolved into eyes. Even if their is no God, skin cells did not evolve into eyes. Things have evolved, though, and there is so much proof of that that it is as certain to be essentially correct as is Einstein’s theory of relativity. Thus, there are two choices. A- there is no god or gods and the process came about naturally, or B- there is a god or gods and he/they created that process. Either way, the process remains the same.
err… I mean - roadrunmch….not buzz… I’m used to arguing with buzz… ha!
Look, roadrunmch, a question that I have for you is why don’t you learn something about evolution before you dismiss it?
I mean, you would KNOW that skin cells are not thought to evolve into eyes, and you would KNOW the explanation?
I am not saying you have no right to question the theory, but isn’t it important to you to challenge the actual theory, and not some other theory?
If I was to say to you that Christianity is false, you might say to me - “hey, Prose Perro, what’s your basis for saying it’s false?” And, then if I said to you, “Well, if you want to believe that Jesus was a warrior king who liberated the Israelites from their Roman oppressors…..” that’s fine, but it seems ridiculous to me….. what would you do?
You’d say, “Prose Perro! Do you even KNOW what Christianity is? Have you even bothered to read the New Testament? Christianity never says that Jesus was a warrior king or that he freed the Israelites from Roman oppressors!”
And, wouldn’t I have done NOTHING to dispute Christianity with that argument? Well, that is PRECISELY what you did with your “eyes evolve from skin cells” statement.
Am I making any sense?
Here are some websites, roadrunmch, if you care to learn what evolution is, and why so many people are so certain about it.
http://www.talkorigins.org/
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
http://lifesciences.asu.edu/evolution/
http://mcb.harvard.edu/BioLinks/Evolutio...
http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/evo...
http://explore-evolution.unl.edu/
gewgaw!
whoa! why’d i get a youtube “We’re sorry, this video is no longer available” error?…
gawd, it wasn’t that hot…
well, it was, but only in my imagination…
back again…must’ve been a YT glitch…
and what is a glitch, anyway?
Marina when I log in i can reply on this video. But when I go to the Most viewed channel from here it tells me to log in again. Any help please.
Never mind It’s that dang xp computer again.
next time buy a mac.
sure, so you can buy the vast array of inexpensive software available for a large number of competing vendors…
oops…wrong OS…
I think I will. I am about tired of Microsoft and all of its bullshit error screens and costly software.
I love my mac!!!
Most viewed channel on what? YouTube?
This site which was at the top of the home page.
http://www.hotforwords.com/2008/06/22/most-viewed- channel-on-youtube/
Teacher.
I read your post below and I would like you to keep in mind one thing. The Jackals on Utube like nothing more then to tear People down. Build them up and then Gang Bang, Tear them to pieces like Perona.
Let them come here and try it . Like errin we’ll send them home with their Head stuffed up their ass.
In the nicest way possible
That software is programmed with a sofistical algoritm which is the base of its artificial intelligence
It certainly would assist with the spelling since it’s algorithms are sophisticated enough to have rules dealing with that and to offer suggestions on synonyms.
How much that qualifies as intelligent is depends on how broadly you define it since it’s limited in it’s interactions
I’m interested adquiring “Whitesmoke” software because as you can see, my vocabulary is short and I have a lot of problems with redaction and Gramatical building. Don’t ya konw if there’s a trial version of it ???
Yes it’s available for trial now just click on the link above. I recently installed it and it seems to work reasonably well
Reasonably well, It means the software has artificial intelligence ???
I guess it depends on how broadly you define artificial intelligence. Behaviorists would probably give it high marks but it wouldn’t pass the Turing Test
dragon
dragon
dragon
dragon
dragon
dragon
dragon
dragon
dragon
dragon
dragon
plzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
***warning: major silliness ahead***
here’s a site that is about Smokin’ dragons…
so, if a dragon smokes a cigarette, is a dragon takin’ a drag on a cig?
and if it’s a mariuwanna? cig, would the dragon bogart? would u tell ‘im if he did? you might get him all fired up, ya know…
lastly, if a dragon taking a drag on a cig enjoys dressing in a female dragon’s clothing, does that make him a dragon drag queen taking a drag on a cig? Or a dragon dragon queen taking a drag on cig?
Okay, this has dragged on one dragon joke too long…
what a drag!…
dragon
c.1220, from O.Fr. dragon, from L. draconem (nom. draco) “serpent, dragon,” from Gk. drakon (gen. drakontos) “serpent, seafish,” from drak-, strong aorist stem of derkesthai “to see clearly.” But perhaps the lit. sense is “the one with the (deadly) glance.” The young are dragonets (14c.). Obsolete drake “dragon” is an older borrowing of the same word. Used in the Bible to translate Heb. tannin “a great sea-monster,” and tan, a desert mammal now believed to be the jackal. Dragonfly is from 1626.
How about “embuggerance”?
i don’t think it’s a recognized word yet…
and that bugs me…
i’m gonna bugger off now, though…
You are a visual definition of hot.
Hello My Dear Teacher Marina,
I am sorry for posting a response to your questions on YT here
regarding the spelling of hot in German, “Heiß”. I don’t have a YT
account yet, and there is someone over there who is hogging every
imaginable user name not taken. Grrrrr.
First, your spelling of hot in German, “heisz” is correct, with the
exception that it should have been capitalized. For you Germans
(I am one) who just had a heart attack, calm down. I can’t go into
a long dissertation due to the format, but will make two points that
indicate that Marina is correct in her writing it the way it was.
In German, the double “ss” is replaced by a letter called “es zet”,
whose symbol is “ß”. According to the new rules, “Heiß” would have
been correct, but had you written it “Heiss”, as many YT comments suggested, then that would not be correct, unless you were Swiss
German.
So, Marina, you were correct writing it “heisz” on two counts.
(except for the capitalization)
1. Your OED showed it as “heisz” which is the Old German way
of spelling it. So, historically, you are correct.
2. It is assumed, and by edict, it is said that if one cannot write the
special symbol “ß”, then one would use the double “ss”. But, that
would violate the rules. Therfore, many people use the literal
sound of the symbol “ß”, as “es zet” which would be written as “sz”,
meaning “ß”.
As an aside, Poland and Hungary are two countries that use the
letters “sz” in their language.
On the Mac, you would use Option+s to create the “ß”, but that
may or may not be true, depending on the software.
The debate and controversy regarding the letter “ß” will continue in
Germany and there is a ton more interesting things to be said about it.
Here are two links.
http://www.electriceditors.net/langline/vol2/2-20. txt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9F
I loved how you pronounced “heisz”. ♥♥♥
Wow! Thanks pedantickarl! I really appreciate this! They were really making me feel that I had made a mistake and that the OED was incorrect as well!
You are the best for clearing that up for me!!!
Marina
Verrrrry cool Marina,
You placed an annotation on the YT video.
Love it!!!
The es zet is also available on the PC using an ALT keyboard shortcut. ALT-0223 = ß
And i love how you pronounce whatever it is you are pronouncing at the time, Marina…
I think, the explanation of “HOT” is very simple: HOT=Marina :p
Hello Marina,
Now that prospero811 has had his day I would like to vote for:
annudermale, pennsyltucky9 and Bob
as one of your next “Teacher’s Pet”.
They have shown intelligence and wit in many ways that seems to flow naturally instead of reading/copying from a book.
The way that they get their point across is very exact and intuitive all the while showing a depth that is admirable.
Thank you.
Oh, and of course thank you for another excellent show.
Thank you for your vote, Warren, but I’m quite happy to let everyone else jump the queue, in the belief that Marina is saving the best till last.
Anyway, since she named the Crane after me, I regard myself as Teacher’s Pet for Life.
Yea Bob. I do think your TP for life. Need to see the crane again in a vid.
I can see it now, Bob. Long after we’re dead, you’ll receive your teacher’s pet award posthumously as little old wizened Marina delivers her final vid from her deathbed at age 151 or so….
My pleasure Bob.
What is the crane reference?
You can’t vote for teachers pet…not earned, except for being signed up. Bob’s comming up soon, I’m sure. I’m just curious as to which name he will have?
Aw, shucks Warren. You’re makin’ me blush.
No problem, you guys deserve it more since you’re not just rambling on. I actually learn a bit more here because of you guys.
why, thank you, Warren…that is a surprising post to me…
Bob and hill..’er, penn should be far ahead of me in that race, me being a relative newcomer…
and then there’s the ol’ saying…
age before beauty…
or, to be fair…
pearls before swine…
Hmmm. It was never a race for me, nudder, I’m just here to have fun crackin’ wise. Sometimes I slip up and say something intelligent by mistake. But on another note, if you look over toward the south end of the trough there’s some lovely slop over there for ya.
It’s all true.
Marina
Hot - there used to be a lot of feline-type synonyms for this e.g. slinky, and some others I don’t recall. How far back goes one trace the implicit identification of female sexuality with cats - I imagine it goes back to Ancient Egypt or Babylon. Dogs on the other hand (although we love them) are definItily not sexy and are synonyms for ugliness. There is an underlying assumption that dogs have ‘male’ virtues - or at least those that women would like men to have(steadfast, brave, loyal) whilst cats have ‘female’ qualities - the qualities that men find attractive in women on first meeting - elegance, intuition, curiousity, caprice (that would be a good word to do), self-regard, enigmatic eyes, the sense of being on a different plane. What is so nice in Russian women is that this female tradition has been kept alive, whereas in much of the West it has been lost.
woo hoo, stereotyping women of various cultures… let’s do asian women next and black ones after that!
Dear Buzzword
Thank you for your considered comment. I happen to be a Russian myself. Are you saying that I cannot make a (friendly) generalisation about women in my own culture without being accused of ’stereotyping women of various cultures’. Secondly you seem to assume that culture and ethnicity are the same thing. Russia, like France or Germany, is a nation/culture about which some generalisations can be made, although we should always be careful. You can see differences between the behaviour of men and women in Russia as opposed to Austria as opposed to Greece and so on. This is nothing to do with ethnicity - my generalisation would apply to Russian regardless of their ethnicity, as it would be a product of their upbringing and cultural heritage.
This is nothing like making generalisations about asian or black women - there is no single asian or black culture, and so any such generalisation would be about ethnicity not culture.
Your wish is my command, Buzz, and as I’m married to an Asian woman (Thai) I feel qualified to comment.
I don’t like stereotyping of anyone any more than you, but I do know what leonidas1111 means. Asian women, in my experience, are mostly of small or petite stature, have soft voices and gentle dispositions and a tradition of acting in a subservient manner, since that is generally what their male dominant societies require. These are the qualities that western women, in their quest for “equality”, have abandoned, in the belief that they are demeaning, and the qualities that western men, not finding them at home, find so attractive in oriental women.
Note that Thai women, at least those living in the large cities and with a modern education, have all the equality of opportunity that western women enjoy, but they are intelligent enough to know what men like and to pander to them.
Do them all
ethnicity is an identification with an ethnic group and exclusion from certain other groups because of the affiliation. now an ethnic group is distinguished by cultural similarities and differences. members of an ethnic group share beliefs, values, habits, customs, and norms, and a common language, religion, history and kinship. culture is a difficult term to define as it describes all that is human. at its most basic culture is the traditions and customs that govern behavior and beliefs. stereotypes are the fixed ideas about what the members of a group are like. so, yes you were stereotyping russian women, and yes you may continue to stereotype russian women and all other women. but as an obnoxious smart ass i was expressing my lack of enthusiasm for stereotyping as it rarely achieves any deep understanding of a person or their culture, ethnicity, etc… however i do question how specific the qualities of self-regard, enigmatic eyes and the sense of being on a different plane are to russian women alone. what the hell does a sense of being on a different plane mean? having traveled a good bit i can say that individual differences exceed the descriptions provided by the stereotypes of various cultures and ethnic groups. i could take 100 women from various cultures and group them together again using different characteristics that would relate them all into another group. and i could then stereotype that group as well. not saying stereotyping is wrong just saying it’s just a tired means of generalizing a people to a few simple characteristics that are often found throughout human culture. woo hoo.
Guys ….” Paragraphs ” for F**k’s sake
@ Bob, I don’t minded equality. I just don’t like the women that are brain washed by commercials thinking they need this and that to be truly happy. This is one reason I don’t like to date women from the US.
What does Fetish mean in BDSM lifestyle.
Rodace
as i’ve pointed out before….fetish is when you’re not really “fet” — you’re just fet-ish.
Hey
I was wondering what the word cup means. There are many synonymes of cup. you can
drink coffee from a cup and I also know that there is world cups. You now - sports events.
There is also bra cups. I acctually choosed to ask you about the word cup when I saw your beautiful torso. Don´t take me for a pervert now. I just think you are a beautiful women and your breasts are one of the thinks that makes you wonderful
Best regards Lennart from Sweden.
Thanks Marina, your the best English teacher I ever had!~ Since Ron Paul has started one, I’d like to know the origin of the word: “Revolution”
Vasdrugleonard
homework: Smokin, PHAT (pretty hot and tempting) Gorgeous, beautiful, HEY!~ all these words describe you Hotforwords!~ This homework had a twist~
Hey_ would you be willing to proofread the website, http://www.campaignforliberty.com ? Just kidding!~, just wanted to get in a free digg designed at saving the last few liberties of the average American citizen. Please Marina, sign our petition. Thank you my teacher , sorry to interrupt class
ooh homework: tangerine or tangy or tanginess
e.g. Look at her walkin’ down the street with all that tanginess.
I disagree about the assessment of “hot” referring to looks. I believe that this use of “hot” refers to sexual attractiveness or being fertile. I think it refers to being “in heat”, when a female is the most fertile and invites sexual advances.
levocombi, and the term “being in heat” refers to the temperature of the genitals of the animal that is in heat? Are they hotter when the animal is “in heat”?
Ohhhhhhhhhhh! Shit.
You sure put me in my place.
There’s no challenge too great for Hot for Words.
Isn’t it more to do with the reaction of the viewer feeling “hot under the collar” when they encounter someone attractive?
Tempareture is not mentioned as a characteristic of a cat or dog in heat in the following two webites (assuming I can insert them correctly). The characteristics are behaviorial.
Wearing attractive clothing seems analogous to an animal in heat trying to attact a mate. Could not “hot” in the sense of attractive be related entymologically to “in heat?”
Cat link
Dog link
Marina, am I dumb or just lost? Don’t be honest, ok be somewhat honest. Are some of the maxim radio shows miising? ie 2-4…
Oh & how about “Viral” as in exteme heat.
estrus is, of course, the formal term for a female animal “in heat”…according to sources, it is from the Latin oestrus, meaning “frenzy, gadfly” and from Greek oistros
so perhaps being “in heat” came about from the frenzied actions of the female leading up to, and perhaps during, mating?…
sorta like a cat on a hot tin roof.
..
not being female, i can’t vouch for any frenzied activity, but i’m pretty sure i’d be willing to unfrenzy a few…
(okay, we all know human females have menstrual cycles that have replaced estrus, but, hey, that was the best shot i had to poke a lil’ fun Marina’s way today…)…
“Heat” relates directly to “excitement” on a molecular level. Similarly, animals in heat (estrus) tend to generate excitement in the form of heightened social or sexual activity levels as well. Amazing how the terminology we used to refer to heightened social or sexual activity since the days well before molecular physics were precisely understood ended up as a parallel to the physical properties of molecules. Wild, huh? Now how do you suppose we intuited that connection?