OT: Michael Jackson Leaves Nothing to Bubbles
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:02 am
MR
https://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/
OT: Michael Jackson Leaves Nothing to Bubbles
https://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=42524
Page 1 of 2
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:02 amPosted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:03 amI heard Bubbles was getting the kids.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 amBubbles is doing alright on his own. He's chilling in a sanctuary in Florida. I don't know if he knows about Michael yet. Dude still has about 20 more years to live. Who ever thought he'd outlive Jackson.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:16 amGunbot wrote:Bubbles is doing alright on his own. He's chilling in a sanctuary in Florida. I don't know if he knows about Michael yet. Dude still has about 20 more years to live. Who ever thought he'd outlive Jackson.
Good music or not, the Bubbles thing was weird. And carrying around 12 or 13 year old "Webster" like a toddler. Poor rich MJ, what a sad life this guy had.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:18 amStoneCold wrote:Gunbot wrote:Bubbles is doing alright on his own. He's chilling in a sanctuary in Florida. I don't know if he knows about Michael yet. Dude still has about 20 more years to live. Who ever thought he'd outlive Jackson.
Good music or not, the Bubbles thing was weird. And carrying around 12 or 13 year old "Webster" like a toddler. Poor rich MJ, what a sad life this guy had.
Who or what was "Webster"? Sounds like a snake or possibly a lizzard.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:20 amThe Sushi Hunter wrote:StoneCold wrote:Gunbot wrote:Bubbles is doing alright on his own. He's chilling in a sanctuary in Florida. I don't know if he knows about Michael yet. Dude still has about 20 more years to live. Who ever thought he'd outlive Jackson.
Good music or not, the Bubbles thing was weird. And carrying around 12 or 13 year old "Webster" like a toddler. Poor rich MJ, what a sad life this guy had.
Who or what was "Webster"? Sounds like a snake or possibly a lizzard.
Emmanuel Lewis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_(TV_series)
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:21 amHave they determined who Bubbles' father is yet?
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:22 amVoyager wrote:Have they determined who Bubbles' father is yet?
LOL
Paris Hilton
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:23 amWas Bubbles male or female? If male, this could have been a "red flag" on what was yet to come.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:23 amStoneCold wrote:Voyager wrote:Have they determined who Bubbles' father is yet?
LOL
Paris Hilton
I know, don't tempt the Loons, it's feeding time.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:26 amThe Sushi Hunter wrote:Was Bubbles male or female? If male, this could have been a "red flag" on what was yet to come.
Wow it only took less than 10 posts to change the topic to beastiality. That's gotta be an MR record!
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:26 amThe Sushi Hunter wrote:Was Bubbles male or female? If male, this could have been a "red flag" on what was yet to come.
You're really Arnel, aren't you?
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:27 amwhat a flashback.i haven't even heard or seen of webster in at least twenty years.he didn't snag the tabloids like 'ol gary coleman does.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:31 amIf we're going to devote time to a monkey thread, let's at least make educational
Monkeys recognize 'bad grammar'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8139322.stm
Studies on monkeys have revealed clues about the evolution of language.
In the journal Biology Letters, researchers said that cotton-top tamarins are able to spot if the order of syllables in a word is "wrong".
They familiarized the monkeys with two-syllable terms, and recorded their reaction to words that were not consistent with that syllable pattern.
The team says the work illustrates how many animals use patterns that have become intrinsic to human language.
And this provides evidence of the "non-lingual" origin of certain aspects of language, the group told BBC News.
In the experiment, the monkeys were played a series of different words that all shared either the same first syllable or second syllable.
The idea was to investigate the origins of the prefixes and affixes used in many languages to indicate tense.
In English, for example, the past tense of a verb can be composed using the suffix "-ed" - "walk" becomes "walked".
The monkeys were not trained to respond to specific words, but they were familiarized with a pattern - a particular prefix, or a suffix.
"In the prefixation condition, they heard 'shoy-bi', 'shoy-la', 'shoy-ro' and so on," explained Ansgar Endress, lead author of the study.
"The idea is that they get used to the pattern if you play it long enough."
The "suffixation" group heard words with a changing first syllable, this time with the suffix, "shoy", kept consistent - such as "bi-shoy" and "la-shoy".
The team played recordings of these "familiarization" words to the animals for half an hour.
The following day, the monkeys were tested.
The researchers played them "new" words that were either consistent with the pattern they had heard before - with "shoy" in the right place - or inconsistent with the familiar pattern.
"We simply measured how often the monkeys looked to the speaker when we played the items," said Dr Endress.
"If they got used to, or bored by, the pattern, then they might be more interested in items that violate (it) - because they are something new - than in items that are consistent with the pattern."
Marc Hauser, who was also involved in this study, told BBC News that the results showed how human language had incorporated memory processes that were not "language-specific".
"Simple temporal ordering is shared with non-human animals," he said.
"This has an important role. In bird song or whale song, for example, there's a temporal ordering to the notes and that's critical for communication."
And it goes beyond that. "In primates, this ordering is vital for learning," explained Professor Hauser. "In tool use, primates learn from each other that you do this first, then you do that, then it's that."
Professor Hauser described how evident this innate ability is when a child learns language.
"As a child learns to use the past tense," he said, "they may generalise and use a suffix wrongly, but they will never generalize in the wrong direction.
"You never hear them say ed-walk instead of walked."
"We simply measured how often the monkeys looked to the speaker when we played the items," said Dr Endress.
"If they got used to, or bored by, the pattern, then they might be more interested in items that violate (it) - because they are something new - than in items that are consistent with the pattern."
Marc Hauser, who was also involved in this study, told BBC News that the results showed how human language had incorporated memory processes that were not "language-specific".
"Simple temporal ordering is shared with non-human animals," he said.
"This has an important role. In bird song or whale song, for example, there's a temporal ordering to the notes and that's critical for communication."
And it goes beyond that. "In primates, this ordering is vital for learning," explained Professor Hauser. "In tool use, primates learn from each other that you do this first, then you do that, then it's that."
Professor Hauser described how evident this innate ability is when a child learns language.
"As a child learns to use the past tense," he said, "they may generalize and use a suffix wrongly, but they will never generalize in the wrong direction.
"You never hear them say ed-walk instead of walked."
Monkeys recognize 'bad grammar'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8139322.stm
Studies on monkeys have revealed clues about the evolution of language.
In the journal Biology Letters, researchers said that cotton-top tamarins are able to spot if the order of syllables in a word is "wrong".
They familiarized the monkeys with two-syllable terms, and recorded their reaction to words that were not consistent with that syllable pattern.
The team says the work illustrates how many animals use patterns that have become intrinsic to human language.
And this provides evidence of the "non-lingual" origin of certain aspects of language, the group told BBC News.
In the experiment, the monkeys were played a series of different words that all shared either the same first syllable or second syllable.
The idea was to investigate the origins of the prefixes and affixes used in many languages to indicate tense.
In English, for example, the past tense of a verb can be composed using the suffix "-ed" - "walk" becomes "walked".
The monkeys were not trained to respond to specific words, but they were familiarized with a pattern - a particular prefix, or a suffix.
"In the prefixation condition, they heard 'shoy-bi', 'shoy-la', 'shoy-ro' and so on," explained Ansgar Endress, lead author of the study.
"The idea is that they get used to the pattern if you play it long enough."
The "suffixation" group heard words with a changing first syllable, this time with the suffix, "shoy", kept consistent - such as "bi-shoy" and "la-shoy".
The team played recordings of these "familiarization" words to the animals for half an hour.
The following day, the monkeys were tested.
The researchers played them "new" words that were either consistent with the pattern they had heard before - with "shoy" in the right place - or inconsistent with the familiar pattern.
"We simply measured how often the monkeys looked to the speaker when we played the items," said Dr Endress.
"If they got used to, or bored by, the pattern, then they might be more interested in items that violate (it) - because they are something new - than in items that are consistent with the pattern."
Marc Hauser, who was also involved in this study, told BBC News that the results showed how human language had incorporated memory processes that were not "language-specific".
"Simple temporal ordering is shared with non-human animals," he said.
"This has an important role. In bird song or whale song, for example, there's a temporal ordering to the notes and that's critical for communication."
And it goes beyond that. "In primates, this ordering is vital for learning," explained Professor Hauser. "In tool use, primates learn from each other that you do this first, then you do that, then it's that."
Professor Hauser described how evident this innate ability is when a child learns language.
"As a child learns to use the past tense," he said, "they may generalise and use a suffix wrongly, but they will never generalize in the wrong direction.
"You never hear them say ed-walk instead of walked."
"We simply measured how often the monkeys looked to the speaker when we played the items," said Dr Endress.
"If they got used to, or bored by, the pattern, then they might be more interested in items that violate (it) - because they are something new - than in items that are consistent with the pattern."
Marc Hauser, who was also involved in this study, told BBC News that the results showed how human language had incorporated memory processes that were not "language-specific".
"Simple temporal ordering is shared with non-human animals," he said.
"This has an important role. In bird song or whale song, for example, there's a temporal ordering to the notes and that's critical for communication."
And it goes beyond that. "In primates, this ordering is vital for learning," explained Professor Hauser. "In tool use, primates learn from each other that you do this first, then you do that, then it's that."
Professor Hauser described how evident this innate ability is when a child learns language.
"As a child learns to use the past tense," he said, "they may generalize and use a suffix wrongly, but they will never generalize in the wrong direction.
"You never hear them say ed-walk instead of walked."
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:37 amVoyager wrote:StoneCold wrote:Voyager wrote:Have they determined who Bubbles' father is yet?
LOL
Paris Hilton
I know, don't tempt the Loons, it's feeding time.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:45 amStoneCold wrote:Voyager wrote:StoneCold wrote:Voyager wrote:Have they determined who Bubbles' father is yet?
LOL
Paris Hilton
I know, don't tempt the Loons, it's feeding time.
PLEEEEEZEEE --- Just don't post that icky one where he's holding the microphone & he's tilting his head back with his mouth hanging open & he looks like he's in the throes of passion. That one gives me the creeps!!!
Re: OT: Michael Jackson Leaves Nothing to Bubbles
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:45 amStoneCold wrote:
How cute...they had the same nose.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:48 amJasonD wrote:StoneCold wrote:Voyager wrote:StoneCold wrote:Voyager wrote:Have they determined who Bubbles' father is yet?
LOL
Paris Hilton
I know, don't tempt the Loons, it's feeding time.
PLEEEEEZEEE --- Just don't post that icky one where he's holding the microphone & he's tilting his head back with his mouth hanging open & he looks like he's in the throes of passion. That one gives me the creeps!!!
You mean this one?
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:52 amVoyager wrote:JasonD wrote:StoneCold wrote:Voyager wrote:StoneCold wrote:Voyager wrote:Have they determined who Bubbles' father is yet?
LOL
Paris Hilton
I know, don't tempt the Loons, it's feeding time.
PLEEEEEZEEE --- Just don't post that icky one where he's holding the microphone & he's tilting his head back with his mouth hanging open & he looks like he's in the throes of passion. That one gives me the creeps!!!
You mean this one?
Nah, that one’s okay. I meant the one where is facial expression is all relaxed & it looks like he just finished having sex. Eeeeewww. Women probably think it’s hot, but that pic gives me the heebie-jeebies.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:52 am_________________
Tito's Blog...Coming Soon
God save us. I don't think Tito & Blog should even be mentioned in the same sentence. Oops , I did it myself.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:56 am
Totally off topic Loon question: Does anyone know why Perry's neck and chest appear to be discolored in the pic? I've seen this photo a million times and every time the discoloration is there. It doesn't appear to be a shadow. Is his skin peeling?...or do he and MJ share a little secret???
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:00 amJasonD wrote:
Nah, that one’s okay. I meant the one where is facial expression is all relaxed & it looks like he just finished having sex. Eeeeewww. Women probably think it’s hot, but that pic gives me the heebie-jeebies.
Yeah, me too. I hate that one...uhmm could someone please post that picture, so we all know which one we're talking about - just for the record.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:09 amLLL wrote:JasonD wrote:Nah, that one’s okay. I meant the one where is facial expression is all relaxed & it looks like he just finished having sex. Eeeeewww. Women probably think it’s hot, but that pic gives me the heebie-jeebies.
One of these perhaps Jas?
Okay, I guess I started something here & just b/c I don't wanna get a boat load of orgasmic Perry pics coming my way ---- they creep me out --- I guess I'll finished what I started. It's this one:
I absolutely hate this pic !!!!!
Excuse me but I need to vomit now.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:16 ammikemarrs wrote:what a flashback.i haven't even heard or seen of webster in at least twenty years.he didn't snag the tabloids like 'ol gary coleman does.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 12:46 pmJubilee wrote:
Totally off topic Loon question: Does anyone know why Perry's neck and chest appear to be discolored in the pic? I've seen this photo a million times and every time the discoloration is there. It doesn't appear to be a shadow. Is his skin peeling?...or do he and MJ share a little secret???
Heh it's a shadow... it's in the shape of his hand and mic.
Also, SP has so many "after sex" pics lol
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 1:33 pmPost more Perry pics please...........
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 8:25 pmartist4perry wrote:Post more Perry pics please...........
I hate you, Ginger.
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:07 pmOnly in this place can a thread about Bubbles the Chimp turn into a Perry Porn thread.....God I love this place!!!
(Sorry Jason!!!)
(Sorry Jason!!!)
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:56 pmJasonD wrote:artist4perry wrote:Post more Perry pics please...........
I hate you, Ginger.
You'll like this thread then, Jason.
http://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=38913&start=0
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:03 amLLL wrote:Arianddu wrote:JasonD wrote:artist4perry wrote:Post more Perry pics please...........
I hate you, Ginger.
You'll like this thread then, Jason.
http://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=38913&start=0
Portland is going to have a stroke when she sees that thread!
I am already there.....and my mood has improved considerably.......that was until I read the whole thread....the ending was little ugly for my taste...but the photos were all....what can I say....very nice!