Ari Siletz

Very sad blog. Reform

Very sad blog.

Reform requires the consent of the corrupt

Holy the Faithful!

.

.

According to the Intelligent Design Theory, and I quote directly, "God said let there be fellatio, and there was fellatio,,,"

As you can see, there is no reference to any bacteria in the above command, meaning Eve was not conversant of any bacteria.  Or in another word, Eve, in her own mental intrepidity, was not mimicking anything, and vice versa, and by vice versa I mean if before vice was Adam and versa was Eve, now it’s the other way around, so no one would call me a sexist.

And according to my own scientific theory, there was no Adam and Eve to begin with, so Adam didn’t tell nothing to Eve, and vice versa. 

.

.

Dear MPD: Are you having us to believe ...

That when Adam told Eve "You suck" it was all because she was mimicking some good bacteria?

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

Holy fellatio!

.

.

Fellatio is very simple to explain in scientific terms.  As you might know, the word fellatio drives from Latin.  It literally means to suck.  So, I give you two explanations for fellatio, and why it’s so popular.

1- The Intelligent Design explanation:  “… and God said let there be fellatio, and there was fellatio, and man (humans) walked upon the face of the Heaven very happily from then on.”

2- My Own Scientific Explanation: In the beginning, when reproductive organs were at their earliest stages of development, there was no extraordinary desire for being sucked, or for sucking others.  Let’s say the nerve system uniformly had the same kind of sensitivity anywhere in the body.  In those early days there were bacteria, as there are today, that some of them were “bad” and some of them were “good”.  Yes, there are “good” bacteria all over the place; for example “good” bacteria that makes some of our food.  So anyway, the early creatures with the kind of reproductive system we have today, were infected by these “good” and “bad” bacteria.  The “bad” bacteria killed them off and the “good” ones made them survive.  One of the places that “good” bacteria are very beneficial is in the digestive system, because they help us, what else, digest food.  So, the creatures that were in the habit of sucking each other’s skin survived quite well, because sucking skin had double benefits.  On one hand it got rid of the “bad” bacteria, and on the other had the “good” bacteria would enter into their digestive system and help them live a happy life.  So these early creatures were doing well while they were sucking on each other, till one day one of them said, hay wait a minute, it really feels good when you suck me down there on that spot, because he or she, by accident had developed a slightly more sensitive skin down there below.  So the fellow with more sensitive skin down there below went around and asked anyone he, or she, could find and asked them to suck him, or her, down there.  And since this fellow was getting more attention with his, or her, sensitive skin, he or she (fuck it, let’s just call “he or she”, “Hersh”), so Hersh was making more offspring, who had a slightly more sensitive skin down there, in comparison to Hersh’s earlier generations.  And the rest of the story goes as the way the story of the poisonous frog and the resistive snake went; sucking became more popular as the skin down there below became more sensitive, and vice versa.

And the rest is history, very pleasurable and reproductive, as well as digestive, history.       

How to measure breast sag

Measure from the center of the nipple to the tip of the V shaped notch just below your neck (the standard young female breast measures about 210 millimeters from nipple to this notch). Subtract 210 millimeters from whatever measurment you get for the V to nipple distance. This is approximately your current breast sag.

For a group experiment, take your current age and subtract from it the age at which you think your  breasts first fully matured.  For example, if you are 36 and your breasts were fully matured at 16 the arithmetic would be  36-16=20.

Divide your breast sag by the last number (20 in the example case). This is your average breast sag in millimeters per year. You can post this number for comparison as it does not reveal your age or your breast sag (well, not quite true, depending). 

I tried it on myself, just for kicks and my breast sag per year came out to negative 0.5 millimeters per year! Basically zero.  No female breasts, therefore no breast sag.  

......

I mentioned infertility if it was known to them it should have been for both genders . then I brought up the genetic factors cause it is not just infertility that is known these days .

Besides if most died around 40 then women were fertile all the time anyway ... women at 40 can have kids.

But if we see, these days, that not too many have, it is because now they know of the risks of having baby at that age, So women choose not to. But not that they can not. As long as a healthy woman has her normal periods she can get pregnant and she should go for any of the contraceptive choices available just like a 20 year old. 

anyway ,  thanks God these days age is documented  otherwise it would have been very hard to guess,  after all these vanity insanity surgeries.. 

: ) 

wow, I am behind the comments

Popularity of Bahmani's Dr. blog and now this one shows that Iranians are into doctors and boobs. So a boob doctor must be a very popular person with Iranians.

Easily Explained by the Evolution Theory

I think that MPD nailed it.

Any parts of the body that gets a lot of use, gets larger and more prominent over time. That explains why we don’t have tails anymore or why our fingers are of the size that they are.

The caveman having remembered how much fun they had as cave babies playing with and being fed by the larger boobs developed an affinity for them and started to seek them out at nights in the cave. And that daily interaction between the early man and the boob has resulted in today’s relatively larger boobs.

Sagging

As a matter of fact men have their own issues with sagging, but lower down below. And cave-gals could guess the age if a cave-guy's nut sacks were hanging below his knees!!!

@Soosan K

Women do not have to look at any parts. All they have to do is wait and see if they guy grunts when trying to stand up from a sitting position.

Some replies

Arj: Yes, the modren age seems to have messed up pretty much everything having to do with sex. Nature has every right to ask a modern woman, "If you weren't going to have kids until 30, why did you bother having periods before you were even a teenager."

Amirparviz: You speak the truth. Actuall the whole truth is that "perk" tricks us with small or big breasts. We men seem to associate it with mating prospect. Hence the bra industry.

SK: I will hazzard a guess with the data available. Regarding older fathers and genetic abnormalities, only about 25% of early humans survived to age 40. So the male aging issue you correctly bring up may not have been as relevant as it is today.  As for the 25% survivors past age 40, if infant mortality was as high in early humans as it is in animals today--and there is no reason to think otherwise--the (relatively) rarely occuring autism (and other parent age issues) would have been a drop in the bucket and therefore not strongly selected against. For example, a 1% survival advantage in mating with an older man (for whatever reason) may have more than offset the genetic disadvantages you point out. Regarding how women can tell a guy's age, older men typically have more digestive problems. So a good ear and the ability to count...  :)

Bavafa: With you all the way. Everytime I count my blessings, I don't need to go past two!

MPD: Still laughing over your grant proposal. The main issue is showing how felatio helps reproduction. But that in itself is a subject well worth studying. With some rewording I believe you can get the funding you need--and many grateful volunteers.

I submit to you my own theory, for consideration

.

I am speaking from my fading memory, not from a precise scientific representation of facts, figures, actual data, or experiments.

Once upon a time, millions of years ago, there was a species of a mildly poisonous frog living in a pond in a place far, far away.  At the same time there was a kind of a species of snake that liked to eat the little poisonous frogs, but since the frogs were poisonous they would kill the snakes once eaten, except those snakes that were mildly resistant to the poison of the poisonous frogs.  So, the snakes that did not have a natural resistance to the poison of the poisonous frogs died out, but the more resistant snakes survived.  At the same time those frogs that were less than mildly poisonous died out, and the more poisonous ones survived.  By the way, what good is it if you are poisonous but you get eaten anyway because the snake doesn't know how poisonous you are, to avoid you in the first place?  Well, there are signals that says avoid me, like the color of the skin.  So anyway, back to what I was saying, take this cycle of frogs getting more poisonous and snakes getting more resistance over millions of years till today where we have a species of frog that is so poisonous that it would kill a man in an instance, yet there is a kind of snake that will eat the same frog without any problem what so ever.

So, this is what I want to say, I present to you this scientific theory, "man's penis size has evolved to the size it is today in unison with the woman's breast size, and vice versa."  And here is how my theory goes; there was a time when women had small breasts, a scientific fact since monkeys have small breasts, and we evolved from monkeys as we know.  At the same time men had small penises, another scientific fact since apes' penises are only about a couple of inches long, and we know humans have the largest penises among primates now.  But anyway, these men, with their small penises, would go out and suck on women's small breasts, and the women, with their small breasts, would go out and suck on men's small weewees; but guess what!  Which one of the men, or women, do you think were more successful in being sucked more successfully, and thereby being more successful in finishing up the job of mating, copulation, conception, and reproduction, thereby perpetuating the species?  If you guessed the ones that had bigger breasts and bigger penises, you guessed correctly.  So, over the millenniums, we have these huge penises and huge breasts that are not really needed functionally, except that evolution has made them to the size that they are today.

So anyway, I wish I could get a huge grant from a well known university so I could go out there and do some experiments to prove my theory. 

I don't know about all this science and theories

Was it natural selection or intelligent design… what ever it was bless its heart as I like them and extremely happy they don't shrink to just nipples Monday-Friday just to come back for the weekend.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

Question

Which part of the men's body the cavewomen would look to find out about the age of the man ?  

It seems that according to the scientific myths cave people in general were smart enough to figure out everything. So I have no doubt that cavewomen knew what we know now and that is the fact that Age raises infertility risk in men too.   And it is not just infertility. There are many genetic problems caused by aging men. The Major one is autism. Also The incidence of Down syndrome is related to sperm approximately 50% of the time and children born to older men run a higher risk of developing schizophrenia.  Men between the ages of 45 to 49 are twice as likely to have children with schizophrenia and that risk even gets higher for men over the age of 50 compare to the younger men.....

So the women with the small perky boobs trick us??????????????

We can't tell their age and so we think they are younger than they are.

Crafy little devils!

X=y2

Interesting observation! Natural selection could have played a role in that development.  Meaning, the female specimens of the human species might have been just like any other mamal (in terms of perkiness), of whom however, the ones with certain sizes and shapes of boobs have gotten a better chance of reproduction!!! Nonetheless, the advent of sillicone implants and baby formula could pretty well reverse the whole process!!! :)

Good points Dr. Ala

Especially about the need for local volunteer studies. Also, you are absolutely right about the problem involving more than two variables :)

One cannot draw any conclusion because boobs are not alone....

Ari jaan;   I wish to make few comments:   Your blog would have received more hits if you had chosen Dolly Parton in that picture.  By the way, Dolly Parton once said in Johnny Carson’s show that none of her parts are real which you ignored to address this factor.     With help from bra’s to various gels the actual size can vary.  Before I forget, you also forgot to mention some men who have huge breast (Sumo wrestler’s for example).    

Large breasts have been mixed blessing to companies such as DuPont for paying million of dollars in lawsuits.   It is not clear Dr. (sorry Mr. Bahmani) Professor Marlowe received any local or federal grants for this study! How about sample size or volunteers for this study?  I see conflict of interest in Professor’s study!!  

One cannot draw any conclusion because breasts (boobs) are not alone!! Many individuals do nose job(s), fix their hips, etc.  in relation to their weight.  This study is multi-variant with so many uncontrollable variables (e.g. large size is not controllable), therefore no conclusion can be drawn (LOL)!!