leaving in 6 hours
yeah, you read that right. i'm leaving at 4am in the morning. no sleep again ehehe.
today was another boring day, just like every other one. holidays are absolutely no fun when exams are looming right in fron tof us. not to mention PW either.
morning: go to school and mug, what else? i haven't touched geog yet. human geog, that is. saturday mornings are even MORE dreary than usual mornings. for one, the library isn't open, no more air-con... two: there's nobody around! well except for the occasional border lounging in the canteen, that is.
lunch was simple... get a wafer, munch on the way. got to bugis at 11:30 so i could scout the library and especially the reference sections first. well i've worked there before so i roughly know the layout, but specific books... still have to go through the catalogue. and books relevant to us are found on three levels. basement, the borrowing section, and levels 7 and 11.
and to my groupmates: thanks for being on time, eh? one of these days you're going to miss something important then maybe you'll learn. if you can't be early, at least don't be more than 5 mins late.
and ok, it seems i'm not that good a researcher. sherine and huihui took level seven while me and paul went to level 11, and we found only like two measly books while the two of them have like a whole pageful of minute notes each. dammit where did you find so much info from?
but i did find something interesting while browsing though. no not what paul picked up (healthy sex after 50 -.-) but rather a weird question. do you consider a baby part of a mother's body? it seems nature seems to contradict itself in this case. let me elaborate:
when a baby is in the mother's womb, it stays there until it is ready to be born. it is not expelled like a "foreign body".
however, it has more than once been proven that babies and mothers are not fully compatible, especially when organ transplants are needed but mother and child are not compatible donors. the body rejects the organ donated, in fact.
so is the child part of the mother's body, which is why it is not viewed as a foreign body and subsequently expelled, or is it a completely independant body, because their bodies are not the same and orgnas may not be compatible?
good question, eh? hopefully someone can give me an answer when i come back from vietnam on wednesday.
today was another boring day, just like every other one. holidays are absolutely no fun when exams are looming right in fron tof us. not to mention PW either.
morning: go to school and mug, what else? i haven't touched geog yet. human geog, that is. saturday mornings are even MORE dreary than usual mornings. for one, the library isn't open, no more air-con... two: there's nobody around! well except for the occasional border lounging in the canteen, that is.
lunch was simple... get a wafer, munch on the way. got to bugis at 11:30 so i could scout the library and especially the reference sections first. well i've worked there before so i roughly know the layout, but specific books... still have to go through the catalogue. and books relevant to us are found on three levels. basement, the borrowing section, and levels 7 and 11.
and to my groupmates: thanks for being on time, eh? one of these days you're going to miss something important then maybe you'll learn. if you can't be early, at least don't be more than 5 mins late.
and ok, it seems i'm not that good a researcher. sherine and huihui took level seven while me and paul went to level 11, and we found only like two measly books while the two of them have like a whole pageful of minute notes each. dammit where did you find so much info from?
but i did find something interesting while browsing though. no not what paul picked up (healthy sex after 50 -.-) but rather a weird question. do you consider a baby part of a mother's body? it seems nature seems to contradict itself in this case. let me elaborate:
when a baby is in the mother's womb, it stays there until it is ready to be born. it is not expelled like a "foreign body".
however, it has more than once been proven that babies and mothers are not fully compatible, especially when organ transplants are needed but mother and child are not compatible donors. the body rejects the organ donated, in fact.
so is the child part of the mother's body, which is why it is not viewed as a foreign body and subsequently expelled, or is it a completely independant body, because their bodies are not the same and orgnas may not be compatible?
good question, eh? hopefully someone can give me an answer when i come back from vietnam on wednesday.
posted by CHENZ | 6:05 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home