# Is it possible to bring back the dead?



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Hello,
I was reading around and began (my dangerous) thinking. Before I begin, I would like to ask to not bring religion into the issue. 

From what I understand, death happens because the body is old, organs are damaged severly, infections, diseases, stuff like that. While there is stuff like defibrillators, that can "Revive" a person that has suffered Cardiac arrest, or heart attacks, they can't work for people who have suffered from diseases or damaged organs. 

If the heart stopped, the body would die because of lack of oxygen to the brain, which causes the brain to die. The brain can't control functions and thus everything stops working. Would it be possible to replace the damaged organs, repump the blood, refill the body with oxygen, and restart the brain, thus bringing the person back? If not can you please explain? 

Personally, I believe it is possible to bring the dead back.

Also, What would be the pros and cons if such a method to bring the dead back were to be found?


----------



## iSpinz (Jan 21, 2010)

Well you can't revive a soul.


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)

Am I on candid camera? I have to be, right?

No, you obviously can't bring someone back from being dead for very long. Cells die and your decomposed flesh and organs are useless very quickly. That's why we can't use organs as transplants unless the person the organ is coming from is still alive or very, very recently deceased. It's why we have to keep blood refrigerated so that the natural process of decomposition doesn't break it down so very quickly.

@Ispinz- Of course not, because it's a silly notion to begin with. Our consciousness or "soul", if you will, is the result of a chemical process that causes the self-awareness of cells, but don't be deceived into believing that this is proof of something that isn't physical in ourselves. We are slaves to our physical components. You and your choices are the results of a very complicated scientific equation.


----------



## AndyRoo789 (Jan 21, 2010)

Hmm..
Interesting.

But if that was done to bring the person back, would it be the same person?


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 21, 2010)

That isn't what a defibrillator does at all. A defib doesn't bring you back from the dead, it (hopefully) prevents you from getting there in the first place. A defib kills your heart function so it can manually reset itself, and hopefully work. 

On a side note, no, just no.


----------



## qqwref (Jan 21, 2010)

With current technology there is no way to fix a dead brain. It's not just like a computer that is turned off - the brain cells themselves die. So that's the end all, if the brain dies there is no way to bring back the person and make them conscious/themself again, even if you can make the body work again...

(There ARE situations where the brain has died and the body technically continues to live... these people never wake up, they are just on life support for arbitrarily long at great expense to taxpayers. The brain contains all personality, memories, etc. so if the brain dies the *person* is just gone.)


----------



## aronpm (Jan 21, 2010)

You can't restore electrical activity to the brain. Lack of electrical activity in the brain is death.

:fp

/thread


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

iSpinz said:


> Well you can't revive a soul.



No, but assuming that the person just died (Maybe about less than 24 hours), there might be certain procedures that can be applied to restart the body. 

There is something that makes the heart beat, and organs can be transplanted. The heart beats, delivering oxygen, which makes the cells live. Without it, cells die. There exists artificial hearts that can do the job of the heart, maybe not permanently, but it's a step. If we can replace what causes death, and find what is needed to restart the body, it might be possible.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

aronpm said:


> You can't restore electrical activity to the brain. Lack of electrical activity in the brain is death.
> 
> :fp
> 
> /thread



Why not? 
Please don't use facepalms, I'm really serious about this. I want to know why. It's not just the brain either, the brain is part of a system that makes the body, the brain can't live on it's own.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 21, 2010)

Yea, once the brain is off, it's pretty much...


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> iSpinz said:
> 
> 
> > Well you can't revive a soul.
> ...



If you can do it in an EXTREMELY limited window of time. But that's absolutely no different from what happens now.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

miniGOINGS said:


> Yea, once the brain is off, it's pretty much...



Yeah, I realize this. The brain is dead because lack of oxygen causes cells that generate the electrical signals to die. What if we were to replace these cells?



Kian said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > iSpinz said:
> ...



How limited? I'm pretty sure there's more to the body as well.


----------



## iSpinz (Jan 21, 2010)

I don't know about bringing people back from the dead. But seriously, you can't live forever.


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Yea, once the brain is off, it's pretty much...
> ...


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> What *if* we were to replace these cells?



When you put it that way...


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> miniGOINGS said:
> 
> 
> > Yea, once the brain is off, it's pretty much...
> ...



You're going to rebuild an entire brain? Because that's what you're suggesting. All the cells will die very quickly, and be unable to be used. Rebuilding an entirely new brain wouldn't be bringing something back to life, it's just creating non-traditional life (man-made, artificial, call it what you will). We will certainly be capable of that in the future, but I can't imagine why we'd want to do so other than to test the subjects or to harvest organs.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 21, 2010)

By the time you've replaced one brain cell, surely more than one will have already died. You're talking about replacing and sustaining pretty much every cell in the brain untill you can revive the person. Good luck.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Kian said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > miniGOINGS said:
> ...



I believe that it might be possible with stem cells. I'm also assuming that there are ways to preserve organs without killing them (Because people get transplants) so it could be possible to preserve the brain without killing it. 

Something interesting I found 




miniGOINGS said:


> By the time you've replaced one brain cell, surely more than one will have already died. You're talking about replacing and sustaining pretty much every cell in the brain untill you can revive the person. Good luck.



I'm pretty sure the brain can be salvaged and be fixed then, put back in. There must be a way.


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

If it were that simple, don't you think someone would have done it already?


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> If it were that simple, don't you think someone would have done it already?



Yes, I think someone would've. But I also know that there has been limited research in regenerating cells due to ethical issues, so the study hasn't reached it's potential yet.


----------



## Weston (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> If it were that simple, don't you think someone would have done it already?



I think he is just asking if it is theoretically possible the way he thinks it is. Not if we actually have the means to right now. I think hes just checking if he's missing something in his thinking.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Weston said:


> shelley said:
> 
> 
> > If it were that simple, don't you think someone would have done it already?
> ...



Not only that, but also to see if there might be some potential in what further studying can do. Death is a touchy subject, and analyzing corpses, let alone a person as they are dying, hasn't really been done much.


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

You forget the brain isn't the only thing in the body that requires oxygen (though it is the most important). Once the cells start dying, even pumping fresh blood through the body won't revive them.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> You forget the brain isn't the only thing in the body that requires oxygen (though it is the most important). Once the cells start dying, even pumping fresh blood through the body won't revive them.



Yes, the whole body is a system. This is where replacing what's needed comes into play. You can't tell me that scientist can transfer genes in DNA from many species but not be able to replace cells.


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

This is quite an interesting thread, Kian has made some good posts. I can't really say much because I'm not to good on this subject, but cells do eventually die and organs aren't so easy to preserve.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 21, 2010)

Why not just figure out how to copy their brains information, and then clone a copy of the person?


----------



## aronpm (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Not only that, but also to see if there might be some potential in what further studying can do. Death is a touchy subject, and analyzing dead corpses, let alone a person as they are dying, hasn't really been done much.



You can't seriously be saying that dead bodies haven't been analysed. Have you ever heard of autopsies?


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Zane_C said:


> This is quite an interesting thread, Kian has made some good posts. I can't really say much because I'm not to good on this subject, but cells do eventually die and* organs aren't so easy to preserve*.



If a way were found, it might be possible.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

aronpm said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Not only that, but also to see if there might be some potential in what further studying can do. Death is a touchy subject, and analyzing dead corpses, let alone a person as they are dying, hasn't really been done much.
> ...



Yes. Dead bodies have been analyzed, but mostly to determine the cause of death. I also said that what happens when a person is in the process of dying is completely different. You can see what is missing and what eventually leads to death, then once in death, it can be analyzed to see what exactly needs to be fixed. This doesn't happen much though because I know of no family willing to let scientists examine their beloved dying.


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Zane_C said:
> 
> 
> > This is quite an interesting thread, Kian has made some good posts. I can't really say much because I'm not to good on this subject, but cells do eventually die and* organs aren't so easy to preserve*.
> ...



If a way were found, flying ponies might be possible. What's your point?


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Zane_C said:
> 
> 
> > This is quite an interesting thread, Kian has made some good posts. I can't really say much because I'm not to good on this subject, but cells do eventually die and* organs aren't so easy to preserve*.
> ...



Yeah maby. It's good to see people curious about something


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> aronpm said:
> 
> 
> > V-te said:
> ...



You don't know of anybody who dies in a hospital?


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

Being curious is one thing, but making pointless threads when it's clear you don't know what you're talking about is another.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Zane_C said:
> ...



My point is that there are things that we still don't know about death. It is something personal and touchy, and something that scientists rarely have a chance to study. I believe it is possible. The question is _how_ might it be possible.



shelley said:


> Being curious is one thing, but making pointless threads when it's clear you don't know what you're talking about is another.



I don't see how this is a useless thread. I am sharing my thoughts and I wish to discuss them. I want to hear opinions, and whys and why nots. I will admit, I am not a doctor, but neither are most of us, and we only learn what we are taught, what we do not know cannot be taught, and that's what I'm focusing on. This is a place to share and discuss ideas.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Zane_C said:
> ...




I was about to post the same thing only make the if 50 times larger and scrambling a 1x1 as apposed to flying ponies.


----------



## Hyprul 9-ty2 (Jan 21, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> shelley said:
> 
> 
> > V-te said:
> ...


x y z x' y z y z y' x' z x' y' z' y z x'
I present to you a scrambled 1x1.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Ethan Rosen said:


> You don't know of anybody who dies in a hospital?



Yes, but most people who die in hospitals analyze the cause, and the doctors usually try to revive them while they are in the process of dying. I'm talking about observing what happens while the life is fading.


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)




----------



## Edward (Jan 21, 2010)

Hyprul 9-ty2 said:


> MichaelP. said:
> 
> 
> > shelley said:
> ...


19.54. I hate parity .
On topic

I can't really present anything worthwhile without getting into religion. .

And even If I did, I wouldnt know what I'd be talking about.


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Ethan Rosen said:
> 
> 
> > You don't know of anybody who dies in a hospital?
> ...



You seem to be under the impression that all people who die in hospitals die fast deaths from cardiac arrest. It doesn't quite work that way.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Kian said:


> Picture



Seriously? Can you please tell me your thoughts instead, I simply want to discuss and listen.


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 21, 2010)




----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

I just consulted my parents. Both are doctors. One is an oncologist, the other is an anesthesiologist. They said it's not possible. 

"Once brain cells are dead, theirs no replacing them. No if's about it."


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

Hyprul 9-ty2 said:


> x y z x' y z y z y' x' z x' y' z' y z x'
> I present to you a scrambled 1x1.



You call that scambled, it has simply changed it's orientation


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> I just consulted my parents. Both are doctors. One is an oncologist, the other is an anesthesiologist. They said it's not possible.
> 
> "Once brain cells are dead, theirs no replacing them. No if's about it."



Did you ask them why? and if it would be possible to fix what is broken? 




Ethan Rosen said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Ethan Rosen said:
> ...



But no one really spends time looking at what is happening.


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Kian said:
> 
> 
> > Picture
> ...



What I posted there made infinitely more sense than many of the posts in this thread.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> MichaelP. said:
> 
> 
> > I just consulted my parents. Both are doctors. One is an oncologist, the other is an anesthesiologist. They said it's not possible.
> ...



I put it in white. *Revealed*


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Kian said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Kian said:
> ...



How so? Just because we have been told it's not possible doesn't mean it's not possible. There's still many things to learn.


----------



## aronpm (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Ethan Rosen said:
> 
> 
> > You don't know of anybody who dies in a hospital?
> ...



Let's see... The heart stops pumping blood to the extremities and organs. This stops the lungs supplying oxygen to the extremities and organs. This starts with the brain and spinal cord, and finally the extremities. After four minutes without oxygen, the brain is irreversibly damaged. After long enough, the brain has ceased all electrical activity and said electrical activity cannot be restored. Dead. After that stage, decomposition starts.



> Did you ask them why? and if it would be possible to fix what is broken?


THE CELLS ARE DEAD. ***.



Edward said:


> I can't really present anything worthwhile without getting into religion. .
> 
> And even If I did, I wouldnt know what I'd be talking about.


If you don't know what you're talking about, don't post. And maybe, do the same for everything else, since you don't seem to know what you're talking about ever.


----------



## iSpinz (Jan 21, 2010)

What's with all those pics of "that guy". Who is he?


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

iSpinz said:


> What's with all those pics of "that guy". Who is he?



Seriously? NOBODY TELL HIM!!!!


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Kian said:
> 
> 
> > V-te said:
> ...



I don't think ponnies can fly, doesn't mean it's not possible.  I'm just joking.


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelP. said:
> ...



Yeah, but how am I supposed to believe an oncologist who probably deals with brain cancer nearly everyday when there's a 15 year old who says "there must be a way"?

Edit: OMG I'm a poet and I didn't even know...that I was.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 21, 2010)

iSpinz said:


> What's with all those pics of "that guy". Who is he?



...me...


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

aronpm said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Ethan Rosen said:
> ...



I believe there is something more to the brain than electrical activity. How is the brain damaged? and why can't it be restored? 

Decomposition can be fixed by replacing cells.


----------



## aronpm (Jan 21, 2010)

hay gais am i doin it rite


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> aronpm said:
> 
> 
> > V-te said:
> ...



By doing that your probably more creating a new brain then fixing one.
[Edit] I guess it depends how much cells you replace


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 21, 2010)

aronpm said:


> hay gais am i doin it rite



Yes, yes you are.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Kian said:


> MichaelP. said:
> 
> 
> > V-te said:
> ...



Yes, do these people know why cells suddenly become cancerous? I'm not claiming I'm an expert, I am simply saying that I see no reason why there isn't something that we don't know of out there. Knowledge is limited, man can only learn so much in such a short period, we can only learn what is thought, and sometimes, what is found contradicts what we know.


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> *I believe there is something more to the brain than electrical activity.* How is the brain damaged? and why can't it be restored?
> 
> Decomposition can be fixed by replacing cells.



You didn't want religion in this thread but you sure as hell are making quite a few leaps of faith.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Kian said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > *I believe there is something more to the brain than electrical activity.* How is the brain damaged? and why can't it be restored?
> ...


 
This is not faith, it is unknown scientific knowledge. We don't understand consciousness, but we know it's there. There's more to the brain that we don't know.


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Kian said:
> 
> 
> > V-te said:
> ...


----------



## iSpinz (Jan 21, 2010)

This should get an award for the most posts within an hour of being posted.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Kian said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelP. said:
> ...




Your right, *IF* we find a way to make stories real, by zooming off to planet Zultan at 3 times the speed of life, then we can retrieve the elixir of life from Dumbledor and live forever. 


Keyword: Dumbledor 


Also I nominate for most deserving of a facepalm thread of 2010.


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

Am I doing this right?


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Ethan Rosen said:
> 
> 
> > V-te said:
> ...



[citation needed]


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Ethan Rosen said:
> ...



But shelley, he *believes* it, how could you require more proof than that?


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Kian said:
> 
> 
> > V-te said:
> ...



Sure, but that doesn't mean you can just fill in the gaps by going "I believe [insert anything here]".


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

Maby he means "believe"as in, another word for "think" or "reckon".


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Kian said:
> ...



Maybe if we just believe really hard...


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)

Zane_C said:


> Maby he means "believe"as in, another word for "think" or "reckon".



It's the same thing though, there is no reason to "believe", "think", or "reckon" anything without evidence. I might as well say I believe that I'm going to be the third pick in the upcoming NFL Draft. That is an equally valid statement.


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

Zane_C said:


> Maby he means "believe"as in, another word for "think" or "reckon".



Without the evidence or proper reasoning to back up those ideas, the specific word choice doesn't make much of a difference.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

Spoiler


----------



## Edward (Jan 21, 2010)

I showed my friend this thread and these are his thoughts.


My friend Frank said:


> It's impossible with today's technology, the only really possible way to bring someone back would be to emulate their mind in an artificial intelligence of some sort. Well, as far as I know.



EDIT: omg 76 posts in only like an hour.
EDIT2: Wtf am I getting flamed for? Just because they're not my words doesn't mean it's not contributing.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Once again, I am not an expert. I am saying IF because we don't have any evidence that any of these ideas are false. Like I said, there are many things we don't know, and just because we don't have evidence doesn't mean they aren't true. 

I am also saying I "Believe" because if I say "I know" or "It is", you would eat me up for it. And yes, they are my belifs. I am sharing them. I don't believe them to be right, but I don't believe them to be wrong either.


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 21, 2010)

Edward said:


> I showed my friend this thread and these are his thoughts.
> 
> 
> My friend Frank said:
> ...





My friend Greg said:


> Why is he posting some random kid as a source? Does he think that if he puts some random thought in a quote tag it will seem more intelligent?


----------



## aronpm (Jan 21, 2010)

Edward said:


> amount of posts +1


You shouldn't make useless posts like that, dude.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Once again, I am not an expert. I am saying IF because we don't have any evidence that any of these ideas are false. Like I said, there are many things we don't know, and just because we don't have evidence doesn't mean they aren't true.
> 
> I am also saying I "Believe" because if I say "I know" or "It is", you would eat me up for it. And yes, they are my beli*e*fs. I am sharing them. I don't believe them to be right, but I don't believe them to be wrong either.


Fixed. Well, a small portion of it anyway...

Just because their is no evidence against it, it doesn't make it a solid argument. And their is evidence against it, but you just keep saying, IF we could find away around this...



Spoiler


----------



## vrumanuk (Jan 21, 2010)




----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, I am not an expert. I am saying IF because we don't have any evidence that any of these ideas are false. Like I said, there are many things we don't know, and just because we don't have evidence doesn't mean they aren't true.
> ...



So you don't think that there's more out there than what we know? I think there is. We only know what we find. Just because it hasn't been done doesn't mean it can't happen. Remember the V-cubes.


----------



## vrumanuk (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> Sure, but that doesn't mean you can just fill in the gaps by going "I believe [insert anything here]".


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

Come on lets be serious, V-te wanted opinions, instead I see more pictures, you know, pictures like this



Spoiler


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> Just because their is no evidence against it, it doesn't make it a solid argument. And their is evidence against it, but you just keep saying, IF we could find away around this...



Yes, because maybe there is a way. I keep saying if because we only know so much. Think of how the people of the black death thought. They believed that it 
was caused by God, or Gases from the ground, or Jews, or other people. Only later did we find germs.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

vrumanuk said:


> shelley said:
> 
> 
> > Sure, but that doesn't mean you can just fill in the gaps by going "I believe [insert anything here]".



But that doesn't mean that they are wrong either just because it hasn't been proven.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> MichaelP. said:
> 
> 
> > Just because their is no evidence against it, it doesn't make it a solid argument. And their is evidence against it, but you just keep saying, IF we could find away around this...
> ...



So IF we find a way to miraculously bring the dead to life, what IF wizards came and destroyed the technology we had devised to do this. I feel like I'm posting in the "Corrupt a Wish Thread"


----------



## Cride5 (Jan 21, 2010)

Zane_C said:


> Am I doing this right?



lol, so fitting!


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> vrumanuk said:
> 
> 
> > shelley said:
> ...


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelP. said:
> ...



Yes, IF. It can't be done yet. Everything is IF until it can be done. But it hasn't been shown that it can't be done, so until then we can assume that it isn't possible. We have many things that 200 years ago would be thought impossible. That doesn't mean this can't happen either.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

Ethan Rosen said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > vrumanuk said:
> ...



I L U I C 
 _a n___r
_u_t___i 
_g_i___e
_h_l___d
_e 
_d


----------



## iasimp1997 (Jan 21, 2010)

:fp (Sorry, I know the facepalm policy, but I feel that this is a fair situation in which to use it.)
It's not possible. I won't do a ton of research on it, but it isn't.
Cough/hintaboutmybeliefs/cough/††††/cough/deadcantcomeback/coughcough/damnallergies. I don't believe in "resurrection". Only one can do that.

Great thinking though (no seriously). But I think if it were that easy, then it would have been done before. Also, scientifically, organs being transferred to another <deceased> body wouldn't last because they wouldn't have any use. Also, how would you replace brain cells? I'm not that great at science, so sorry if I'm asking obvious questions.


----------



## aronpm (Jan 21, 2010)

iasimp1997 said:


> :fp (Sorry, I know the facepalm policy, but I feel that this is a fair situation in which to use it.)
> It's not possible. I won't do a ton of research on it, but it isn't.
> Cough/hintaboutmybeliefs/cough/††††/cough/deadcantcomeback/coughcough/damnallergies
> 
> Great thinking though (no seriously).



Even if resurrection is possible, still gotta kill those damn heathen witches that take the poor people away from God and bring them back to their families!


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)




----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Seriously, I thought you guys were more mature than this. I am simply asking a question and hope to find answers, and all I get is this. I don't see why it can't be done just because it hasn't been done. It is possible, the question is how. How.


----------



## Edward (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Seriously, I thought you guys were more mature than this. I am simply asking a question and hope to find answers, and all I get is this. I don't see why it can't be done just because it hasn't been done. It is possible, the question is how. How.



Why am I getting crap about quoting a friend's opinion on the subject?


----------



## iasimp1997 (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Seriously, I thought you guys were more mature than this. I am simply asking a question and hope to find answers, and all I get is this. I don't see why it can't be done just because it hasn't been done. It is possible, the question is how. How.



To tell the truth, (no offense), but your question isn't that mature. Lots and lots of people have wondered the same thing. It just isn't possible. Let's say your mom or something died. You could "revive" their organs and keep them working, but the person that you've known is gone. Their body works, their person doesn't.


----------



## aronpm (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Seriously, I thought you guys were more mature than this. I am simply asking a question and hope to find answers, and all I get is this. I don't see why it can't be done just because it hasn't been done. It is possible, the question is how. How.


You're still asking how? We've told you, it's impossible. THAT IS YOUR ANSWER HURR



Edward said:


> Why am I getting crap about quoting a friend's opinion on the subject?


Because you're you.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Seriously, I thought you guys were more mature than this. I am simply asking a question and hope to find answers, and all I get is this. I don't see why it can't be done just because it hasn't been done. It is possible, the question is how. How.




It is possible in the same way leprechauns are possible, or finding their pot of gold at the end of rainbow. Even though we know rainbows are just spectrums of light.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

iasimp1997 said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously, I thought you guys were more mature than this. I am simply asking a question and hope to find answers, and all I get is this. I don't see why it can't be done just because it hasn't been done. It is possible, the question is how. How.
> ...



Yes, they have asked this before, and they have only done so much research, but I believe there is more. More that we don't know. What you're saying is only supported by what we know now, but there is more to that. 

You keep saying it's impossible. Why? Because it hasn't been proven? Doesn't mean it can't happen. That's what I want to point. That just because we've been told it is doesn't mean it really is. 

I never said my question wasn't mature, I said the answers were. I don't know of any "Immature" Questions because sometimes, they might be right and we might really be missing out on something.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

aronpm said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously, I thought you guys were more mature than this. I am simply asking a question and hope to find answers, and all I get is this. I don't see why it can't be done just because it hasn't been done. It is possible, the question is how. How.
> ...


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Seriously, I thought you guys were more mature than this. I am simply asking a question and hope to find answers, and all I get is this. I don't see why it can't be done just because it hasn't been done. It is possible, the question is how. How.



Come on now, think about what you're asking.

If it were possible, and someone could give you an answer as to how, don't you think it would have been done already? Surely you can't think you're the first person to ponder the possibility of bringing the dead back to life.

In any case, none of us are doctors or medical researchers (well, we've got MichaelP's parents but you don't seem to be willing to listen to them either). The best we can give you is basic knowledge of biology. The brain, its structure and its workings are far too complex for us to be able to replace it with a person's original memories, personality, etc. intact the same way you can replace a kidney or a lung. As for replacing cells that have died, you would probably be better off creating a new clone (that at least is possible).


----------



## maggot (Jan 21, 2010)

how you bring someone back from dead.... like many poster have said once you are dead, the cell decompose and it impossible to restore synapse between those cell after a certain time. if oxygen not going to brain before synaptic activity cease, then that function of your brain will not exist. that why people "alive" but brain died. because the part brain have synaptic activity to control some necessary life function and rest dependent upon machine for sustain life. but whatever is dead is dead, unless you are a molecular brain surgeon genius. it is impossible. 
cell ----- synaptic reaction ------ cell 
^ ^
dead alive

this fail....
sometime you can have this happen. if it happen too much, body function break down (paralyze) or other thing similar... i dont know if you were told science class in 1st grade to find a way, but teacher will be happy that you learn that is not possible because of these thing.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously, I thought you guys were more mature than this. I am simply asking a question and hope to find answers, and all I get is this. I don't see why it can't be done just because it hasn't been done. It is possible, the question is how. How.
> ...



Yes, I'm sure people have thought about it, and I am sure people are trying. But just like we didn't get the internet as soon as someone thought of it, or the cellphone, or the airplane, or spaceflight, We're not going to get this now. I just don't understand why everyone is just accepting the fact that it is impossible, just because it hasn't been done. 

I understand the brain is a complex structure, and just as that, there are things we still don't know about it, so we can't completely dismiss the fact that it's not possible. Yes, you could be better of cloning, but this is to attempt to get the person back. I've thought about what I'm asking, and that's why I asked. I just don't see why it's dismissed so quickly. Also, some people are posting pictures instead of answering, so this is why I keep persisting.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

Conversation I just had with my dad (Oncologist):

Me: Hey Dad, hypothetically, if you were able to replace brain cells efficiently, could you bring the dead back to life.

Dad: (After looking at me funny) No, because they'd need to be in the correct spot and facing the right direction, and connected to the write things. 

Basically it's like trying to preform 1LLL on a 20,000 by 20,000 cube. (Including AUF).


----------



## LewisJ (Jan 21, 2010)

Lemme get this straight:


We can extract, insert, and transfer genes from and into DNA. Hell, I did this in my HS Bio class. 

THEREFORE

We should be able to replace ENTIRE CELLS which contain and are made up of MUCH MORE than just DNA. Regarding the brain, this involves finding which of the tens or hundreds of billions of a person's brain cells have died, creating exact replicas, and replacing them, all at a rate faster than the rate at which they die. This includes patching the (on average) several thousand connections between each neuron so that the brain can go back to functioning as it was before.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

maggot said:


> how you bring someone back from dead.... like many poster have said once you are dead, the cell decompose and it impossible to restore synapse between those cell after a certain time. if oxygen not going to brain before synaptic activity cease, then that function of your brain will not exist. that why people "alive" but brain died. because the part brain have synaptic activity to control some necessary life function and rest dependent upon machine for sustain life. but whatever is dead is dead, unless you are a molecular brain surgeon genius. it is impossible.
> cell ----- synaptic reaction ------ cell
> ^ ^
> dead alive
> ...



You said it yourself, unless you are a molecular brain surgeon genius. I wasn't thought that there is a way. I am saying there must be because we found so many things that were supposed to be impossible, so why not this? Something else gives life besides normal body operations. This is what makes a person see, react to stimuli and think "These things" are only the things that we know now. We don't understand that yet. Thank you for answering though.


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

Well you can't seem to let go of the idea that it's somehow possible, while we all know that with our current knowledge and technology it's pretty much impossible. So what do you want? There isn't exactly much to discuss.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> maggot said:
> 
> 
> > how you bring someone back from dead.... like many poster have said once you are dead, the cell decompose and it impossible to restore synapse between those cell after a certain time. if oxygen not going to brain before synaptic activity cease, then that function of your brain will not exist. that why people "alive" but brain died. because the part brain have synaptic activity to control some necessary life function and rest dependent upon machine for sustain life. but whatever is dead is dead, unless you are a molecular brain surgeon genius. it is impossible.
> ...



Wait, wait, wait. That's your argument? We found so many other things that at some point seemed impossible, that this must be true? USE SOME LOGIC!!!!


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> You said it yourself, unless you are a molecular brain surgeon genius. I wasn't thought that there is a way. I am saying there must be because we found so many things that were supposed to be impossible, so why not this? Something else gives life besides normal body operations. This is what makes a person see, react to stimuli and think "These things" are only the things that we know now. We don't understand that yet. Thank you for answering though.



You act like the entire phenomenon of consciousness is a complete mystery. Yes, there is a lot we don't understand about it yet, but we know more about it than you seem to think we do.

Your arguments so far hinge on the possibility that there is "something else" we don't know about yet, that would make the task of reviving a dead brain possible. Based on what we know now, that's an impossibly difficult feat. What makes you think this mysterious new factor that nobody has been able to observe would make this process easier as opposed to more complicated?


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> Well you can't seem to let go of the idea that it's somehow possible, while we all know that with our current knowledge and technology it's pretty much impossible. So what do you want? There isn't exactly much to discuss.



I want to know how it might be possible. Ideas, Logical abstractions. We can't do much with our current technology, I'm wondering how it could be done. I'm not letting go of the idea, because we still don't know if it is or if it isn't. Our current technology doesn't allow it, but maybe some near future technology might, and I want to know how it might be achieved.


----------



## aronpm (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> so we can't completely dismiss the fact that it's not possible.



So you admit that it is a FACT that it's impossible, but you say that we can't dismiss the opposite?


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> shelley said:
> 
> 
> > Well you can't seem to let go of the idea that it's somehow possible, while we all know that with our current knowledge and technology it's pretty much impossible. So what do you want? There isn't exactly much to discuss.
> ...



Are my posts simply being ignored? I mean, I know I'm not qualified, but my parents are, and I'm just saying what their telling me.


----------



## Cride5 (Jan 21, 2010)

I'm surprised no one has brought Cryonics into this yet. 

I think everyone agrees this would be impossible with today's technology, but presumably foks shelling out 1000s of dollars to be kept in a fancy freezer aren't just doing it for the hell of it.

What's possible now, and what will be possible in 100's possibly 1000's of years are two completely different things. If brain cells are preserved at the moment of death, then I see no reasonable arguments as to why it should necessarily be _impossible_ to re-animate them.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > maggot said:
> ...


Yes I'm using logic. Tell me, why not this? What makes this so unachievable? The daunting requirements? Still doesn't mean it's impossible, just really hard. 

I'm using that point because I'm pretty sure that if someone were to invent something that would Revolutionize our lives, there would have been a point where people have said "That's Impossible". Many people have said that and it has still been done. I see this being no different.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

Cride5 said:


> I'm surprised no one has brought Cryogenics into this yet.
> 
> I think everyone agrees this would be impossible with today's technology, but presumably foks shelling out 1000 of dollars to be kept in a fancy freezer aren't just doing it for the hell of it.



It's unlikely they'll come out alive, but not impossible.


----------



## shelley (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> I want to know how it might be possible. Ideas, Logical abstractions. We can't do much with our current technology, I'm wondering how it could be done. I'm not letting go of the idea, because we still don't know if it is or if it isn't. Our current technology doesn't allow it, but maybe some near future technology might, and I want to know how it might be achieved.



A few of these might be what you're looking for:



MichaelP. said:


> Conversation I just had with my dad (Oncologist):
> 
> Me: Hey Dad, hypothetically, if you were able to replace brain cells efficiently, could you bring the dead back to life.
> 
> ...





LewisJ said:


> We should be able to replace ENTIRE CELLS which contain and are made up of MUCH MORE than just DNA. Regarding the brain, this involves finding which of the tens or hundreds of billions of a person's brain cells have died, creating exact replicas, and replacing them, all at a rate faster than the rate at which they die. This includes patching the (on average) several thousand connections between each neuron so that the brain can go back to functioning as it was before.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> Cride5 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm surprised no one has brought Cryogenics into this yet.
> ...



You're not being ignored, I'm listening. You have given me some good info. Your parents are qualified, but only with what we know. 

Also, those people being frozen do believe in this. They're not sure how, but they believe it is possible, just hasn't been found yet.


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

If it is possible, reincarnation is impossible, I'll describe:

Example:
some one dies [person A], they get reincarnated say into another person [person B]. Years after [person A] has died, science brings the corpse back to life. Now that [person A] is back to life, what the hell is ganna happen to [person B]??? Is [person A] ganna live 2 lifes? is person B ganna just [drop dead]?

There's my theory.


----------



## DavidWoner (Jan 21, 2010)

Here is a simple analogy that you might understand:

I have a piece of paper. On this piece of paper, I draw a picture. I set the paper on fire. You give me a brand new piece of paper, but it does not have my drawing on it, and I am unable to replicate my former work. So this replacement paper is not, and never will be the same as the original.

And in case you missed it: Brain = paper, Memories/consciousness = drawing, fire = death, etc

I know it is perhaps an over simplification, but I think it gets the point across.


----------



## aronpm (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Yes I'm using logic. Tell me, why not this? What makes this so unachievable? The daunting requirements? Still doesn't mean it's impossible, just really hard.
> 
> I'm using that point because I'm pretty sure that if someone were to invent something that would Revolutionize our lives, there would have been a point where people have said "That's Impossible". Many people have said that and it has still been done. I see this being no different.



It would be very hard for me to bungee jump off a mountain in a car, while doing a blindfolded solve with my feet, and winning the lottery while at the same time having sex with a supermodel on the international space station before I hit the bottom, but I'm sure just about everyone would say it's impossible.


----------



## Kian (Jan 21, 2010)

DavidWoner said:


> Here is a simple analogy that you might understand:
> 
> I have a piece of paper. On this piece of paper, I draw a picture. I set the paper on fire. You give me a brand new piece of paper, but it does not have my drawing on it, and I am unable to replicate my former work. So this replacement paper is not, and never will be the same as the original.
> 
> And in case you missed it: Brain = paper, Memories/consciousness = drawing, fire = death, etc



Oh I get it, so your point is that brains are made of paper?


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

shelley said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > I want to know how it might be possible. Ideas, Logical abstractions. We can't do much with our current technology, I'm wondering how it could be done. I'm not letting go of the idea, because we still don't know if it is or if it isn't. Our current technology doesn't allow it, but maybe some near future technology might, and I want to know how it might be achieved.
> ...



@ Shelly: How would you think it might be done?

@Michael. He told you what would be required. It is daunting, but not impossible. 


@ Lewis: There's an idea, and the downside, it is daunting, but not currently possible. Thank you for sharing this though.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

DavidWoner said:


> Here is a simple analogy that you might understand:
> 
> I have a piece of paper. On this piece of paper, I draw a picture. I set the paper on fire. You give me a brand new piece of paper, but it does not have my drawing on it, and I am unable to replicate my former work. So this replacement paper is not, and never will be the same as the original.
> 
> ...


 Yes I understand what you're saying. 
Of course the body is much more complex.


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

Oh, and sorry I was wrong about freezing cells. It doesn't actually kill cells, but my parents predict that no technology to "defrost" them. My bad, I posted that without thinking.


----------



## Swordsman Kirby (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> Yes I'm using logic.



Previous attempts at using "logic" on this forum have ended in disaster: e.g. http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showpost.php?p=197726&postcount=23


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

Zane_C said:


> If it is possible, reincarnation is impossible, I'll describe:
> 
> Example:
> some one dies [person A], they get reincarnated say into another person [person B]. Years after [person A] has died, science brings the corpse back to life. Now that [person A] is back to life, what the hell is ganna happen to [person B]??? Is [person A] ganna live 2 lifes? is person B ganna just [drop dead]?
> ...



Maybe that's when that person dies? There are many possibilities.


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

Kian said:


> DavidWoner said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a simple analogy that you might understand:
> ...



Lol, some people's seem like that.


----------



## qqwref (Jan 21, 2010)

Er. Things don't suddenly become possible *because* people say they are impossible. They become possible when someone works out a way to do them. If people say "that sounds too difficult/time-intensive/complicated, so I don't think anyone will ever do it", you have a way to prove them wrong. But if your only evidence is that it'd be cool if something were possible, and people who actually know something about the subject contradict all your base assumptions, it's probably you who is wrong.


----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> Oh, and sorry I was wrong about freezing cells. It doesn't actually kill cells, but my parents predict that no technology to "defrost" them. My bad, I posted that without thinking.



It's all right. 

I've heard of brain surgeries to take out a large part of the brain (For epilepsy or cancer) and that person is still themselves with hardly any effects. (I'll look for the book) So then that would mean that not the entire brain would need reconstruction.


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 21, 2010)




----------



## V-te (Jan 21, 2010)

qqwref said:


> Er. Things don't suddenly become possible *because* people say they are impossible. They become possible when someone works out a way to do them. If people say "that sounds too difficult/time-intensive/complicated, so I don't think anyone will ever do it", you have a way to prove them wrong. But if your only evidence is that it'd be cool if something were possible, and people who actually know something about the subject contradict all your base assumptions, it's probably you who is wrong.



I know. I have been given two ways it could happen, and they both said that everything would need to be reconstructed correctly for it to work. These say it's hard, and too complicated, but don't dismiss them as impossible. 



MichaelP. said:


> Conversation I just had with my dad (Oncologist):
> 
> Me: Hey Dad, hypothetically, if you were able to replace brain cells efficiently, could you bring the dead back to life.
> 
> ...





LewisJ said:


> We should be able to replace ENTIRE CELLS which contain and are made up of MUCH MORE than just DNA. Regarding the brain, this involves finding which of the tens or hundreds of billions of a person's brain cells have died, creating exact replicas, and replacing them, all at a rate faster than the rate at which they die. This includes patching the (on average) several thousand connections between each neuron so that the brain can go back to functioning as it was before.


[/QUOTE]


----------



## maggot (Jan 21, 2010)

i need to say that it is pointless here in speedcube. maybe you can bring on star trek forum. maybe they know more about cloning brain and such... good luck!


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

http://www.healthboards.com/boards/index.php?gclid=CPagiNTytJ8CFRwTagod1SHc0A


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Jan 21, 2010)

If it was this simple, don't you think doctors would be doing it right now?


----------



## xXzaKerXx (Jan 21, 2010)

hmmm i heard my biology teacher said that scientiests are trying to preserve the body of the dead without much damage and are trying to find a way to bring them back to live. my teacher said that it has something to do with regenerating the nucleus, or something like that.. so, in a way, i think it is possible to bring the dead back to live, if you think about it from another angle.


----------



## Dene (Jan 21, 2010)

lmao @ this entire thread. What a waste of space.


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

Dene said:


> lmao @ this entire thread. What a waste of space.



Yeah, allow me to conclude this thread.
With our current technology doing such a thing is not possible, who knows what the future holds?
Even if it is possible, this probably isn't the right forum to be discussing it.


----------



## PEZenfuego (Jan 21, 2010)

No it's possible. Don't you people watch TV gosh.


----------



## Owen (Jan 21, 2010)

It actually is possible.


----------



## gyc6001 (Jan 21, 2010)

For some cases, someone which has "died" can wake back up after a period of time. Their heartbeat may stop as well as the functions of the body, being paralized temporaily, but somehow it can miraculously revive itself. I think I have read such news before.


----------



## Lux Aeterna (Jan 21, 2010)

Short answer: This isn't really a well-defined question.

Longer answer: As far as modern science knows, when electrical activity in your brain ceases, whatever it is you used to call "I" ceases to exist. It's gone. Poof! 

So what happens next? Is it possible to reconstruct each and every cell in your body to be in _exactly _the same state as it was before? Maybe, maybe not. A priori it seems like it might be possible, barring quantum effects which may or may not be significant at the level of detail we're talking about. Technologically this is certainly impossible, but in theory it might be. That's a very iffy "might" though. 

However, even if you could do this, and then even if it is possible to somehow restart all the biochemical reactions and electric signals that make the machine we call your body tick and get the ball rolling again, we have no real reason to believe that the result would be "you", and it's not even guaranteed that the result would be "alive". Google the ship of Theseus. Trying to "bring back the dead" is essentially trying to perfectly recreate the state of someone's body when they were alive, and then hope for the best. Would it be the same person? Who knows -- at this point it's not a question for science, it's a question for philosophy. 

In any case, I think it's safe to say that the people of speedsolving.com aren't going to be able to answer a metaphysical question that has eluded all of humanity for the past several thousand years.


----------



## brunson (Jan 21, 2010)

Think we need a flying ponies emoticon.


----------



## Bryan (Jan 21, 2010)

Yes, this stuff hasn't been tested on humans too much because of ethical reasons.

However, I'm betting many people have experimented on animals to see if they could do this.

MichaelP, you may want to have a talk with your dad just so he knows you don't have a dead body in the backyard and are trying to fix a very bad mistake.


----------



## qqwref (Jan 21, 2010)

gyc6001 said:


> For some cases, someone which has "died" can wake back up after a period of time. Their heartbeat may stop as well as the functions of the body, being paralized temporaily, but somehow it can miraculously revive itself. I think I have read such news before.



Sure, but none of those stories were really about someone reviving - just about us being wrong when we said they were dead. It's far better now than it used to be, though - once in a while they used to have problems with people waking up after being executed, sometimes even on the "autopsy" table.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jan 21, 2010)

brunson said:


> Think we need a flying ponies emoticon.



That sounds great! Since everyone was complaining about overuse, maybe we should just change : f p to stand for "flying pony" instead of "facepalm".


----------



## 04mucklowd (Jan 21, 2010)

I heard somewhere that once the brain has been starved of oxygen, thereby being "brain dead"

There is no way to bring the brain back working.


----------



## Muesli (Jan 21, 2010)

Am I the only one that is suspicious that the only reason V-te is asking this is because he killed someone?


----------



## PHPJaguar (Jan 21, 2010)

04mucklowd said:


> I heard somewhere that once the brain has been starved of oxygen, thereby being "brain dead"
> 
> There is no way to bring the brain back working.



I'm glad you brought it up. [/sarcasm]


----------



## maggot (Jan 21, 2010)




----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 21, 2010)

Musli4brekkies said:


> Am I the only one that is suspicious that the only reason V-te is asking this is because he killed someone?



I was thinking more along the lines of someone close to him died.


----------



## TioMario (Jan 21, 2010)

V-te said:


> I believe it is possible to bring the dead back.



Dr. Frankenstein quote...

No seriously, after the organism dies, the cells begin to die one by one because you are not breathing anymore, and they don't receive oxygen nor energy. AND, you can't make a Warcraft III abomination from random people bodyparts because it's just bad and impossible, dead cells can't come to life again.

You just can't bring people back to life, we have to deal with that.

EDIT: maybe with VERY FRESH bodyparts... muahahahahahaha !!!


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 21, 2010)

Bryan said:


> MichaelP, you may want to have a talk with your dad just so he knows you don't have a dead body in the backyard and are trying to fix a very bad mistake.


OMG HE KNOWS!!!!
Who told you about the bod.... bo ... bolognese sandwich. Yea... it was.... good?


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 21, 2010)

Musli4brekkies said:


> Am I the only one that is suspicious that the only reason V-te is asking this is because he killed someone?





Cyrus C. said:


> I was thinking more along the lines of someone close to him died.



I don't think neither of those, he's just some one who had a thought cross their mind and wanted to look into it a bit.


----------



## Muesli (Jan 21, 2010)

Zane_C said:


> Musli4brekkies said:
> 
> 
> > Am I the only one that is suspicious that the only reason V-te is asking this is because he killed someone?
> ...


We all know that V-te is a murdering psychopath.


----------



## miniGOINGS (Jan 21, 2010)

This thread was pretty much failing untill the flying pony. Now its...




Opps, wrong pic. I meant "Automatic Win".


----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 22, 2010)

Musli4brekkies said:


> Zane_C said:
> 
> 
> > Musli4brekkies said:
> ...


Who murders because someone close to him died???


----------



## Dene (Jan 22, 2010)

Flying Pochmann?


----------



## Cyrus C. (Jan 22, 2010)

I'm surprised this thread hasn't been closed yet.

+1 for Flying Pochmanns.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jan 22, 2010)

Dene said:


> Flying Pochmann?


I want a Flying Pochmann.


----------



## a small kitten (Jan 22, 2010)

There ya go


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 22, 2010)

Years ago I used to love that card game.


----------



## AndyRoo789 (Jan 22, 2010)

Zane_C said:


> Years ago I used to love that card game.



Same. HEART OF THE CARDS.


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 22, 2010)

AndyRoo789 said:


> Same. HEART OF THE CARDS.



Precisely


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 22, 2010)

ITS TIME TO DU DU DU DU DU DU DU DU DU DU (Voice drops 6 octaves) DUEL!


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 22, 2010)

Did somebody call for a DUEL?

You can call me Aaron Burr
From the way I'm dropping Hamiltons


----------



## vrumanuk (Jan 22, 2010)

Don’t want security to get suspicious. 
Mr. Pibb and Red Vines equals CRAZY DELICIOUS!


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Jan 22, 2010)

Reach in my pocket, pull out some dough
girl acting like she's never seen a ten befo'


----------



## IamWEB (Jan 22, 2010)

MichaelP. said:


> ITS TIME TO DU DU DU DU DU DU DU DU DU DU (Voice drops 6 octaves) DUEL!





lol human with 6 octaves.

You could _die and come back_ and still not have that much vocal range!


----------



## MichaelP. (Jan 22, 2010)

I LOVE THOSE CUPCAKES LIKE MCADAMS LOVES GOSLING


----------



## Zane_C (Jan 22, 2010)




----------

