posted
I always thought Maureen O'Hara was lovely when she was younger. I think the most beautiful woman around now is Catherine Zeta-Jones.
Posts: 1319 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Monica Bellucci, Jennifer Connelly, and pictures don't do Ingrid Bergman justice; watch one of her films.
Posts: 686 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, I take it back. Ingrid was the most beautiful woman ever born, and she gave birth to the second most beautiful woman: Isabella Rosalini.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Again, Natalie Portman and Anne Hathaway (wow, thery really MUST be beautiful ) also: Liv Tyler why hasn't anyone mentioned Sophie Marceau? She looks like an angel. and... what's her name, for pete's sake?! the actress that played Galadriel and Elizabeth I. She's got that amazing, indescribable quality to her...
Posts: 218 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cate Blanchett. I love Cate Blanchett - I have girl crushes on the two above, but I want to be Cate Blanchett.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I forgot about Audrey Hepburn, even though I'd listed her once as one of my top 5 most beautiful actresses. Her body seems ordinary (though very thin), but she has such symmetrical features, clear skin, and big inquisitive eyes I can't look away from her; she seems to want to know everything about me.
And seeing Jewel's face reminded me of Tori Amos's, which I also like. They both have this rounded face with narrowish eyes and a tired smile that makes them look (to me, at least) as if they know everything and are full of compassion and pity for the rest of us.
Posts: 781 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm kind of surprised no one has mentioned Kate Winslet I fell for her beauty in Eternal Sunshine- specifically near the beginning when she sleeping in Joel's car. She just looks amazing.
She's very much in what I consider- the uber gorgeous.
And probably for the "girl next door" look I really think that Kirsten Dunst
I also am one that thinks that Angelina Jolie isn't attractive at all.
Posts: 980 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
steven, I'm gonna have to pass on that (generous, if suspect) offer. I'm in the middle of a job and a move, and I barely have time to read the things I want to read.
Cost/benefit and all that. You understand, I'm sure.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm surprised no one's mentioned the classic National Geographic Afghan Girl.
I'll echo Natalie Portman and Kate Winslet. But we're forgetting Zhang Ziyi, and somewhat more obscure, Olga Pikienko (don't be alarmed by the makeup).
Posts: 1810 | Registered: Jan 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm going to have to second Zhang Ziyi, nth Natalie Portman, nth Audrey Hepburn, the Afghan Girl...
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then delete or edit your insulting post, El JT.
If you think my offer is suspect, email King of Men. He got his first $25 and his free copy of the book 7 weeks ago. The offer is still open to anyone who is interested. 100 pages isn't that much reading, since a good bit of it is pictures.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will do neither, since it's neither insulting nor untrue.
Even if I had the time to wade through his crappy book, and even if I believed you might pay up, I still wouldn't do it. It's worth mentioning that one of the not insignificant reasons I passed is that I don't feel comfortable with someone as unhinged as you having my address.
Though I admit I'm not surprised that a good bit of your doctrine is based on pictures.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm curious why this thread is so interesting, and whether the same would be true if we had a "most attractive guys" thread.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
AK, I was thinking of posting a guy or two just to be different. Like Brad Pitt. But I think a "most attractive guys" thread wouldn't be as popular, simply because just about everyone likes looking at pictures of beautiful women, while the same cannot be said of beautiful men. Or maybe there's more to it.
Posts: 1810 | Registered: Jan 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Neither of them are women obviously but I think Kaneshiro Takeshi and Tom Welling exhibit a impressively large amount of facial beauty. I'm not attracted to Welling but whenever I see his pictures I can't help but think, "That's a prime example of facial beauty right there. That's right."
Also, Jennifer Connelly! Unlike the two above though, she is, in fact, a woman. I can't really pinpoint what I find so gorgeous about her but the combination of her dark hair, green eyes and porcelain skin is .
Posts: 181 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jodi Foster is stunningly gorgeous, especially with brown hair (in the movie Nell I think). I can see people like Keira Knightly being very attractive to guys, but in my opinion, she looks like a robot to me. Her face is too perfect--to shiny, or something. Jodi Foster is very real-looking.
And some non-women, Viggo Mortensen and Simon from Firefly both have quite a lot of facial beauty.
Posts: 464 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I will do neither, since it's neither insulting nor untrue.
:bristles:
I think it was insulting.
I have read Price's studies. I believe that his conclusions have merit and relevance to human health. I have changed my eating habits as a result of the things I have read, and I believe I am better off for it. Does that make me unhinged and a crackpot?
<--- drinks raw milk & churns butter from it
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Price's experimental studies are regularly unequivocally flawed. He is not a good scientist, and he rarely, if ever, does good science.
That does not prevent some of his conclusions (such as on general dietary advice) from being correct or helpful. Many very good studies have been done on diet that sometimes reach similar conclusions (though hardly on all things). You are not unhinged or a crackpot for following some of his dietary advice.
posted
Science is limited in the scope of things it can find the truth of absolutely. Many of the things we would like to know can only be found out by abandoning ethics in our studies. There is still much room for faith and individual interpretation when it comes to evidence found. We all believe what we believe.
I find Price's studies compelling, though I try to take them with a grain of salt. I think steven has been rather unkindly treated on this forum, and I have never really been able to understand why. Many people claim things are solid science when they are more faith than science. I find that no reason to call them insulting names and dismiss them as untrustworthy human beings.
I have tried to understand the reasons behind the unkind treatment, and I have come to the conclusion that it has to do with 1) That no one else has come forward and defended him or supported his beliefs by coming forward and saying, "I share them as well" and 2) The claims do sound odd, especially when hearing them for the first time.
I don't think steven would be trying to doggedly to convince others to believe as he does if they would just listen to him, nod, and say, "Oh, that is very interesting," or "I have heard that as well." Feeling like no one will even grant you that can make you kinda desperate to convince because everyone wants to be taken seriously on the things that really matter to them.
Maybe it just doesn't bother me that much when someone believes something this harmless is water-tight science. It certainly isn't worth the time and effort to convince them otherwise.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My celebrity crush for the last couple years has been Zooey Deschenel. There's an honest vulnerability in her eyes, and expression. Not to mention she's cute as a button.
Other than her, I'd second, third, fourth whatever Morena Baccarin.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:The harm done isn't in the belief. It's in the misunderstanding of what "science" is.
I think it is a common mistake amongst those not well trained in logical thought, especially when they want so badly for something to be real science. Again, if the result is harmless, I'm not bothered by it. It's only worth wrestling over when there is significant harm involved. Otherwise, why beat your head against a wall? Why be unkind? That doesn't help anyone learn anything. (Sorry for this tangent, all. If anyone wants to reply to this, feel free to put it in my Raw Milk thread.)
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
She was so good-looking that she almost spoiled Rear Window by her presence. What was a woman like that doing with guy like that, in an apartment like that, pulling capers like that? She should have been hanging out in some palace with some prince or other.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
El JT--do you actually think I'm crazy, or is that just your way of talking to people? Fine. I'd be willing to send the book or the check to a hatracker of your choice, or whatever address you choose. If you think I'm dangerous, then that should satisfy your need for safety.
Tom, how about you read chapters 18 and 19 of Dr. price's book? The same offer applies. I send you the book and the $25, and you post your comments. That's only about 48-50 pages of reading.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Tom, how about you read chapters 18 and 19 of Dr. price's book? The same offer applies. I send you the book and the $25, and you post your comments. That's only about 48-50 pages of reading.
I'll make you another offer: I will read, for free, any article printed in a scientifically-accredited journal. I trust Dr. Price's book not at all; what you're doing is akin to asking me to read Ann Coulter to get a new outlook on American politics.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, Dr. price published literally dozens of articles in peer-reviewed journals. A couple of these, in edited form, are in Price's book. Price also referenced dozens of peer-reviewed articles and books, including several studies on animals that showed conclusively the effects of particular nutritional deficiencies on different species. He also performed several animal experiments himself. I'm trying to find a way not to insult you, tom. Can you help me out, there, so we can get past this?
The simple point I'm making is this--although the same nutritional deficiency will produce different effects in different species, you can always be sure that overly-processed or undernourished plant and/or animal products will cause illness in those that consume them. Price made very clear in his book that the same deformity is produced in different species by different deficiencies.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
steven, how about you just give us the cites from his book of the articles that were published? Many of us have access to university search engines and could probably locate those articles with ease and then read them.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In that case you should have no problem providing a few of Dr. Price's peer reviewed articles you find particularly central .
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Price-Pottenger Foundation has quite a few articles of Dr. Price's. I have asked them to provide a shorter version of the book.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's a self-published journal, not a peer-reviewed one. Do you have examples of articles that appeared in peer-reviewed journals?
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll try to dig some of that up for tomorrow. Some of those articles were published nearly 80 years ago. I don't know if the records for those journals go back that far. I'll check for specific references, though.
I'll be the first to admit that I don't know everything about good diet. that's exactly why i try to eat mostly-raw, mostly-unrefined, mostly-fresh, and pretty similar to traditional tribes who have good health. No matter what makes it work, it works. That's my main and only point. I eat a diet that works. I don't know entirely why it works, and I KNOW that I don't know. My guesses about the ormus stuff are just that, guesses. I still think it's worth noting that 100% of the 10-12 people I've shown Dr. Price's book to are quite convinced by the pictures.
I'm not saying Price didn't have his flaws. What I am saying is that none of you are fit to point out the mote in his eye without noting the beams in your own eyes. Who the fizzle are a bunch of armchair-sitting, potato-chip-gulping, soda-slurpers to question the work of someone who spent decades studying nutrition and bone structure?
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
.
