backbreaker said:
you know good and damn well what the intent of this thread was, and are to ***** to admit it.
Really? What was my intent, then? Apparently I didn't convey my REAL INTENT, and it came off to you in a completely different way. For that I apologize, really. But please, don't assume you know what my intent was; YOU ARE NOT ME.
backbreaker said:
my problem isnt' with you.. it really isn't.. I just say what's on my mind.. dont' take it personal.
Don't worry, I'm not taking it personally. Actually, I UNDERSTAND where you are coming from... I'm just trying to make YOU understand that what you are accusing me of is simply NOT the case, as far as my intentions/curiosities were concerned. You'll just have to take my word for it man, quit trying to shove assumptions up my ass.
backbreaker said:
The fact that you even had the nerve to say: " it takes a much larger set of balls to be acting, singing, and dancing in front of people then it does to say, look down a microscope in a laboratory (nothing against science, at all! just an example)."
shows just how little you get it.
It takes balls to succeed in antyhing. Lots of hard work, dedication, studying, failure, nay sayers and pain.
Alright, alright I am perfectly HAPPY to admit that that was a HORRIBLE example. My apologies. It's just the first one that popped into my mind, and on that note, it completely reflects MY experience. I've been behind a microscope a few times, and for ME, it takes LESS balls than DANCING in front of 2500 people in an auditorium. It was my bad to not take into account other peoples perspective on that particular example.