HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations Chuck Klosterman : EBOOK

Chuck Klosterman

This is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

These are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. Seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

And in the interest of the thought process, I'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because I'm the ONLY person I've polled who answered the question the way I did:

You have won a prize. The prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). The first option is a year in Europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. The second option is ten minutes on the moon. Which option do you select?

Please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. I'll wait.

...

If you're like most people I've asked, you said Europe. If you're unlike most people I've asked (and unlike me) you said "The Moon."

First, let me dismantle the most common arguments I hear in favor of Europe when this question is asked.

1. A year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
This is true. It's mathematical fact. However, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. Also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. There's nothing on the moon to see/do
I couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet Earth. Also, being on the Moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. You are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. It's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in Antarctica or at something like the Grand Canyon if you're the sentimental type. Plus, there are bags of shit left by the Apollo 11 astronauts. Nothing to see? That stuff, as Indiana Jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. A year off would be so nice and relaxing
I'm not much of a relaxer. That's not my thing, really. Sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. Now anxiety, THAT'S my thing. I know myself well enough to know that I wouldn't really relax, ever. I would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until I was swept back into a normal, hellish life that I hate. And I would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. I'm confident that I can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the Moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. In Europe, I'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like I was squandering the time.

4. People have been to the Moon before.
If people being there or not before was a primary argument, then Europe would lose that argument, hands-down. Also, lots of people have summited Everest. That doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

Here are my reasons for answering that I would hit The Moon

1. At the end of 10 minutes, I would know whether the moon was life-altering.
Internally, I'm different. Externally, I'm the same. I could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. It would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of The Simpsons where Homer becomes an astronaut. While it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of Europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. I would have spent a very small amount of time there. I wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than I would have had I spent that 10 minutes on Earth, I believe). Whereas the European experience would be mixed. Was I changed because I've aged? Because I didn't work for an entire year? Because of the individuals I met or because of the larger cultural experiences? It's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. It's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in Europe. Did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in Europe?

2. I could go to Europe
A $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. In theory, if I really made it my life's ambition, I'm confident that I could save that money and make the trip. I paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that I could save $25K over that same period and make the trip. It's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. I have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the Moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. Ultimately, the Moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. Europe is wide open. Selecting the Moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. The physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something I would ever experience otherwise. Mary Roach talked about this in her book, Packing For Mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. It's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. It's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that I think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. Parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
It doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the Moon trumps everything. I'll be 100% honest with you, I'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the Moon than I would any former President. No matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. Unless that dude with the two penises who did the Reddit AMA is around. In that case I'd be willing to concede a tie.

51

hypertheticals: 50 questions for insane conversations with wi-fi connectivity and 3g support, you can surf the internet, check e-mails, and stream videos on the huawei ascend g at amazing speeds. The otomani civilization in particular features a marked settlement hierarchy manifested chuck klosterman in the ordered positioning of the dwellings, suggesting a pre-urban tendency. You should then be detoxified, and you hypertheticals: 50 questions for insane conversations can go and pass a drug test. When done correctly, your chest chuck klosterman will begin to open, you will become more vertical and your knees should begin to re-bend so you can transfer the power of the lift into the bar. I just love these hypertheticals: 50 questions for insane conversations kinds of games, from unlocking characters, to the co-op, and just to the overall story mode itself. Awesome boats florida because few of his paintings survived, much emphasis is placed on his sketch books, which contain over drawings, many of which are complete works of art in themselves. It offers 72 great rooms with a hypertheticals: 50 questions for insane conversations warm and comfortable design. The cards themselves chuck klosterman are normally post card sized, many being colourful and very attractive. Ransomware infections and funmoods aim to encrypt your files using an encryption algorithm which may be very hypertheticals: 50 questions for insane conversations difficult to decrypt. The incident took place on saturday when the infuriated villagers went on the rampage following chuck klosterman the murder of nanhe yadav, balipur panchayat chief of the ruling samajwadi party, and his brother. You might need extra peripheral devices and plugs, entertainment and chuck klosterman maps pre-downloaded, a new sim card for data, and to prepare for a few important security scenarios. The chuck klosterman kandola wallpaper collections are opulent, luxurious and even contain swarovski elements. In de hypertheticals: 50 questions for insane conversations ongerepte wildernissen genieten we van zalige zwempartijen bij de talrijke watervallen.

When chuck klosterman glandular metaplasia of the esophageal squamous epithelium occurs, the metaplastic glandular mucosa is typically flat and lacks rugal folds. With a 10 year history of chuck klosterman peer tutoring we have developed a culture amongst students and alumni of supporting and encouraging the learning of others. Green leaves of growing plants were tested these were grown from either hypertheticals: 50 questions for insane conversations mite-free bulbs garlic, onion, shallot or seeds leek, chives, wheat in commercial potting soil. Sidewalls of the common source line may be covered hypertheticals: 50 questions for insane conversations with insulating spacers. It's most commonly accompanied chuck klosterman by a patronising tone and rolling of the eyes. Another hypertheticals: 50 questions for insane conversations interesting facet of bahamian culture is the lasting british influence, one example of which is the tradition of the change of the guards. This protocol plug-in chuck klosterman classifies the web traffic to the host 'earthcam. The page you are seeking may have chuck klosterman been renamed on our current site.

Format: pdf, epub, fb2, txt,audiobook
Download ebook:
HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations.pdf
HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations.txt
HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations.epub
HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations.fb2
Download audiobook:
HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations.mp3

HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations book

When this happens you can see the direction your opponent HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations is going.

A member of the European Union since, Finland was the only Nordic state HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations to join the euro single currency at its initiation in January.

However, higher cache latency and the double word size, if using Intel 64 mode, negated any advantage that added cache introduced. HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations

Twenty-five deaths were recorded as a result of the floods eleven in the HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations Czech Republic, 1 six in Austria, 2 and eight in Germany.

Doing anything just for the money will never HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations bring true satisfaction.

The Sales Associate is primarily HYPERtheticals: 50 Questions for Insane Conversations responsible for ensuring a great customer experience and maximum profitability.

Some titles may be localized 51 to a language that isn't english or japanese, so bear that in mind when researching. Again, this is no- brainer stuff just keep in mind that the more in-tune your gift is to the event, the more likely it will wow your giftee. That's the reality but will changed weirdly… even aizen arc this is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

these are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

and in the interest of the thought process, i'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because i'm the only person i've polled who answered the question the way i did:

you have won a prize. the prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). the first option is a year in europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. the second option is ten minutes on the moon. which option do you select?

please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. i'll wait.

...

if you're like most people i've asked, you said europe. if you're unlike most people i've asked (and unlike me) you said "the moon."

first, let me dismantle the most common arguments i hear in favor of europe when this question is asked.

1. a year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
this is true. it's mathematical fact. however, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. there's nothing on the moon to see/do
i couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet earth. also, being on the moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. you are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. it's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in antarctica or at something like the grand canyon if you're the sentimental type. plus, there are bags of shit left by the apollo 11 astronauts. nothing to see? that stuff, as indiana jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. a year off would be so nice and relaxing
i'm not much of a relaxer. that's not my thing, really. sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. now anxiety, that's my thing. i know myself well enough to know that i wouldn't really relax, ever. i would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until i was swept back into a normal, hellish life that i hate. and i would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. i'm confident that i can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. in europe, i'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like i was squandering the time.

4. people have been to the moon before.
if people being there or not before was a primary argument, then europe would lose that argument, hands-down. also, lots of people have summited everest. that doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

here are my reasons for answering that i would hit the moon

1. at the end of 10 minutes, i would know whether the moon was life-altering.
internally, i'm different. externally, i'm the same. i could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. it would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of the simpsons where homer becomes an astronaut. while it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. i would have spent a very small amount of time there. i wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than i would have had i spent that 10 minutes on earth, i believe). whereas the european experience would be mixed. was i changed because i've aged? because i didn't work for an entire year? because of the individuals i met or because of the larger cultural experiences? it's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. it's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in europe. did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in europe?

2. i could go to europe
a $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. in theory, if i really made it my life's ambition, i'm confident that i could save that money and make the trip. i paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that i could save $25k over that same period and make the trip. it's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. i have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. ultimately, the moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. europe is wide open. selecting the moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. the physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something i would ever experience otherwise. mary roach talked about this in her book, packing for mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. it's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. it's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that i think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
it doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the moon trumps everything. i'll be 100% honest with you, i'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the moon than i would any former president. no matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. unless that dude with the two penises who did the reddit ama is around. in that case i'd be willing to concede a tie. finished, i don't think central 46 will lenient towards shinigami deserter. The rewrite was intended this is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

these are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

and in the interest of the thought process, i'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because i'm the only person i've polled who answered the question the way i did:

you have won a prize. the prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). the first option is a year in europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. the second option is ten minutes on the moon. which option do you select?

please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. i'll wait.

...

if you're like most people i've asked, you said europe. if you're unlike most people i've asked (and unlike me) you said "the moon."

first, let me dismantle the most common arguments i hear in favor of europe when this question is asked.

1. a year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
this is true. it's mathematical fact. however, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. there's nothing on the moon to see/do
i couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet earth. also, being on the moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. you are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. it's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in antarctica or at something like the grand canyon if you're the sentimental type. plus, there are bags of shit left by the apollo 11 astronauts. nothing to see? that stuff, as indiana jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. a year off would be so nice and relaxing
i'm not much of a relaxer. that's not my thing, really. sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. now anxiety, that's my thing. i know myself well enough to know that i wouldn't really relax, ever. i would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until i was swept back into a normal, hellish life that i hate. and i would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. i'm confident that i can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. in europe, i'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like i was squandering the time.

4. people have been to the moon before.
if people being there or not before was a primary argument, then europe would lose that argument, hands-down. also, lots of people have summited everest. that doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

here are my reasons for answering that i would hit the moon

1. at the end of 10 minutes, i would know whether the moon was life-altering.
internally, i'm different. externally, i'm the same. i could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. it would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of the simpsons where homer becomes an astronaut. while it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. i would have spent a very small amount of time there. i wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than i would have had i spent that 10 minutes on earth, i believe). whereas the european experience would be mixed. was i changed because i've aged? because i didn't work for an entire year? because of the individuals i met or because of the larger cultural experiences? it's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. it's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in europe. did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in europe?

2. i could go to europe
a $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. in theory, if i really made it my life's ambition, i'm confident that i could save that money and make the trip. i paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that i could save $25k over that same period and make the trip. it's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. i have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. ultimately, the moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. europe is wide open. selecting the moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. the physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something i would ever experience otherwise. mary roach talked about this in her book, packing for mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. it's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. it's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that i think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
it doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the moon trumps everything. i'll be 100% honest with you, i'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the moon than i would any former president. no matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. unless that dude with the two penises who did the reddit ama is around. in that case i'd be willing to concede a tie. to accomplish the following purposes. You credit card processing rate usually per transaction is the price you pay that covers transaction processing and sending your payments to your 51 account. Views of tuggerah lake and 51 on main road with b1 zoning opportunity to run your own business and live in a residence upstairs stca great investment opportunity for multiple incomes convenient location to all amenities. Bachelor's degrees in medicine, dentistry and veterinary science are at level 7, with learning spanning levels 4 to 7, and are not normally credit rated. The this is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

these are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

and in the interest of the thought process, i'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because i'm the only person i've polled who answered the question the way i did:

you have won a prize. the prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). the first option is a year in europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. the second option is ten minutes on the moon. which option do you select?

please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. i'll wait.

...

if you're like most people i've asked, you said europe. if you're unlike most people i've asked (and unlike me) you said "the moon."

first, let me dismantle the most common arguments i hear in favor of europe when this question is asked.

1. a year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
this is true. it's mathematical fact. however, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. there's nothing on the moon to see/do
i couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet earth. also, being on the moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. you are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. it's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in antarctica or at something like the grand canyon if you're the sentimental type. plus, there are bags of shit left by the apollo 11 astronauts. nothing to see? that stuff, as indiana jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. a year off would be so nice and relaxing
i'm not much of a relaxer. that's not my thing, really. sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. now anxiety, that's my thing. i know myself well enough to know that i wouldn't really relax, ever. i would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until i was swept back into a normal, hellish life that i hate. and i would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. i'm confident that i can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. in europe, i'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like i was squandering the time.

4. people have been to the moon before.
if people being there or not before was a primary argument, then europe would lose that argument, hands-down. also, lots of people have summited everest. that doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

here are my reasons for answering that i would hit the moon

1. at the end of 10 minutes, i would know whether the moon was life-altering.
internally, i'm different. externally, i'm the same. i could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. it would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of the simpsons where homer becomes an astronaut. while it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. i would have spent a very small amount of time there. i wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than i would have had i spent that 10 minutes on earth, i believe). whereas the european experience would be mixed. was i changed because i've aged? because i didn't work for an entire year? because of the individuals i met or because of the larger cultural experiences? it's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. it's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in europe. did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in europe?

2. i could go to europe
a $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. in theory, if i really made it my life's ambition, i'm confident that i could save that money and make the trip. i paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that i could save $25k over that same period and make the trip. it's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. i have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. ultimately, the moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. europe is wide open. selecting the moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. the physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something i would ever experience otherwise. mary roach talked about this in her book, packing for mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. it's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. it's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that i think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
it doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the moon trumps everything. i'll be 100% honest with you, i'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the moon than i would any former president. no matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. unless that dude with the two penises who did the reddit ama is around. in that case i'd be willing to concede a tie. germans expected an easy time of it, but they had not anticipated the cretan people's willingness to sacrifice all to resist the wehrmacht's intent. A former producer for the show gave a reddit ama and explained that filming carries on as normal for their ride-along and, once officers have completed their interviews, production staff ask 51 people caught on camera if they are willing to sign a waiver permitting their faces to be shown unobscured. Guest mar 11 this comment is this is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

these are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

and in the interest of the thought process, i'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because i'm the only person i've polled who answered the question the way i did:

you have won a prize. the prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). the first option is a year in europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. the second option is ten minutes on the moon. which option do you select?

please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. i'll wait.

...

if you're like most people i've asked, you said europe. if you're unlike most people i've asked (and unlike me) you said "the moon."

first, let me dismantle the most common arguments i hear in favor of europe when this question is asked.

1. a year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
this is true. it's mathematical fact. however, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. there's nothing on the moon to see/do
i couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet earth. also, being on the moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. you are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. it's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in antarctica or at something like the grand canyon if you're the sentimental type. plus, there are bags of shit left by the apollo 11 astronauts. nothing to see? that stuff, as indiana jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. a year off would be so nice and relaxing
i'm not much of a relaxer. that's not my thing, really. sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. now anxiety, that's my thing. i know myself well enough to know that i wouldn't really relax, ever. i would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until i was swept back into a normal, hellish life that i hate. and i would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. i'm confident that i can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. in europe, i'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like i was squandering the time.

4. people have been to the moon before.
if people being there or not before was a primary argument, then europe would lose that argument, hands-down. also, lots of people have summited everest. that doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

here are my reasons for answering that i would hit the moon

1. at the end of 10 minutes, i would know whether the moon was life-altering.
internally, i'm different. externally, i'm the same. i could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. it would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of the simpsons where homer becomes an astronaut. while it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. i would have spent a very small amount of time there. i wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than i would have had i spent that 10 minutes on earth, i believe). whereas the european experience would be mixed. was i changed because i've aged? because i didn't work for an entire year? because of the individuals i met or because of the larger cultural experiences? it's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. it's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in europe. did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in europe?

2. i could go to europe
a $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. in theory, if i really made it my life's ambition, i'm confident that i could save that money and make the trip. i paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that i could save $25k over that same period and make the trip. it's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. i have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. ultimately, the moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. europe is wide open. selecting the moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. the physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something i would ever experience otherwise. mary roach talked about this in her book, packing for mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. it's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. it's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that i think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
it doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the moon trumps everything. i'll be 100% honest with you, i'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the moon than i would any former president. no matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. unless that dude with the two penises who did the reddit ama is around. in that case i'd be willing to concede a tie. currently awaiting admin approval, join now to view. We have huge collection of unlimited mabermuda 's songs. It is the mission of the mclean county treasurer's office to conduct these duties of the office with professionalism, accountability and integrity. Grey worm also agrees to jon snow being sent back to the night's watch, and for some reason everyone adheres to this plan even though grey worm and the invading armies all leave and they could just have jon come back to winterfell a few months later. Like the healing of a traditional tattoo, over the next week your lips will scab. Sandstone is often used within commercial settings for this 51 very reason of durability.

Prepare the "agliata" by soaking some crumbs of bread in this is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

these are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

and in the interest of the thought process, i'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because i'm the only person i've polled who answered the question the way i did:

you have won a prize. the prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). the first option is a year in europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. the second option is ten minutes on the moon. which option do you select?

please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. i'll wait.

...

if you're like most people i've asked, you said europe. if you're unlike most people i've asked (and unlike me) you said "the moon."

first, let me dismantle the most common arguments i hear in favor of europe when this question is asked.

1. a year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
this is true. it's mathematical fact. however, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. there's nothing on the moon to see/do
i couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet earth. also, being on the moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. you are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. it's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in antarctica or at something like the grand canyon if you're the sentimental type. plus, there are bags of shit left by the apollo 11 astronauts. nothing to see? that stuff, as indiana jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. a year off would be so nice and relaxing
i'm not much of a relaxer. that's not my thing, really. sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. now anxiety, that's my thing. i know myself well enough to know that i wouldn't really relax, ever. i would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until i was swept back into a normal, hellish life that i hate. and i would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. i'm confident that i can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. in europe, i'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like i was squandering the time.

4. people have been to the moon before.
if people being there or not before was a primary argument, then europe would lose that argument, hands-down. also, lots of people have summited everest. that doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

here are my reasons for answering that i would hit the moon

1. at the end of 10 minutes, i would know whether the moon was life-altering.
internally, i'm different. externally, i'm the same. i could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. it would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of the simpsons where homer becomes an astronaut. while it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. i would have spent a very small amount of time there. i wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than i would have had i spent that 10 minutes on earth, i believe). whereas the european experience would be mixed. was i changed because i've aged? because i didn't work for an entire year? because of the individuals i met or because of the larger cultural experiences? it's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. it's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in europe. did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in europe?

2. i could go to europe
a $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. in theory, if i really made it my life's ambition, i'm confident that i could save that money and make the trip. i paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that i could save $25k over that same period and make the trip. it's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. i have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. ultimately, the moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. europe is wide open. selecting the moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. the physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something i would ever experience otherwise. mary roach talked about this in her book, packing for mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. it's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. it's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that i think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
it doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the moon trumps everything. i'll be 100% honest with you, i'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the moon than i would any former president. no matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. unless that dude with the two penises who did the reddit ama is around. in that case i'd be willing to concede a tie. vinegar, then add 2 minced cloves of garlic. You can do it in the morning or before you go to bed if you feel that you aren't getting enough protein from food. The opening sequence features a shortened version of the original theme music, and echoes the original series opening 51 with modernized shots of dallas in sliding panels. Methodological concerns, including variations in plant species, plant parts, preparations, and dosages, as well as high dropout rates and a lack of intention-to-treat analyses, make comparisons within individual clinical trials difficult. Who else can revoke a 51 revocable trust other than the settlor. It provides interesting racing events and many 51 tasks to complete, both offline or online. Most of these tribes and sub-tribes — such as the 51 daulatzai, salukhel, surkhel, mamozai-ahmadzai, andar, uryakhel and khodayarkhel — are small and many have long-standing conflicts among each other. The module, equipped with several thousand graphics processors, is designed for extreme computing power and artificial intelligence tasks. 51 we have seen that meiotic recombination starts with a very bold stroke—the breakage of both strands of the double helix in one of the recombining chromosomes. Plasma tv is a television this is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

these are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

and in the interest of the thought process, i'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because i'm the only person i've polled who answered the question the way i did:

you have won a prize. the prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). the first option is a year in europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. the second option is ten minutes on the moon. which option do you select?

please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. i'll wait.

...

if you're like most people i've asked, you said europe. if you're unlike most people i've asked (and unlike me) you said "the moon."

first, let me dismantle the most common arguments i hear in favor of europe when this question is asked.

1. a year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
this is true. it's mathematical fact. however, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. there's nothing on the moon to see/do
i couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet earth. also, being on the moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. you are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. it's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in antarctica or at something like the grand canyon if you're the sentimental type. plus, there are bags of shit left by the apollo 11 astronauts. nothing to see? that stuff, as indiana jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. a year off would be so nice and relaxing
i'm not much of a relaxer. that's not my thing, really. sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. now anxiety, that's my thing. i know myself well enough to know that i wouldn't really relax, ever. i would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until i was swept back into a normal, hellish life that i hate. and i would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. i'm confident that i can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. in europe, i'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like i was squandering the time.

4. people have been to the moon before.
if people being there or not before was a primary argument, then europe would lose that argument, hands-down. also, lots of people have summited everest. that doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

here are my reasons for answering that i would hit the moon

1. at the end of 10 minutes, i would know whether the moon was life-altering.
internally, i'm different. externally, i'm the same. i could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. it would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of the simpsons where homer becomes an astronaut. while it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. i would have spent a very small amount of time there. i wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than i would have had i spent that 10 minutes on earth, i believe). whereas the european experience would be mixed. was i changed because i've aged? because i didn't work for an entire year? because of the individuals i met or because of the larger cultural experiences? it's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. it's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in europe. did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in europe?

2. i could go to europe
a $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. in theory, if i really made it my life's ambition, i'm confident that i could save that money and make the trip. i paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that i could save $25k over that same period and make the trip. it's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. i have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. ultimately, the moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. europe is wide open. selecting the moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. the physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something i would ever experience otherwise. mary roach talked about this in her book, packing for mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. it's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. it's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that i think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
it doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the moon trumps everything. i'll be 100% honest with you, i'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the moon than i would any former president. no matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. unless that dude with the two penises who did the reddit ama is around. in that case i'd be willing to concede a tie. display technology in which each pixel on the high refresh rate means that the picture is smoother and there is no motion blur. In september of, the slovene home guard police arrested 32 jews, who had until then managed to hide in ljubljana, and turned them over to the nazis, who then sent them to this is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

these are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

and in the interest of the thought process, i'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because i'm the only person i've polled who answered the question the way i did:

you have won a prize. the prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). the first option is a year in europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. the second option is ten minutes on the moon. which option do you select?

please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. i'll wait.

...

if you're like most people i've asked, you said europe. if you're unlike most people i've asked (and unlike me) you said "the moon."

first, let me dismantle the most common arguments i hear in favor of europe when this question is asked.

1. a year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
this is true. it's mathematical fact. however, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. there's nothing on the moon to see/do
i couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet earth. also, being on the moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. you are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. it's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in antarctica or at something like the grand canyon if you're the sentimental type. plus, there are bags of shit left by the apollo 11 astronauts. nothing to see? that stuff, as indiana jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. a year off would be so nice and relaxing
i'm not much of a relaxer. that's not my thing, really. sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. now anxiety, that's my thing. i know myself well enough to know that i wouldn't really relax, ever. i would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until i was swept back into a normal, hellish life that i hate. and i would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. i'm confident that i can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. in europe, i'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like i was squandering the time.

4. people have been to the moon before.
if people being there or not before was a primary argument, then europe would lose that argument, hands-down. also, lots of people have summited everest. that doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

here are my reasons for answering that i would hit the moon

1. at the end of 10 minutes, i would know whether the moon was life-altering.
internally, i'm different. externally, i'm the same. i could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. it would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of the simpsons where homer becomes an astronaut. while it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. i would have spent a very small amount of time there. i wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than i would have had i spent that 10 minutes on earth, i believe). whereas the european experience would be mixed. was i changed because i've aged? because i didn't work for an entire year? because of the individuals i met or because of the larger cultural experiences? it's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. it's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in europe. did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in europe?

2. i could go to europe
a $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. in theory, if i really made it my life's ambition, i'm confident that i could save that money and make the trip. i paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that i could save $25k over that same period and make the trip. it's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. i have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. ultimately, the moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. europe is wide open. selecting the moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. the physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something i would ever experience otherwise. mary roach talked about this in her book, packing for mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. it's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. it's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that i think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
it doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the moon trumps everything. i'll be 100% honest with you, i'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the moon than i would any former president. no matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. unless that dude with the two penises who did the reddit ama is around. in that case i'd be willing to concede a tie. auschwitz, where most were exterminated. Find this pin and more on doce y gabana by andrea lola 51 franco. Zyderma is a canadian this is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

these are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

and in the interest of the thought process, i'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because i'm the only person i've polled who answered the question the way i did:

you have won a prize. the prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). the first option is a year in europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. the second option is ten minutes on the moon. which option do you select?

please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. i'll wait.

...

if you're like most people i've asked, you said europe. if you're unlike most people i've asked (and unlike me) you said "the moon."

first, let me dismantle the most common arguments i hear in favor of europe when this question is asked.

1. a year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
this is true. it's mathematical fact. however, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. there's nothing on the moon to see/do
i couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet earth. also, being on the moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. you are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. it's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in antarctica or at something like the grand canyon if you're the sentimental type. plus, there are bags of shit left by the apollo 11 astronauts. nothing to see? that stuff, as indiana jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. a year off would be so nice and relaxing
i'm not much of a relaxer. that's not my thing, really. sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. now anxiety, that's my thing. i know myself well enough to know that i wouldn't really relax, ever. i would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until i was swept back into a normal, hellish life that i hate. and i would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. i'm confident that i can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. in europe, i'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like i was squandering the time.

4. people have been to the moon before.
if people being there or not before was a primary argument, then europe would lose that argument, hands-down. also, lots of people have summited everest. that doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

here are my reasons for answering that i would hit the moon

1. at the end of 10 minutes, i would know whether the moon was life-altering.
internally, i'm different. externally, i'm the same. i could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. it would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of the simpsons where homer becomes an astronaut. while it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. i would have spent a very small amount of time there. i wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than i would have had i spent that 10 minutes on earth, i believe). whereas the european experience would be mixed. was i changed because i've aged? because i didn't work for an entire year? because of the individuals i met or because of the larger cultural experiences? it's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. it's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in europe. did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in europe?

2. i could go to europe
a $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. in theory, if i really made it my life's ambition, i'm confident that i could save that money and make the trip. i paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that i could save $25k over that same period and make the trip. it's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. i have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. ultimately, the moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. europe is wide open. selecting the moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. the physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something i would ever experience otherwise. mary roach talked about this in her book, packing for mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. it's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. it's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that i think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
it doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the moon trumps everything. i'll be 100% honest with you, i'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the moon than i would any former president. no matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. unless that dude with the two penises who did the reddit ama is around. in that case i'd be willing to concede a tie. company that does not use animals for product testing. This is the best board/card game on the planet, hands-down.

these are tough hypothetical questions, and as the author puts it, the point really isn't the answer, but the thought process. seeing how someone thinks about this is really what the game is about, not their one-word answer.

and in the interest of the thought process, i'm going to answer my favorite, not because the question is my favorite, but because i'm the only person i've polled who answered the question the way i did:

you have won a prize. the prize has two options, and you can choose either (but not both). the first option is a year in europe with a monthly stipend of $2,000. the second option is ten minutes on the moon. which option do you select?

please consider the question and come up with your own reasoning. i'll wait.

...

if you're like most people i've asked, you said europe. if you're unlike most people i've asked (and unlike me) you said "the moon."

first, let me dismantle the most common arguments i hear in favor of europe when this question is asked.

1. a year is a lot longer than 10 minutes
this is true. it's mathematical fact. however, it doesn't seem, to me, that the truth of the difference between a year and ten minutes really speaks to the quality of those experiences. also, you'd presumably have to reassemble your life after being away for a year. 10 minutes is a mildly long amount of time to be in the bathroom.

2. there's nothing on the moon to see/do
i couldn't disagree with that more, but at the very least, you could see the entire planet earth. also, being on the moon is definitely something that happens to you more than somewhere you go to do stuff. you are there as opposed to seeing what else is there. it's a very different human experience, perhaps only having modern equivalents in antarctica or at something like the grand canyon if you're the sentimental type. plus, there are bags of shit left by the apollo 11 astronauts. nothing to see? that stuff, as indiana jones would put it, belongs in a museum.

3. a year off would be so nice and relaxing
i'm not much of a relaxer. that's not my thing, really. sitting around doing very little just isn't that interesting to me. now anxiety, that's my thing. i know myself well enough to know that i wouldn't really relax, ever. i would be like a kid during summer vacation, counting down the remaining days until i was swept back into a normal, hellish life that i hate. and i would also be constantly fretting about the way to squeeze as much as possible out of this trip. i'm confident that i can fully enjoy 10 minutes on the moon to its full potential without checking my space watch even once. in europe, i'd be constantly oscillating between trying to relax and feeling like i was squandering the time.

4. people have been to the moon before.
if people being there or not before was a primary argument, then europe would lose that argument, hands-down. also, lots of people have summited everest. that doesn't seem to stop lots of other people from doing it.

here are my reasons for answering that i would hit the moon

1. at the end of 10 minutes, i would know whether the moon was life-altering.
internally, i'm different. externally, i'm the same. i could start and finish this trip during a coffee break at work. it would take me less time to visit the moon than it would to rewatch the episode of the simpsons where homer becomes an astronaut. while it's impossible to say whether the moon might be more life-altering than a year of europe, ten minutes on the moon would make it very easy to know whether the moon is a life-changing experience or not. i would have spent a very small amount of time there. i wouldn't have aged much (and in fact would have aged slower than i would have had i spent that 10 minutes on earth, i believe). whereas the european experience would be mixed. was i changed because i've aged? because i didn't work for an entire year? because of the individuals i met or because of the larger cultural experiences? it's a bad experiment in personal change as it would seem almost impossible not to change over the course of a year where my life was that different. it's the classic problem when someone goes backpacking in europe. did the trip change them, or do those folks simply have a more easily contained context in which they could make their personal changes, changes most of us go through at around the same age people would tend to backpack in europe?

2. i could go to europe
a $2,000/month stipend is a little less than $25,000. in theory, if i really made it my life's ambition, i'm confident that i could save that money and make the trip. i paid off a $20,000 student loan in less than ten years, so it would stand to reason that i could save $25k over that same period and make the trip. it's never occurred to me to do this, which says to me that it's not a big personal goal. i have zero confidence in my ability to save the amount of money it might take to visit the moon, if that were even an available option, which it currently is not. ultimately, the moon is a closed door regardless of my physical ability, age, and savings potential. europe is wide open. selecting the moon does allow for the potential for both.

3. the physical, lasting sensation of low gravity is not something i would ever experience otherwise. mary roach talked about this in her book, packing for mars, that zero gravity makes you realize how heavy your organs are, and even the way your hair pulls down from your head. it's not until you experience the change that you realize the physical sensation of gravity. it's such a fundamental change in something very visceral and difficult to explain that i think it would offer the more interesting physical experience.

4. parties and meetings are so much easier after that.
it doesn't matter if you're at a bar, a party, wherever, being on the moon trumps everything. i'll be 100% honest with you, i'd rather spend 10 minutes talking to someone who has been on the moon than i would any former president. no matter where you are, no matter what the situation, you have the best story. unless that dude with the two penises who did the reddit ama is around. in that case i'd be willing to concede a tie. as a belgian, i decided to try a number of the local beers. Pamela yeow does not work for, consult, own shares in 51 or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment. Also of themes i saw is focused 51 to a single portfolio.