You Talk to Me


Interviews and conversations that speak to us.

Ryan Purtill talks to an interviewer about what his new album would be like

Text

RYAN PURTILL: My new album would be like a SuperPoke to the heart. If your soul had a seat belt, you’de better buckle up kiddo. I’m talking music that would blow your mind all over your face type music. Like if heroin was music. Or if like cleavage could play guitar. Yeah like remember 911 and how bad that was? Well this would be like that but a good thing instead of a bad thing. Yeah that’s what my new album would be like. If I was a musician. Just saying…

INTERVIEWER: You know this is a janitorial position right?

RYAN: Yes. Yes sir I do. I was just making a point.



Reblogged from The Pillow Fort.
Comments (View)

Melissa 1 talks to Melissa 2 about chat posts

Chat
  • MELISSA 1: i didn't even notice you could post chats.
  • MELISSA 2: that's because you're not internet literate.
  • MELISSA 1: what should i write?
  • MELISSA 2: i don't know. we could just copy the example.
  • MELISSA 1: okay. um. let's see. could you give me directions to a men's dressing room?
  • MELISSA 2: no, but i can give you directions to an actual guy's apartment & you can watch him change through his window.
  • MELISSA 1: whoa. it's like you're reading my mind. so, what am i thinking now?
  • MELISSA 2: that we should go throw water balloons at the people leaving the bar around the corner.


Reblogged from my beat is correct..
Comments (View)

NewScientist talks to Harold Varmus about life after Bush

Chat
  • NEWSCIENTIST: You worked with Bill Clinton, and now Barack Obama. What about the man who came between them, George W. Bush?
  • HAROLD VARMUS: It was not a good time for science, but it wasn't an unmitigated disaster. I would say two things that are often forgotten. To his credit Bush completed the doubling of the budget for the National Institutes of Health. And he did good things for global health. But there were many other things that hurt science and undermined the science advisory process. However, that era is over. We need to be clear about the fact that damage has been done, and we need to repair that damage and look ahead.
  • NEWSCIENTIST: How do we repair the damage?
  • HAROLD: We've now got the chance to work with a president who has a positive vision of science and a very strong commitment to the fundamental principle that government should operate in a way that is based on rational thinking and evidence rather than dogma.
  • NEWSCIENTIST: Have you spoken to the new president about science?
  • HAROLD: Yes, in general terms. He's not a trained scientist, but what we can expect from him is a deep understanding of what scientists can do for society. To solve the nation's energy problems he has named a distinguished physicist to run the department of energy. That's an amazing symbol of his conviction.
  • NEWSCIENTIST: The "stimulus package" includes a strong investment in science. Wouldn't we be better off building roads and bridges?
  • HAROLD: Science is a good place to spend money. The long-term benefits are said to be about 150 per cent from government investment in science. In the short term money buys salaries, equipment and infrastructure. It's now our responsibility to find ways to use this largesse in a way that doesn't hurt us down the road by creating a cycle of boom and bust.
  • [Shamelessly swiped from: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227026.700-one-minute-interview-varmus-on-bush-and-obama.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news]


Comments (View)
Photograph

[via Buzzfeed]

[via Buzzfeed]



Comments (View)
Photograph

[via Buzzfeed]

[via Buzzfeed]



Comments (View)