search results matching tag: Byron

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (44)     Sift Talk (1)     Blogs (5)     Comments (46)   

Fantomas (Member Profile)

PlayhousePals says...

The amazing and exotic birds is one of the fondest memories from my visit to OZ in 2001. We were at the Ballina Beach Resort for the Byron Bay Bluesfest and the buggers would just fly onto your shoulder. Loved it! [Plus I'm a "day" person down under]

Fantomas said:

Looks very much like a Sulphur-crested Cockatoo, which you can occasionally spot flying here in Aus.
Very smart birds

Straya Day Ride

Straya Day Ride

PlayhousePals says...

I want to go back to OZ someday. Loved my visit in 2001 and the delightful people I met there. First two days were at the Byron Bay Bluesfest and there was a small hippie town nearby that I can't remember the name of [something like bin bin ... only not that]. I could picture myself there, especially now

What "Orwellian" really means - Noah Tavlin

poolcleaner says...

Or Voltairian. Why can't we use that word anymore?

I fancy a good satirical polemic, especially in regards to flippant condensers of classic literature, who hide behind simplistic animations aflutter of Lovercraftian connotations. Such balderdash! Give me a Byronic hero any day, over the snide Youtubian objectivist...

Babymech said:

What an eye opener! I hope this guy does another talk about other weird words, like 'Shakespearean'! I hear it thrown around a lot, but where does it come from? What does it mean? How do it do? I bet it has something to do with George Orwell!

blackfox42 (Member Profile)

A New Level Of Archery Skills

bareboards2 says...

@eric3579 I never had an issue with all the details of what he is doing -- couldn't care less about bow strength and armor. I was more curious if he is ACTUALLY DOING IT, or if this was some sort of CGI.

I did find this one article about him, posted Jan 2015, with these two quotes that spoke to my issues:

"This guy is the Clint Eastwood of archery," says Tim Wells, professional bow hunter and host of the TV show, Relentless Pursuit. "Or if I was talking to someone who had never shot a bow and arrow, I'd say he is the 'Bruce Lee playing ping pong of archery.' We have all played ping-pong and none of us can play with nun chucks — that's what this guy's skillset with a bow is comparable to. He's a badass."

Experts agree that the skills demonstrated in the video are unbelievable, but also completely real. "His skillset is tremendous," says Byron Ferguson, owner of the Bare Bow Archery School and star archer on the History Channel's show, Extreme Marksmen. "These shots are legitimate, despite some video editing. His speed is almost unbelievable."

Read more: http://www.mensjournal.com/adventure/outdoor/the-story-behind-lars-andersens-new-level-of-archery-video-20150126#ixzz3Q3tKMqJK
Follow us: @mensjournal on Twitter | MensJournal on Facebook

I can't tell if they have met this guy or not, or if they, too, are just looking at the videos. That other "world record"? All I can find is more videos and nothing from Guinness or anyone else.

So at present, I am going to stay neutral as to whether this guy is for reals or not.

How the Dutch got their cycle paths

spoco2 (Member Profile)

PlayhousePals says...

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
Hey there!

I hope that the truly bizarre welcome you got to the sift doesn't put you off, it's a great place for discussion.

I'm from way down south of Oz in Melbourne, but I've been to Byron Bay for a wedding, and it's a lovely place.


In reply to this comment by PlayhousePals:
HI there, thought I'd introduce myself. It's my first week anniversary sifting here ... I see you are from Australia. I had a chance to visit during a whirlwind tour back in 2001 [My friends were headlining the Byron Bay Blues Festival that year, so I got to tag along] ... didn't get to spend NEARLY enough time in your country, but was impressed with how beautiful it is and how GREAT the people we met are. I hope I can go back some day, it was absolutely one of the most memorable trips I've ever embarked on, HoyHoy


Thanks! It was a bizarre introduction to the site, but hey, who doesn't like a bit of drama [when it's warranted that is]. I really enjoy it here [now] =oD

The band played the Mercury Lounge in Melbourne and the Metro in Sydney before popping over the Auckland for a show at the St. James Theater. It went by so fast! I really wish we'd had longer than ten days down under. My favorite little town was Nimbin in NSW ... my kind of people!

spoco2 (Member Profile)

PlayhousePals says...

HI there, thought I'd introduce myself. It's my first week anniversary sifting here ... I see you are from Australia. I had a chance to visit during a whirlwind tour back in 2001 [My friends were headlining the Byron Bay Blues Festival that year, so I got to tag along] ... didn't get to spend NEARLY enough time in your country, but was impressed with how beautiful it is and how GREAT the people we met are. I hope I can go back some day, it was absolutely one of the most memorable trips I've ever embarked on, HoyHoy

A fantastic, inexplicably rejected Doritos spot

Fletch says...

>> ^Shepppard:

Wait, isn't this the older of the two brothers that make youtube videos to each other?
I think the other ones name is hank.

Written by: Jack Dreesen, John Ramsey & David Ward

Directed by: David Ward & John Ramsey
Produced by: Jack Dreesen, John Ramsey & David Ward

Starring: Byron Brown

It's an entry for Dorito's Crash the Super Bowl contest. The five finalists are pretty good, but I like this one better.

A fantastic, inexplicably rejected Doritos spot

heathen says...

>> ^Shepppard:

Wait, isn't this the older of the two brothers that make youtube videos to each other?
I think the other ones name is hank.


No, this isn't John Green of vlogbrothers - the puff levels are far too low.
Clicking through to youtube the "more info" suggests this is Byron Brown.

MythBusters Cannonball Experiment Gone Wrong Hits Houses/Car

Winstonfield_Pennypacker says...

Big fan of the show. I am glad no one got hurt, but I can well imagine that the Build team got a severe chastising by one James Franklin Hyneman. He's usually in charge of safety, and someone could have easily been killed or hurt by this lapse. I don't know what happened, but I bet dimonds to dollars that the cannon was not anchored properly before it want off and the recoil probably kicked the barrel up just high enough to clear the hill the shot was supposed to go into. The Mythbusters themselves probably didn't set up the cannon - unless it was the home-made cannon that Tory did for the "Ball & Chain prison escape" episode. That was more like a mortar though, and not designed to fire laterally. I hope this incident makes a blooper show, or gets broadcast in some way. You KNOW they have footage on the accident right up to where the shot went bad.

Not the first time the build team has had a bad accident though. In "Hollywood Car Myths" they were testing the movie axiom of when a car goes full speed under a semi-trailer and gets the roof knocked off but is still drivable. The myth was confirmed - the car slid right under the trailer. But the car went off the safety track and kept on going at like 70 miles an hour... It went right off the track, off the course, up a hill, and over a fence. Kari Byron had a horrified look on her face and just said, "Uh oh..." Luckily in that case (also) no one got hurt, but there was a road not too far past the fence the car flew over and someone could have gotten really clobbered. In that case it was also not the Build Team's fault. The site's safety rigging must have failed somehow.

God does exist. Testimony from an ex-atheist:

hpqp says...

>> ^hpqp:


I was going to suggest reading Byron's "Cain: A Mystery", which develops the immorality of original sin in a much more sophisticated and poetic fashion, but seeing that you did not even get the point of the nonstampcollector video I linked (if you even watched it), Byron would be way over your head.

You say: "God let them know it was wrong to disobey Him by outlining the consequences if they did."
Have you even read the Bible? God is the one who lies, saying "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:7); the serpent, OTOH, tells the truth (Gen. 3:4-7, italics mine):
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil
.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, [...]
It is the lack of knowledge that makes the fabled first humans inferior to (and dependant upon) their father-figure creator. Religion relies on ignorance, obedience and blind faith in authority, i.e. everything that demarcates a dependent infant from an independent adult.



I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but I forgot to add this biblical tidbit to my argument (Gen. 3:22-3, italics mine):

22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.


Not only does everything the serpent says come to pass, it is even validated by God Himself.

Before you go all copy-pasty-preachy on me shiny, remember that we're talking about a fable with a frikkin' talking snake!

God does exist. Testimony from an ex-atheist:

enoch says...

>> ^shinyblurry:

Do you wear a cologne called attitude? You could bottle the sneer dripping from your words and sell it for a tidy sum. Though it doesn't surprise me that you're actually advocating for Satan in the story, it was a lie no matter how narrow, obtuse, and willfully ignorant your interpertation is. They did die, that makes it a lie. God told them the truth about it.
It was not their lack of knowledge that made them "inferior", it was their faith in God that made them superior. Yet, God gave them the choice didn't He? Your argument here is null and void. He enjoyed a perfect relationship with them but He gave them the choice of knowing anyway. He warned them if they did it they would die. They chose not to trust God and lusted after his power, and then they reaped the consequences, which was seperation from God. It's the same story going on on Earth, right now, in every heart that has turned away from God. What He did, and is still doing, is fair and just. He doesn't coerce your love, but he will let you reap the consequences of the evil that you do, and He even gives you fair warning.
What's absurd is your nasty and sarcastic attitude. It's just pure arrogance; have you ever read the bible? You're here railing against something you have no understanding of. You're condescending to me about my intellect when even a child has a more cohesive understanding here than you do. Btw, regarding the ridiculous "blasphemy challenge"
John 6;39
And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.
As far as whether the Earth is old or young, I don't know. It isn't clear. I've seen models where the geology of the planet could be explained by a young Earth, and ones that dispute it. I don't really care, to tell you the truth. It makes no difference to me whether the Earth is young or old. Science hasn't proved it either way, and the bible isn't exactly clear on it, so there isn't a way for me to say definitively. To me the jury is out and it doesn't look like it will be back anytime soon. What is important to me is a relationship with Jesus Christ, not how old His creation is.
>> ^hpqp:
>> ^shinyblurry:
God let them know it was wrong to disobey Him by outlining the consequences if they did. They chose to believe the lie instead, and lusted after Gods power. Thus they sinned and became spiritually seperated from God. The perfect cannot be joined with the imperfect.
The whole point of our lives is to love God (and eachother) and live with Him forever in paradise. That's why He created Adam and Eve in the first place. Man sinned and fell, became seperated from God, and became mortal and lost their place with God.
Your argument is that it is immoral. Well how can you judge God? No sinner could and I include myself in that. How could an immoral being judge a moral one? It's only your excuse for not doing what He told us to do. God is Holy, but you have believed the lie that He isn't. You are choosing death over life, because that is all sin is. The soul that sins is the soul that dies, but Gods gift is eternal life.
In regard to the unforgivable sin, the reason it is unforgivable is because when you become a Christian you receive Gods Spirit. His Spirit is what transforms us, makes us a new creation. If you reject His Spirit, you cannot be transformed, so therefore you cannot be forgiven.
Everyone who has taken the so-called blasphemy challenge just to please their inner demons of being completely dead to Christ are mistaken. None of them have done anything unforgivable and can all still be saved.

I was going to suggest reading Byron's "Cain: A Mystery", which develops the immorality of original sin in a much more sophisticated and poetic fashion, but seeing that you did not even get the point of the nonstampcollector video I linked (if you even watched it), Byron would be way over your head.
You say: "God let them know it was wrong to disobey Him by outlining the consequences if they did."
Have you even read the Bible? God is the one who lies, saying "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:7); the serpent, OTOH, tells the truth (Gen. 3:4-7, italics mine):
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil
.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, [...]
It is the lack of knowledge that makes the fabled first humans inferior to (and dependant upon) their father-figure creator. Religion relies on ignorance, obedience and blind faith in authority, i.e. everything that demarcates a dependent infant from an independent adult.
You use a lot of religious terms as if they actually meant something. Please define these if you want your argumentation to be the least bit intelligible:
God; sin; moral (in relation to "God"), God's spirit.

Since you did not address the incest remark while continuing to speak of Adam and Eve as if they really existed, I'll assume that you really do think we all descend from only two humans, which is totally absurd. Do you also think the Earth is only 6000 years old? Perhaps the Sun revolves around it (Eccl.1:5)? And is it a flat disc (Is.40:22)?
(Btw, most of those who took the "blasphemy challenge" grew up Christian, so no, imaginary Sky-Daddy cannot forgive them)



http://youtu.be/5hfYJsQAhl0

*edit:damn,embed wont work.well so much for me making a funny!now my day is just ruined..RUINED i tell ya!

God does exist. Testimony from an ex-atheist:

hpqp says...

>> ^shinyblurry:

Do you wear a cologne called attitude? You could bottle the sneer dripping from your words and sell it for a tidy sum. Though it doesn't surprise me that you're actually advocating for Satan in the story, it was a lie no matter how narrow, obtuse, and willfully ignorant your interpertation is. They did die, that makes it a lie. God told them the truth about it.
It was not their lack of knowledge that made them "inferior", it was their faith in God that made them superior. Yet, God gave them the choice didn't He? Your argument here is null and void. He enjoyed a perfect relationship with them but He gave them the choice of knowing anyway. He warned them if they did it they would die. They chose not to trust God and lusted after his power, and then they reaped the consequences, which was seperation from God. It's the same story going on on Earth, right now, in every heart that has turned away from God. What He did, and is still doing, is fair and just. He doesn't coerce your love, but he will let you reap the consequences of the evil that you do, and He even gives you fair warning.
What's absurd is your nasty and sarcastic attitude. It's just pure arrogance; have you ever read the bible? You're here railing against something you have no understanding of. You're condescending to me about my intellect when even a child has a more cohesive understanding here than you do. Btw, regarding the ridiculous "blasphemy challenge"
John 6;39
And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.
As far as whether the Earth is old or young, I don't know. It isn't clear. I've seen models where the geology of the planet could be explained by a young Earth, and ones that dispute it. I don't really care, to tell you the truth. It makes no difference to me whether the Earth is young or old. Science hasn't proved it either way, and the bible isn't exactly clear on it, so there isn't a way for me to say definitively. To me the jury is out and it doesn't look like it will be back anytime soon. What is important to me is a relationship with Jesus Christ, not how old His creation is.
>> ^hpqp:
>> ^shinyblurry:
God let them know it was wrong to disobey Him by outlining the consequences if they did. They chose to believe the lie instead, and lusted after Gods power. Thus they sinned and became spiritually seperated from God. The perfect cannot be joined with the imperfect.
The whole point of our lives is to love God (and eachother) and live with Him forever in paradise. That's why He created Adam and Eve in the first place. Man sinned and fell, became seperated from God, and became mortal and lost their place with God.
Your argument is that it is immoral. Well how can you judge God? No sinner could and I include myself in that. How could an immoral being judge a moral one? It's only your excuse for not doing what He told us to do. God is Holy, but you have believed the lie that He isn't. You are choosing death over life, because that is all sin is. The soul that sins is the soul that dies, but Gods gift is eternal life.
In regard to the unforgivable sin, the reason it is unforgivable is because when you become a Christian you receive Gods Spirit. His Spirit is what transforms us, makes us a new creation. If you reject His Spirit, you cannot be transformed, so therefore you cannot be forgiven.
Everyone who has taken the so-called blasphemy challenge just to please their inner demons of being completely dead to Christ are mistaken. None of them have done anything unforgivable and can all still be saved.

I was going to suggest reading Byron's "Cain: A Mystery", which develops the immorality of original sin in a much more sophisticated and poetic fashion, but seeing that you did not even get the point of the nonstampcollector video I linked (if you even watched it), Byron would be way over your head.
You say: "God let them know it was wrong to disobey Him by outlining the consequences if they did."
Have you even read the Bible? God is the one who lies, saying "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:7); the serpent, OTOH, tells the truth (Gen. 3:4-7, italics mine):
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil
.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, [...]
It is the lack of knowledge that makes the fabled first humans inferior to (and dependant upon) their father-figure creator. Religion relies on ignorance, obedience and blind faith in authority, i.e. everything that demarcates a dependent infant from an independent adult.
You use a lot of religious terms as if they actually meant something. Please define these if you want your argumentation to be the least bit intelligible:
God; sin; moral (in relation to "God"), God's spirit.

Since you did not address the incest remark while continuing to speak of Adam and Eve as if they really existed, I'll assume that you really do think we all descend from only two humans, which is totally absurd. Do you also think the Earth is only 6000 years old? Perhaps the Sun revolves around it (Eccl.1:5)? And is it a flat disc (Is.40:22)?
(Btw, most of those who took the "blasphemy challenge" grew up Christian, so no, imaginary Sky-Daddy cannot forgive them)



Since you continuously miss the subtleties of my critiques while avoiding the actual questions that are being posed, I will spell it out as simply as I can. (Note that my intellectual condescension, which you are right in spotting, is based entirely on your unintelligent responses and childish emotional reactions, your disregard for logic, your circular reasoning and your incessant ad hominem attacks. But please, don't let my "nasty and sarcastic attitude" get in the way of your reasoned and logical argumentation... for which we are still waiting.)


1. On the literal reading of Scripture: My question as to whether you took the Adam/Eve/Eden myth as factual and historical truth is crucial, and since you continued to base your argumentation on the assumption that it is, I followed up with questions pertaining to other literal readings of the Bible, i.e. YEC, geocentrism and flat earth theory. In later comments you dance around the issue of the Earth's age, but refuse to address one of my first questions: is all humanity the actual descendants of the fabled Adam and Eve? If not, the whole theory of original sin crumbles. You might argue, as the begrudgingly-evolution-accepting catholic church does, that "original sin" is equivalent to "human nature", which completely voids the whole "created in His image" and "free will" things.

2. On hypocrisy and cherry-picking: I wish I could say how surprised I am at you being oblivious to your hypocrisy and self-contradiction, but it is all too common among religious apologists. You accuse me of "narrow, obtuse, and willfully ignorant" interpretation, of arrogance, ignorance and condescension (I fully own up to that last one), and in the very same lines are guilty of all of the above. What makes your interpretation correct, and mine - which is based directly on the actual text - incorrect? Oh yes, your dogma, which declares that there is only one correct reading of the Bible, i.e. the Christian one, no matter how contrary to the text it is. You assume that any one who contradicts your creed with the help of your holy book "has no understanding" of it... and I'm the arrogant one? I could be a theology major for all you know, and while I am not, I have read the Bible thoroughly enough to know it for what it is: a collection of myths, romanticised history, laws and poetry, written by men.

Concerning the "blasphemy challenge", if I understand your reasoning cherry-picking logic, there is no need to believe in God, the Bible or any Christian creed, since we're all going to heaven anyway, right? But then, in a later comment you proclaim that only some are chosen ("many are called..." I know). What happens to those who are not and, more importantly, how will you get out of that without contradicting yourself?

3. Please do not skirt the questions: note that the "answers" to my earliest questions, repeated here, were unintelligible due to your use of terms (see below) which need clarification.

>>"So the story of Adam and Eve is not just a myth, and we are all descendants of incestuous sex (twice, if the story of Noah is taken into account)?

So God values blind obedience higher than natural curiosity, and expects Adam and Eve to obey without knowing that disobeying is "bad" (since they don't yet have the knowledge of good/evil)?

So it is moral to punish an infinity of generations of humans for what their ancestors supposedly did? And then present the "gift" of forgiveness if you submit to the god who caused you to be "sinful" in the first place??"


>>"You use a lot of religious terms as if they actually meant something. Please define these if you want your argumentation to be the least bit intelligible:

God; sin; moral (in relation to "God"), God's spirit."



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon