Wednesday, October 17, 2007

It's all guys talk about

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2005 2:53 PM


Tuesday, October 16, 2007


From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 11:03 AM


From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent Monday, October 15, 2007 11:03 AM

Why is this "um" worthy?Funny.

From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 11:15 AM

Lewis, I was referring to the fact that Jan is hot. I feel it was um worthy.

From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 11:17 AM

I've just never had hotness brought to my attention via "um?"

like. . .um? totally hot? idk? looks like it. um?

and "um" worthy? I don't really know what that means

From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 11:20 AM

You're the one that asked if it was "um" worthy… so you should know what that means Lewis.


From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 11:35 AM


Don't you understand the rules of hotness?

Section 1.1 states that if a woman is declared as being "subjectively hot," a man may declare to his friends that he believes she is hot. He needn't precede the statement with "I feel" or "I believe" if the woman might not be universally hot, but may reside somewhere on a threshold of hotness, for which it is possible for her to eventually be accepted among a group of men as being hot. (see the "Pam Beesly Syndrome"). If a woman resides below the threshold level, see Section 1.2.

Section 1.2 states that if a woman is declared to be "subjectively hot," meaning that many men would be in disagreement about her hotness, the man must use "I feel" or "I believe" statements as predecessors toward the hotness statement. This suggests that the owner of the statement realizes that a chick might not be hot to everyone, but he, in fact, develops a strong attraction for her based on numerous idiosyncracies and anamolous characteristics she possesses. This attraction develops despite the beliefs of the man's fellow piers.

Section 2.1 states that if a woman is declared to be "universally hot," it is not necessarily required that a man uses obvious statements, such as "She is quite beautiful" or "She is hot" or "That broad is smokin!" Occasionally, the visceral nature of the man will often provoke him to use such statements, and these are deemed as being appropriate and even commendable, but not necessarily required. In many cases, more discreet, simplified phrases like "wow," "um," and "BAM!" may be used. The idea behind this is that, because the woman is universally hot, men are able to communicate a universal message through minimal dialect. In this case, "um" means "um. . . ..jan is a babe." It is up to the recipient of the message (such as yourself Lewis) to understand that these phrases subtly suggest an ending phrase to the initial one-worded statement, and that the spoken words are not required.

If you are in disagreement with this, why don't you start dating men.

From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 12:14 PM

being on a magazine cover precludes being demarcated as "universally hot". Therein lies the dispute. Jan cannot be regarded as universally hot and so the minimal dialect mentioned in section 2.1 does not apply. If there is not system for the acceptance of universal hotness than the door is wide open for strong-arming and and militant seizures of appointments meant to be left under democratic control. And if deciding the hotness of women isn't to be a democratic process then what would the process even mean and by extension, what would the title of 'hot' even be worth? These are priciples that you have overlooked in your dogmatic ascension to author of this incomplete and careless construction of hot legislature.

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 12:42 PM

You are assuming I'm looking at this in black and white. Although it may be perceived that way, there is a varying degree of freedom that exists underneath these rules. The problem here is that you failed to see that, and immediately attempted to dismember my meticulously conceived laws with your atheist, free-will (and preposterous) notions. If everyone were exempt from these laws at all times, you'd see as many ugly chicks with good-looking guys as you see hot chicks with good-looking guys (according to statistics and an incredible large sample population. . .around 7 billion). The truth is, you don't see this. Hotness, for the most part, tends to pair with hotness. It is an inevitable truth in the human mind. . .not just mine either. . .objective analyses will support this. Keep reading:

You suggest that Jan is on the cover of a magazine, and this precludes entitlement of universal hotness. The issue here is that you've completely reversed the chronological order of events, skewing all empirical evidence. The correct order of events occurs with the initial acceptance of Jan being hot, thus rendering her fine figure on the front of a magazine. She was deemed by such a large population as being hot and therefore was photographed for the cover of Entertainment Weekly. This will even increase her universal hotness, as there are varying degrees of universal hotness (this refers to my varying degrees of freedom mentioned above. . .keep reading):

You claim my construction of these laws is nothing more than a "dogmatic ascension," yet these laws are universally, albeit implicitly accepted among heterosexual men. We live in a democratic society, but this doesn't mean we don't have laws. Without laws, we'd be a completely reckless society with no social norms. People would be eating each other. The fact is that we do have laws, but are still allotted freedom nonetheless. Constructing a set of hot laws doesn't devalue the term "hot" in any way because these laws still allow the users to classify. And why is this? Because men, for the most part, have a general understanding of what it means to be universally hot and universally not. Anyone who resides in the gray area of hotness can fluctuate levels because of personal beliefs. (ie the Pam Beesly Syndrome).

Here's what it comes down to. I constructed an elaborate set of laws which better describe a linear trend that was never understood, but had always existed since the dawn of time. Much like science, these are physical laws that have always been prevalent, and now I have unlocked these mysteries with a scientific, diplomatic, and judicial set of laws. . . .all within a morning's work at Medtronic. (Actually, i have believed this to be true long before today). You think this system has flaws and holes, but maybe it's because you have tried to exponentiate such simple data to agree with your biased attitude toward social customs and hot broads.

From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 4:09 PM

I'm not done there, but I got slammed.I guess I'm mostly done, but not quite. Nice job josh.

Monday, October 15, 2007


From: *******.********@********.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2005 10:33 AM


Friday, October 12, 2007


From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2005 3:27 AM
Subject: Re: Suprise ****bags!

nerds are probably the second greatest candy in the world, a close-runner up to that of the notorious sour patch kids. the reason i bring this up is because i am currently masticating a "Nerd Gumball" that I received in my mug from ********. let me tell you is absolutely delicious. the gumball, of course, delivers a sweet sensation to my taste buds, and it has a soft, stretchy consistency. the nerds somewhat oppose this nature due to the fact that they are small and crunchy, and they also deliver a tart, almost sour sensation to the tongue. however, the nerd gumball is not my favorite nerd treat. have you ever tried the immortal nerd rope? these are delectable treats, much like the gumball, except one million times better. nerds wrapped on a rope of sweetened licorice-like candy. the rope itself, though it resembles licorice, does not taste like licorice at all, and that's what makes it so good. possibly the best nerd treat, however, is the nerd blizzard from Dairy Queen. you may never have had one, because, like the bald eagle, they are endagered. more and more dairy queens are wiping out these sweet concoctions because of the low publicity to their name. this angers me. nothing tastes better than cool, creamy, vanilla ice cream mixed with crunchy, tart nerds. if life gets any better than that, i'd sure like to know.


Thursday, October 11, 2007


From: Michael.*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 10:54 AM

everybody's a little testy today .. testy .. test .. testies ...

hehe testicles ..yea testicles ..

So i'm sitting here staring at my cube. I like my cube. I'm glad it's not a circle though. It's lunch time here at ******************. I always enjoy seeing the fat people who work here bring in these lite highpower protein lunches.. There thinking to themselves while there eating... “HEY look at me I'm gonna get THIN! When actually it should be .. I'm a fat ass and I can't get off my duff to work out…”

I don't know why I'm mean in this email .. it just seems like fun


I need to work out as well. So yea i should shutup because ..

So take care kiddies write laters


From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 11:01 AM

i feel like really being mean today too. it's just one of those moods im in. plus its really fun sometimes.

Here’s my Maddox rant (without the swearing)

First of all, books are a waste of time. i could understand maybe a textbook, where you actually learn something and gain some knowledge. but when you read about wizards and beasts and swordsmen you might as well sit in front of Charlie Browns parents for a few hours and listen to them talk. What is the deal with people and books? my mom always tries to get me to read a book, telling me how good it is? Well, you know what happens during the time you read a book? People are doing things. people are getting stuff done. People are accomplishing. Meanwhile you are opening up your noggin and pouring diarrhea on your brain. Why live in a fantasy land? why read about some other morons experiences when i can have my own? Movies are more entertaining. plus you don't have to think. i will not talk about fat people right now because I’m going to eat Wendy’s.

all i can say is i can eat Wendy’s and they cant.

From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 11:19 AM

Josh, your rant had some good points until you said 'movies are more entertaining'. While this may or may not be true, if books are diarrhea then movies are the old moldy cheeseburger that the doctor finds in the 599 lbs. woman's fat flabs that has attracted a colony of maggots creating the most horrible mixture of thought poison known to man or wizard. Except for "12 Monkeys", that movie was sweet! (he totally saw himself in the airport man!!)

The reason I like books is because they are excellent fodder for the conversations I get into with you guys. Stranger is sweet. As for shameless fun books, I recommend "John Carter of Mars" by Edgar Rice Burroughs (he created Tarzan). It's about John Carter who's actually from earth, he just gets mystically transported to mars where several dying races are fighting to survive on a once healthy prosperous planet. Also the guy who worked receiving Menards was named John Carter, he was a weirdo though.

With the Ninth Ray of Barsoom!

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 11:01 AM

Listen lewis, i'm sure that these books provide excellent fodder for our conversations, but really, you don't even need to educate yourself about a man's experience on mars to talk with us. You know why? Because all outer-space/medieval war books are the same. the same plot. The same ending. The same idea. I will now write a quick Martian novel.

John is an intelligent, ambitious young man and works for a pioneer astronomical company. his relationships struggle because he prioritizes his work. His wife hates him and wants to leave him, not only because of his poor communication, but also because of his zitty face and saggy nips. so he heads out to mars on a spaceship. he is instructed to set up a small colony with his fellow astronauts. things go well until one night, their biodome pops, due to weird booger-like Martians. jon and friends chase the Martians, soon discovering a huge Martian city. They attempt to fit in with the Martians, and one of the astronauts tries dating one, and they have kids. The kids somewhat resemble half-booger, half-cheeseburger nugget things. As the kids grow older, they rebel and start a Martian war. Once earth hears about this, they supply troops to mars, which is basically a failed attempt. A war between worlds begins, and at the last second, earth develops a giant fart bomb that destroys all life on mars, including earthlings. The end.

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Why the Josh and Lewis Blog

When did the Josh and Lewis Blog First become a thought?

Read this exchange.

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:20 AM
Subject: Petty behavior, Zero productivity, All in a day's work

That's what my coffee mug says (see subject). My parents got me "the office" coffee mug. Lovin it.

The farts are flowing like wine here, with one minor exception. They don't smell nearly as good as wine, although I suppose both consistencies could, in fact, be described as "rich." Another exception exists, and that is, if you could somehow condense my farts into a liquid, their taste would be absolutely horiffic, leaving a rancid, phosphoric taste on your pallette. I imagine if anyone could formulate a wine like this, it could pave the way for an entirely new market of wine, paralleling that of Harry Potter Jelly-Bellies. You know, those infamous jelly beans that are notorious for putrid tastes, like vomit, worms, rotten eggs, and poop.

Anyways, I'm getting ahead of myself here. The point is, I'm literally suffocating myself in this cube. Everytime an air biscuit sets sail from my rump, through the meshlike material of my chair, it stealthily spreads across the floor, much like the effect from dry ice. After a few seconds, it rises like a mushroom cloud, staining the walls of my cube, and poisoning my lungs and the lungs of any poor, helpless soul who happens to wander into my cube haphazardly. Do I feel bad that my farts spread like a pollutant to the innocent nasal passages of fellow coworkers?


What it comes down to is an ancient proverb my father used to tell me growing up. After all, he is a doctor, so he should know about the pathological dangers of holding in beefcakes, right? It goes like this:

"It's better to let it out and bear the shame, than hold it in and bear the pain."

Never were words more true.

By the way, Paul and Lewis, I wrote a simple, short, slightly dissonanced melody last night, and it is unreal. I'm not kidding. It's only a short bar, but I think it sounds sweeeet. I hear it on a
fluid-like, slightly delayed guitar, with tasty bass fragments in it.

Working harder than an ATPase pump trying to produce a gradient across a plasma membrane,


From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2007 10:35 AM
Subject: Re: Petty behavior, Zero productivity, All in a day's work


Nice work on getting the office mug. I'm proud of you.

As for your father's proverb? I agree... I don't even think anymore about holding my farts in. Yesterday I had to poop worse than a morning after drinking premo... but alas, there was someone in one of the stalls, and I can't poop next to people here at work... it's just too weird... so I'm walking back to my desk, and trying to release a silent blast as I'm walking past ****’s cube (random work Chic)... much to my dismay, the fart was LOUD, I mean, like clearly a loud fart sound...

I just kept walking as if nothing had happened... I KNOW she heard me... and I don't care.

I'll bear the shame any day.

By the way, looking forward to hearing the "unreal slightly dissonant melody"

Much love my homies...


From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: Petty behavior, Zero productivity, All in a day's work

I think I disagree with your fathers proverb. I would rather bear the pain than bear the shame. Assuming the farts would be done in some professional or public place, where I engage with people other than, say you two. Maybe that makes me insecure, or shallow; perhaps I'm unwilling to accept the unchangeable truths about human metabolism. But I'd rather bear the pain. . .
Josh, I think about 23 or the last 25 emails I've received from you have focus primarily on your toxic emissions and how you work in a self-made, tack-board gas chamber. Maybe you should think about amending your diet. Seriously, I mean all that farting can't be good for your colon; you could get colon cancer. I know you love farting, but you'll be farting out a tube sticking out of your stomach when that have to sew up your ass from colon cancer. And it won't make that oh-so-familiar sphincter-rippling sound. Although maybe you could put a tea-pot lid on it so it whistled when you really ripped on. It could serve as a warning to those around you.

Are ***** and ** coming to dinner too?

I've been writing some little things mostly on the keyboard, but I've forgotten them all.

Serving at the pleasure of the president,


From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 11:29 AM
Subject: Thoughts...

If I had to sew my a** up from colon cancer and fart out of a tube in my stomach, I would at least attach some sort of instrument. . . probably a kazoo. I don't think I could generate enough force to create ditties on a harmonica.

I have a couple retorts to your statement Lewis.

We all know that cultural influences have led has to believe that farting is inappropriate and wrong, especially in public. I have recently been learning to detach myself from this obscure belief, mostly because farting is as much a bodily function as sneezing and coughing. You know when you're on a date for the first time, or you're hanging out with a new group of people that you're still not entirely comfortable with, or perhaps you're in a confined public place. . .and you'd never even think of letting one rip? Well it's precisely this function that lets the other party know that you're not constructing a superficial social tier that inevitably creates the awkwardness and tension that so many people experience. Pinching a loaf is just one way of cutting through that tension and letting everyone know that you are comfortable with their presence, and you really could care less about social norms. True, it may be awkward for the brief moment that everyone catches an audio of a ripple, sizzle, or seeper. And it may be slightly awkward when everybody catches some sulfuric whiff from the methanotrophs that are hard at work in your colon. But when all of the devastation subsides, you'll notice how everybody becomes much more comfortable. There's an aura of "Hey, this guy just farted. I can fart too. Or maybe we can sit and shoot s***."
The only time I could see why it would be inappropriate to fart is the subsequent violence that invades everyone’s olfactory bulbs. We've all been perpetrators of farting in a tightly sealed car or elevator, and everyone else must fend for themselves to survive the wrath of your anal demons.

I'm not sure whether your comment about farts causing colon cancer is true. I think it may pertain more to diet, like you were saying earlier, but I always thought my diet was pretty decent. I make it a point to have fruits, veggies, dairy, grains, and meat for lunch everyday. I like having that variety as well. But perhaps I should engage in a colon cleanse. We should all schedule a synchronized colon cleanse, and write about it on our website or myspace page. I've never cleansed my colon, and methinks it could be a wave of relief.

I'm sorry that 23 of my last 25 emails have referenced bodily emissions, but they fascinate me, and quite honestly I like to keep conversation going. If you would like to change the subject, I would invite you to start sending out periodic emails and enlighten me with your inspirations.

If you write piano ditties, you should just record pieces on your phone. The phone recorder is create cause you always have it, and it helps you briefly reclaim what may have been lost to the atmosphere.

Both Lewis and Paul, let's work on my idea on Saturday for an hour. Do you both have time?

Dinner at Mr. and Mrs. *****'s. With our buddies. Nice.

****** is probably coming up here next week. Good grief. What do I do?

Saluting those who do what they do and do it well,

Jack Prescott

From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: thoughts...

On the topic of social norms I agree with you Josh. If I knew a fart was going to be melodic but not pungent I'd be more comfortable with introducing myself to people with homemade methane muffins. But there is simply no situation in which forcing other people to smell your poop is good for society. I think it does more to damage the individual relationship than it does to enhance societal norms.

With regards to cancer--let's extrapolate your situation a little. If your flatulence continues to increase to the point where it is causing stress to the cells of your colon, that stressed environment can increase your chance of colon cancer. Did you know that engaging in anal sex has been shown to increase your chance of developing colon cancer? Maybe you should poke yourself a little with some phallic objects just so you know what it feels like. Then when your farts start to feel like that too, you'd know you have to hold them in for a few days and give your colon cells some R & R.

I heard Janet Jackson takes coffee enemas.

Josh, I enjoy your emails regardless of how many of them are about you farting at work. That number has just peaked my concern about your well-being. If I start having daily revelations the way you do, I'll definitely write you guys. Maybe I'll start doing shrooms to help start me off.

I think sat. works for me.

Who is ******? Is this the girl with the closeness disorder?

*methanotrophs--eat methane
methanogens--produce methane (in your rumen)

praising parsley,

Aphid McGee

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 1:54 PM
Subject: RE: thoughts...

to address the end of your email first,

sorry about the methantroph comment. i forgot i was typing to a microbial engineer. and for some reason it also slipped my mind that troph is a lating derivationg referring to the act of consuming. gen- refers to creating. . ..much like genesis in the Bible. and as far as the rumen goes, you are also correct. good job. i am an idiot. maybe because i'm dealing with intrathecal and epidural cavities so much now, i forget the exact anatomy of our hershey highways. by the way lewis, how is hershey highway? she invited me to a concert via facebook. i figured i could show up with a huge bottle of jagermeister and be a "bad influence."

yes, ****** is the one with the closeness disorder. i'm not sure how her traveling the **** miles to be within my immediate proximity will fare, given the status of her disorder. theroetically, it always made sense that we were separated by **** miles because it alleviated the "closeness" of her "closeness disorder.."

when you say Aphid McGee, is he an actual character, or are you hypothetically coining a name to an aphid, which is a soft bodied insect, sometimes wingless, that sucks the plant juices from, say, a parsley snippet? i'm sure that aphids do praise the nourishing aspect of parsley, and i imagine that, if such a character as Aphid McGee does exist, he would be the leader of this movement.

i've never had an enema, so i don't know what they are like, much less a coffee enema. maybe janet jackson is on to something. has anyone noticed how a disturbingly large proportion of the U.S. male population thinks janet jackson is hot, when in fact, her face is strikingly similar to that of her pedophiliac, warm-milk sipping, neverland ranch creator, broccoli-nosed brother, Michael? Correct me if I'm wrong, but i imagine waking up to that face every morning would be a frightening experience, especially if she were wearing silver-tinted aviation sunglasses.

as far as your experiment with anal objects and flatulence, i think you may be on to something. maybe U of * grad school project?

Pondering the bane of my existence,


From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2007 1:55 AM
Subject: RE: Thoughts…


From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 2:28 PM
Subject: RE: thoughts...

Aphid McGee was just the series of syllables that popped into my head after writing praising parsley. It seems like you've milked a whole children's book out of it though. Josh I think you'd be good at writing children's books. Most of the Children's books that you look at now, as an adult, have some pretty weird and creepy undertones. And you're pretty good with weird and creepy undertones!

Yes Janet Jackson does look like Michael and yes it is very disturbing. I remember this music video they did together where they're both in the white futuro-suits and they're bouncing around a room that you see through a fish-eye lens. Some times you can't tell who's who. I don't know how that little fact hasn't yet completely destroyed Janet's sex appeal.

compelling you to eat without end,

Prader Willi Syndrome

From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2007 2:31 PM
Subject: RE: Thoughts…

Josh, I agree that if you were a children's author, it'd be weird and creepy, although I think it might work… also, I think you could write young adult lit as well… constructing weird, interesting stories with weird characters that people relate to, but never thought they would. I like it


You could just follow my advice and write blogs for the masses that people would actually be interested in reading in. If you updated them a few times a day, you'd get thousands and thousands of hits. I'm telling you, this would work…

Lewis, back me up here…

From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 2:43 PM
Subject: Re: thoughts...

Nah, I'm glad someone's laughing at it. Some of the stuff she does. . .I thought people only did that in soap operas. . .so it sucks, but lesson learned.

Josh I would definitely like to see you maintain a blog. Just to see other people react to the stuff you come up with. Maybe there's other out there like you and you could become like a beacon gathering them all under your wing and creating the raunchiest farting fishbowl ever known to man.

Put your brain in the public arena.

Going straight through like corn in the poo,

Leslie Hammerwhacker

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: thoughts...

Lewis, you are just as apt as i in creating bizarre twisted ideas to write about. quite frankly, some of your material even astonishes me, and that's difficult to do. it is still refreshing to read however, because it's so obscure in comparison to the ideas generated in my brain. . .sometimes i have to wonder where you pull some of this material from.

are you still worked up about hershey? if she's anatomically older than you, why is she behaving like a high-schooler. here's what you should do. mail her a lollipop. a big rainbow, swirly lollipop. see what she says. and i might still take you up on a jag-influenced concert. i'll periodically yell things like "please don't contact me again." what did you do to make her so mad? i mean, i know that chick has issues, but you must have really messed with her mind to get her to the point where she wants to publicly shun you over facebook. you better make sure she hasn't created any anti-lewis groups on there. maybe i could resort to my college freshman days and poop in a box, only to have it delivered to her doorstep.

Filling in the gaps,


From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: thoughts...

I think the biggest difference between your crazy ideas and mine is that I have a hard time just coming up with them as free-standing essays of cogent mental oozing. I can usually spiral into something vaguely interesting as an offshoot but you. . .i just open up my mailbox and there's a 500 word email about God only knows. I just don't know if I could stay on topic that long.

So you start a blog, and I'll contribute to the comments ceaselessly and if my comments get so massive that they need a competing blog then so be it.

Oy, there's some interesting sights along the perilous road that is my relationship with ****, in not all of which am I at my most brilliant. If you want to hear about that trainwreck ask me sometime when I'm not speaking through my fingers.

I just laughed out loud in the computer lab thinking of you yelling 'please don't contact me anymore' at her Masters recital.

Whoever came up with the witches in wizard of oz melting from water clearly had very meager understanding of biochemistry.


And that is why the Josh and Lewis Blog Exists.

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

Speaking of Influx

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 10:34 AM


we've been doing some thinking, and we've decided that we want to spam your email box. basically what the whole thing came down to was that we just don't really like you at all. and when you don't like somebody, you do mean things like spam their email box. so be prepared. be prepared for a constant influx of brilliant quotes, ideas, and insults from the 9 to 5 crew. speaking of influx....

do you think that a flux capacitor would ever work? maybe doctor emett brown was on to something with the flux capacitor. i mean, it looks pretty legit....the way the three corners of the triangle fire little electric bolts to the center....iw ould imagine that's what time travel is really like.

From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 7:42 AM

Flux capacitors? Why not just know in your mind that you’re living in the 80’s and you would be. There was this chic who went to the university of *********** who definitely thought she was in the eighties, walking around in eighties gear every day. It’s kinda like waking up every day, thinking positive thoughts, and willing yourself a good day, although more along the lines of “knowing” you can control your heartbeat, or “knowing” you’re traveling in time, living in the eighties.

From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 7:59 AM

Ya see Josh, The problem is the actions and re-actions of everyone else around you. Everyone is collectively making up the quantum universe, and it’s not just about you. You decide how you will perceive your part, but because I’m thinking that this computer exists, it’s harder for you to believe that it doesn’t. The fact of the matter is, we’re all here interacting with each other, and because of that, we’re all creating this closed minded focus on what reality truly is. Obviously. And the universe is a dream. But one that is constructed in a way that we all contribute to it’s existence.

If you want to decide if the eighties really existed, we need to debate the reality of memory. Because deciding if it actually happened or not brings into question the reality of thoughts, the mind, and perhaps even a connection between the mental and the physical.

Moreover, the fact that the eighties were a decade full of bad clothing choice…is still a reality.

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 10:34 AM

yes but how do i know that you think that computer exists. what if what you just told me about that was simply a figment of my imagination? how do i really know that you have a soul or anyone else have a soul for that matter? all i know is that i have a being, that perceives and thinks. i don't know if you confessing that you think your computer exists is really just something i imagined. perhaps you are just a little human being figure in my dream...and you telling me that you have a soul is just a part of my dream. there's no way that i could believe you because my soul is the only soul im aware of that exists. that is, if i were not a spiritual person. but i am a spiritual person, and so i don't really believe all of what i said above....but a lot of people do. like lewis for example. but it is a legitimate argument for people who don't believe in God or heaven. it's a direct correlation with the argument that you can change the environment around you by saying "im going to have a good day". if you really believe you can do that, then its plausible that you could change pretty much anything around you just by believing it. Therefore, nothing really exists and it's all a figure of your imagination. but thats a pretty sad concept.

the eighties were full of huge bangs, neon clothes, slip-on shoes, and synthesized drum beats. cutting crew and culture club were the best bands ever. boy george was a stud. there's nothing debatable about that

From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 11:08 AM

As long as you don't sign me up for real spam. Fine.
Paul, I'm intrigued by your thoughts about how if I believe something it makes it harder for you not to believe in it. Josh, I still haven't had time to really think about the last conversation we had in your living room about the Snorkblats ect. Preliminary Analysis: I don't actually feel like a god. I don't feel like I'm capable of containing all of the details of my existance all in my own mind. Apparently I'm capable of containing the details to keep it running though...unless I don't actually do that on my own either.

Have any of you read the Ender's Game series. I'm guessing not since you guys aren't as nerdularly awesome as I. But in the fourth book, they find how to travel faster than light by "stepping outside the universe" and just deciding where to come back in. They just went into a sort of ether-land, another dimension that was in contact with every part of our four dimensions here. The only thing was that they had to hold their own "existance" in their minds or they would stop existing. They used a computer entity since they couldn't do that. Can you hold your "existance" like that? Does God hold your "existance" all the time? and if He stopped would you cease to exist?

So I think you guys are real. I'm just not absolutely convinced.

With Love,

From: Michael.*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 11:35 AM


I just don't see how we could travel to a place or time that doesn't exist?? But who's to say that tomorrow or next week our lives are already playing out, or we are living our lives out RIGHT now tomorrow, we just haven't gotten to that period in TIME that we are right now.

I just don't see science, man, machine ever creating such a device that would transmit us into another dimension or time. I believe in black holes, and think there really frickin sweet. But how can we travel to a place in time that doesn't exist?

BTW forward this to Lewis ... his email is being ghey and mine is not accepting his email.. my email service is STRAIGHT and his is GAY

From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 12:00 PM

The past and future are real. And time work like the other dimension. If you set a time bomb for 5min. It will have and effect on 5min from now. Just like if you kick a ball it will have and effect 5 feet from here. We are constantly effected by the bombs and balls from the real past. This brings up the question of predestination. We can have real future and still be free to choose it. Just because you haven't decided something yet doesn't mean you won't decide it, freely. You can't stop this process unless you know the future, at which point you still aren't destined to follow it. It is a real dimension.


From: Michael.*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 12:15 PM

I see your point on the bomb, however We are not living in the future when you set a bomb to explode in five minutes. The bomb is..

No but seriously, yes your setting the detonator for five minutes in the future, but oh i don't know what i was going to say, ur smarter than me

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 12:29 PM

have you never seen back to the future? time exists as a space time is a long band of existence. no matter what point you're at....if you go far into space and come back, you're younger than everyone else. it's like when they did that experiment by sending that spaceship around the world and it came back and its clock was 1 second behind the earths time. einstein discovered that. time is relative. it exists only at wherever you exist....and it only exists to who is perceiving it.

below is an excerpt from paul
You can have a good day by believing that you will because it changes your outlook on the experiences you have. It really doesn't have anything to do with changing the environment around you, but how you yourself perceive it.

paul, if you perceive it, you perceive it through your mind. therefore you should be able to change anything by perceiving anything you want to.
if i
wanted to fly all i would have to do is perceive myself flying. but it doesn't happen.

lastly, i am a samurai-guru-whatever lewis said

i also like michaels point about the forest animals and i don't want lewis to send me any more smooches

From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 12:47 AM

Josh, first of all, you're quoting a movie...

But I like what you said

" time is relative. it exists only at wherever you exist"

This is true because you're not existing "where time is," you're existing "where You are." Thus, we can't go back into time because we're not where time is, we're where we are. Because of this, if we wanted to time travel, we would just have to move time, because it exists where we are, and we are here, in the current. This is supported by the experiment where they flew around the world and the clock was behind.
They were in the current with everyone else here, but the time was different.

I feel that because we are where we exist, we could most definitely time travel, but it'd just be the time that would be traveling, not us, therefore things wouldn't go in reverse, past events wouldn't be relived...Just the "time" would be relived. We'd be living in the eighties, but the eighties would "come to us." And it'd just be time changing, not everything else.

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 12:58 PM

exactly. you cant build a machine to go to another time. but think of time as a huge grid that moves. and you're just chillin' on it. time machines are unrealistic, but it is possible to be in a different time in relation to where you once were.

time is relative. you only think of time the way you do because this is all youve ever known your mind has never been exposed to anything else.
relativity in terms of time is too difficult for most of us to grasp....maybe we can understand the idea, but how it works is really only truly explained through mathematics.

From: paul*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 1:15 PM

So how do we get away from believing what we believe because that's what we believe??? And how do we know when we're wrong?

From: josh.********@********.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 1:25 PM

you have to constantly doubt everything....thats known as Pyrrhonian Skepticism. We don't know anything really...well we grasp some concepts in a relative fashion...only in relation to our existence. but has anyone determined what gravity really is? i mean, in relation
to what we believe, it is a force. but what is a force? you can explain force in terms of what it does, but really what is it. take for example, the movie anger management. jack nicholson asks adam sandler "who are you?" and adam describes what he does for a living, what he likes, what he dislikes, etc.Jack is like "no, i want to know WHO you are" we classify everything we know by how it affects us...directly or indirectly. just like i pull my knowledge from classic movies. don't make me use half-baked as a reference.

From: lewis.********@********.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 1:30 PM

what else are you besides the things you do? Your composition. . . perhaps but your components in turn can only be described in terms of what they do.
As for non physical things, they are only what they do. Like momentum. .
.it carries enertia. Thats it. WHO are you? what does that even mean.
everything is what it does. physical things get a composition only
because it is easier for us to classify them that way. ultimately everything is only what it "does".

(Anger Management= classic movie?!?)

As far as your Pyrrhonian Skepticism, you cannot claim that knowledge in unattainable because that itself is knowledge.

So do you accept your epistemic limitations in the assumption that your ultimate skepticism it right and any true knowledge unknowable. Or do you constantly fight against it in an attempt to prove anything at all.

does absolute proof even matter? we can live pretty well off of generalizations.

Josh you said your self that you can sense another being (i.e. you are not the only entity and thus God.). So you clearly aren't a complete Pyrrhonian Skeptic.

From: Michael.*******@********.com (Contributor to The Josh & Lewis Blog)
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 2:15 PM

Hey u guys make me want to lala

I'm an alley cat, DRINK UP MY MILK B*TCH!