search results matching tag: Coincidences
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds
Videos (105) | Sift Talk (6) | Blogs (5) | Comments (1000) |
Videos (105) | Sift Talk (6) | Blogs (5) | Comments (1000) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
Keanu Reeves Tactical 3 gun shooting
Yeah, I've got to agree, that cannot be a coincidence. It is creepy on the same level as a hooters or any other business that hires exclusively hot women to do a job that should have nothing to do with looks.
It's not so much that I worry about the average female gun enthusiast going without work, but that it's hard to imagine that sort of workplace culture isn't rife with sexual harassment. Any time a woman looking sexy is a job requirement, it's a fair bet that her boss wants more than to look at her.
All the super attractive women creeped me out. Too many of them. Keanu doesn't know any normal looking women? Creep. Pee. (I'm a cis woman, by the way, for those who don't know.)
Mike Tyson Is Starting A Recreational Marijuana Ranch
Just yesterday, this Tyson story was on national news, quickly followed by the announcement that Sessions/the Federal government plans to go after any marijuana business or growers....coincidence?
Dear Satan
There is no evidence whatsoever that he lived again, and barely anecdotal evidence that his body went missing.
You vastly overestimate the theories acceptance outside devout religious theological scholars.
It's not all nonsense, just the magic parts.
History. Constantine converted and compiled the bible to consolidate and grow his political powers.
Satan wrote and fulfilled the bible and prophecies to trick you, just like every other religion. See how that falls apart?
Verified "truth" is a fact demonstrable in the physical world.
I don't buy into isms.
No, they were clearly instructions to individuals, not government...please. Even accepting your view, it's still killing, so no one could carry out the governmental stoning imperative...catch 22, you defy god either way.
But, since I don't believe, I don't accept or reject him.
Ahhh, so he didn't die for the world, only his supporters, you say, with non supporters (mostly tricked thorough no fault of their own) getting eternal torture. Diabolical, monstrous in fact.
Only like cancer that only exists when you believe it does.
I do those things for myself, it's working fine and I take responsibility for myself. I would suggest if Jesus worked as you say, to perfection, no Christian would ever be depressed or do wrong, they would be perfect people without problems....1)what about when you/they don't behave perfectly, is Jesus busy?
If there was zero law enforcement on earth and no vigilantes, it would be like that.
A sign, like the cardboard sign the driver's holding? Yep.
I might get in the car out of curiosity, but wouldn't just accept that coincidence or mental implantation means divinity. I would think it's likely I'm being visited by ET, who would be easily mistaken for gods by believers.
2)Again, I must ask, if you know he has that power of personal revelation, but chose to not use it, why would you defy your own God's wishes to try to convert others? Maybe he needs us heathens to be heathens.
1) The resurrection is absolutely not historical. Jesus the man MIGHT be.
There is a lot of scholarly research that says it is historical,
Jonathan Pie - Enough is Enough
While integrity is not anywhere on her list of priorities.... tanking the economy for a cheap approval ratings boost is EXACTLY the kind of move she'd go for.
It's just that this time it happens to coincide with something actually good....
I see you don't know Theresa May
The Tragedy of Jon Stewart
Also, @bobknight33
They all call him a racist not out of some weird coincidence.
It's because he's a racist.
Mexico City Earthquake collapses building
Crazy coincidence that today was the anniversary of the devastating quake they had back in 1985(8.0/ 5000 dead/ 412 buildings collapsed).
Two hours before today's quake people in the city were going through earthquake drills.
New Song 2017 !! Gum ho gya dil yeh mera full song
comes from youtube channel Ahmed Raza
username here ahmedrza1212
coincidence? I think not.
*ban
A heart pounding chase
The biker is speaking in Spanish the whole video. He mostly says 'aguas' which in Mexico means 'watch out!' to everyone, and then in the end he says 'Thank you, I dont know who the owner is'. I think it was a crazy coincidence and a random act of compassion.
noam chomsky denounces democrats russian hysteria
@newtboy
gonna have to disagree with ya there mate.
not so much on the speculation in regards to trump involvement,or some kind of capitulation with russia.there quite possibly be some co-ordination between the kremlin and the trump administration.trumps alleged ties with putin may all be true,but until i see some actual evidence,that is all it will ever be;speculation.
and i think chomsky's criticism is a valid one.
the "russia russia russia" drum beating is reminiscent of the republicans and their meth-induced media barrage of "benghazi benghazi benghazi",and even after their precious political whipping tool had been debunked,they STILL beat that drum.
and of course it is hypocritical of the US government to cry about political election interference! america has been interfering with other,sovereign countries democratic elections for decades!
because here in murica' we like our allies to be either be run by despotic leaders,or rigid theocracies,because democracies are hard to manipulate and control.can't be bribing an entire citizenry now can we? we like our foreign allies like we like our meat,juicy and tender and easy pickings.
now i am not here to defend putin.the man is a brutal authoritarian,who may appear to some as a russian patriot,but i just see a ruthless and saavy political player who appeases the only constituency that matters to him.the russian oligarchs,and they OWN that fucking joint.
but it was NATO who began to encroach on russian borders,not the other way around.in fact,as early as the 80's we began that encroachment.we lied to gorbachev,who was removed as president in shame,to be replaced by yeltsin.who was america's pick for their own little tool of the kremlin.
russia's military build-up has been a direct response to our ever-increasing wars of aggression in the middle east.putin has stated so publicly.
russia's biggest export is oil and natural gas,and russia pretty much is the sole provider for all of europe.with our wars in the middle east,and now qatar aggressively seeking to push through their own oil and gas pipeline to sell to europe.(what?you thought yemen and syria were about civil wars and terrorists?).
what did you THINK russia was going to do?
sit back and let their only major export be challenged?
and now that trump,like the buffoon he is,publicly stated that if the baltic states are not willing to pay their fair share towards NATO,then they will be removed.opening the door for putin.
poor latvia...
but lets waste all this time on "russia russia russia",while ignoring the larger implications of a fucking world war.
did russia manipulate US elections?
possibly..probably..
was the trump administration complicit?
possibly..probably..
is their any evidence beside speculation,and coincidence?
nope.
chomsky makes a valid point.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-shifrinson-russia-us-nato-deal--20160530-snap-story.html
Sam Harris on Trump
I hate to say it, but that is totally a quote from a Miss U.S.A. pageant. That has been misquoted and been attributed to Trump.
Just pick something else from his Presidential debates, there's so much ripe potential there besides that you'll have no trouble...
IF he really said that (since I didn't look--I'm just going off of memory), that would be beyond an amazing coincidence... I'd dare say it was said on purpose (again, though, it should be misquoted).
The bit about talking as if he's making up rhymes and has to stick with whatever he came up with cracked me up, he nailed it. Here's Trump's response during a presidential debate:
I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some, uh, people out there in our nation don't have maps and, uh, I believe that our education like such as in South Africa and, uh, the Iraq, everywhere like such as, and, I believe that they should, our education over here in the U.S. should help the U.S., uh, or, uh, should help South Africa and should help the Iraq and the Asian countries, so we will be able to build up our future. For our children.
Sharing on Social Media (Sift Talk Post)
I addressed this issue privatley with the powers that be a week ago and have heard nothing back regarding a possible resolution. @lucky760 @dag
Any sifter out there have an idea for a potential fix of this issue? Possibly has something to do with SSL as it seems to have coincided with its implimintation https://videosift.com/talk/SSL-Now-Enforced-Site-Wide
Governor of Washington Slams Trumps over Muslim Ban
so i have been watching this argument over the "ban" all over my facebook.people really like their little "memes" that offer no real criticism,nor any context,they simply display that persons particular bias.the discussion over this "ban" was not my issue.my issue was with the utter lack of depth of understanding.the evident laziness of those who got up on their little soapbox and sanctimoniously,and self-righteously moralized over a situation that they maybe..maaaybe..spent a total of five minutes on.
until finally my head exploded,and i went into hulk-mode.this was my rant,that i now share with you all:
jesus fucking christ...am i reading these comments correctly?
ok,lets put a little clarity into the mix,shall we?
first of all its not actually a "ban" but an extension to vette refugees further.
sounds reasonable right?
but what is NOT mentioned is that the majority of these refugees have already BEEN vetted,and the process has taken up to two years already.
so stop wetting your pants over brown people who happen to be muslim.
secondly,
let us take a look at the countries whose refugees are being "banned".
notice anything?
each and every one of those countries the american military is deployed in.the CIA has been fighting a proxy war in syria for five fucking YEARS.obama expanded operations into:sudan,somolia,yemen,syria and jordan (another proxy war executed by our radical saudi arabia buddies,who just happen to hate america and promote the most radical of muslim interpretations:wahhabism.they spend BILLIONS of their oil money to open madrasas across the region to light the match of radical islam)
so we,along with russia,turkey and other nations,are bombing the SHIT out of these countries,therefore creating the refugee crisis in the first place,and then we turn around an slap a "ban" on them.
oh,i'm sorry,not really a ban,just an extension to vette them further,because god knows we need more than two years to find out if someone is radicalized.
hypocrisy much america?
thirdly,
and this should make us all VERY nervous,but corporate media has YET to address this little turd nugget.a federal court slapped an injunction on this "ban",because it was not done through the proper channels,but rather through executive order.
and DHS ignored the injunction.
IGNORED it,because who needs "checks and balances" right?
who needs an institution,which was put in place to uphold the law and to restrict a sitting president from over-stepping his authority?
right?
and the fact that the DHS,which is under the DoD,outright ignored a direct order from a federal judge to cease and desist,because trump had overstepped his authority by attempting to use executive orders to circumvent the law.,and this was just an injunction,which really just means "stop!until we further review"...the DHS ignored the injunction.
lets ignore the fact that trump gutted the very agency that would have been the first to challenge his executive order "banning" these refugees.trump literally gutted all the high ranking officials at the state dept.
his press secretary said,and this is fucking laughable..they resigned..ALL of them?
all of them just stood up and resigned?
so it came down to a judge to hold trump accountable,which he did by injunction and an entire dept ignored that federal judges ruling.
now let us look at the countries left off that list.
notice anything?
well well well...would you look at that.
not only do they all purchase large amounts of weapons and military apparatus from us.not only do have they have large reserves of oil that our american companies make a shit ton of money from,but lookie here..trump has business in every singly one of those countries.
coincidence?
oh,and lets not overlook the fact that by executive order trump opened the door to have steve bannon on the national security council!
an unqualified,and with zero experience white nationalist is now on the national security council.
this is unprecedented!
but who cares right?
who needs those protocols,or checks and balances right?
trump is slowly creating his own tiny cabal of extreme loyalists and you people are wetting your pants over some brown people who lost everything,and have spent TWO FUCKING YEARS to find refuge?
this isnt the behavior of a president.
this is the behavior of a king.
yes,other presidents have implemented bans.
this is not a new thing.
what IS new,and some of you nimrods are either willingly,or unwittingly ignoring,is that THOSE bans were in direct response to the US being threatened by a particular group,and THOSE bans had the approval of congress..not a fucking piece of paper that king trump signed.
does america need to reform it's immigration policies?
yes,most certainly.
do we need to have an system in place to help assimilate refugees from syria beyond vetting?
of course,all we have to do is look at germany and see what happens when you allow refugees into your country without proper preparation and a system in place to see just how horrible it can get.
does this mean that every muslim refugee is somehow a terrorist?
well,just look at dearborn michigan.the largest muslim community in america and tell me how many terrorist came from that city? how many muslims were radicalized in dearborn?
is radicalized islam a problem?
yes,of course,who would deny this?
but the causes of radicalization are well understood,and have been well documented,and it is NOT only muslims who engage in terrorism.
really folks,before you start making declarations of certitude without having even the most basic knowledge how our government functions,you need to shut the fuck up.
and for FUCK sakes pick up a book once in awhile,and stop being a gaggle of fucking bed wetters.
jesus...you little fags piss yourselves every time a muslim is even mentioned in conversation.
oh,and before one of you tough guys even think about talking shit to me.
1.i am ex military.so go fuck yourself.
2.my JOB is to debunk bullshit stories and research politics and offer analysis.
so you better think twice before you go off half cocked,because my comment hurt your wittle feewings.your comments are ignorant and they are so lacking in the basic understanding of how this government operates that the only feeling you should having right now is:SHAME.
*edit:this is not directed towards anyone in particular here,but this single focus on trumps ill-thought "ban",and how he did so in such a broad,and general wave of a pen stroke that affected even those HAD gone through the process to get their green cards,visas etc etc is simply buying into the corporate narrative.
and then NOT consider the implications of a gutted state department,the loss of the attorney general and the defiant,disobedience of the DHS in regards to a federal judges injunction.
is unforgivable in it's ignorance.
the implications ALONE should make us all worried.
very very worried.
because it appears trump is reshaping our government into his own little fiefdom of loyalists,willing to defy the everyday governmental operations of checks and balances.
trump is consolidating and concentrating his power by creating his own little cabal of loyalists.that motherfucker has ALREADY put his candidacy on the ballot for 2020.now accepting donations to the highest bidder! feel free to purchase your own piece of the american presidency!
on sale NOW! so act fast! positions are limited!
*prices may vary according to your status and where you reside on the class scale.poor people can simply fuck off.
i realize this speculation on my part,
and i could be wrong.
god..please let me be wrong.
First: Do No Harm. Second: Do No Pussy Stuff. | Full Frontal
Ahh, so you were lying. You did have time.
From your response it's clear you don't know much about medicine.
"If you don't provide all the services required of a hospital, you don't get to call yourself a fucking hospital. "
No. You do get to call yourself a hospital. Most hospitals don't offer all medical services. Even major hospitals. You don't get to choose what is and isn't a hospital.
"There's a big bloody difference between "not equipped" and "unwilling"."
Sort of. It's a chicken and egg situation that has an order to it.
Most private hospitals are unwilling to provide non-profit services and are therefore not equipped to provide them. You won't find hospitals with the skills (i.e. doctors and nurses able to perform the procedure) and equipment (which is almost always purpose specific in medicine) and not the willingness to do the procedure. Catholic hospitals won't have either of those necessary requirements for most of the disputed procedures.
"And it's a bit fucking rich to bring up false equivalencies when you just compared unavailability of potential life-saving medical treatment to someone whinging over not getting a big mac at kfc."
No, mine was an appropriate analogy in regards to asking for a service or product that a company does not provide. In this case a Big Mac at KFC.
'"Really? They "articulate the truth"... as I said before, this is self-evidently complete and utter fucking bullshit.'
I can't say it's bullshit, but it is irrelevant.
'Yes, "inconvenient" is exactly the right word for a woman who is probably in the middle of the worst day of her life.
I mean, she might end up "inconveniently" dead, but hey, we wouldn't want to stop catholics telling other people how to live, would we?'
You're wrong. It is only an inconvenience. It sucks to be transferred to a different hospital but in general it has no adverse medical outcome on the patient. If the patient is critical the hospital will do what they can (which will be limited because they don't have the skills or equipment for that service) before transferring the patient. Just like one thousand and one other non-life-threatening and life-threatening procedures that most hospitals don't treat. Leaving the patient in place at that hospital carries a higher adverse risk than transferring them to an appropriate facility.
'And here we come to strawman of all strawmen. The problem is NOT that a woman needs a "direct abortion", it's that she may a surgical procedure that kills the child inadvertently. And this isn't theoretical, women have died from this.'
Not a strawman. You've given one example in a tabloid paper of a single woman who died from septacaemia, a week after a procedure. Unless you can show a conclusive coroner's report showing that the delay in removing the foetus (i.e. waiting until it was dead) was the cause, and not the 1000% more likely cause of infection during or after the surgery, then you don't even have that one example. And this sort of sepsis is just as likely from doing the same procedure with a live foetus. The procedure is pretty much the same. And even with one example, that's not statistically relevant. Do you have a study published in a reputable medical journal?
"The fundamental point is that religion has no place in medicine. If a patient wishes to refuse certain treatments because of their beliefs, well, they're an idiot, but it's their choice to be an idiot."
These hospitals have a mission statement based on their beliefs but they are practicing state of the art medicine. Based on their beliefs they don't offer all services , but this is no different than any other small hospital who limits their services. There are no statistically relevant adverse medical outcomes for anyone from this situation.
"But a hospital doesn't get to refuse treatment based on some bronze-age belief. If the treatment is legal in its jurisdiction and they have the capability to provide it, they must provide it. Businesses should not be allowed to refuse service on religious grounds ("I am religiously opposed to treating gay people or blacks!!")"
You're confusing you're belief of "shouldn't" with "doesn't". They can and should limit their services to what they want to offer as a hospital. The same as every public hospital does. And no, if the procedure is legal they do not have to provide it. This is true for public and private hospitals.
You seem to be sorely missing this basic vital understanding that all hospitals are limited in capacity and don't offer all services. If you go to the largest hospital near me (one of two major hospitals near me) and need emergency obstetrics, you will be shipped off to the other major hospital. That's how it works. If you go to one of many dozens of smaller private hospitals and ask for a,b, or c and they only offer x, y or z, then you're going to end up going to a different hospital.
The catholic hospital is practicing conscientious objection and passively practicing this (yes, passively, they're happy for you to go elsewhere). You want to force (that's the best word) all medical personal to bend to your will and don't accept worldviews that don't coincide with yours. Bigotry at it's finest.
'("I am religiously opposed to treating gay people or blacks!!")'
FFS: Evidence of hospitals doing this please. Not an individual doctor. Hospitals.
'As you said yourself "If you don't like it, go work somewhere else".'
You're saying "if you don't like my personal rules, then go find a different industry". Democracies a bitch when you don't get what you want. You're going to have to live with the fact that your way is just your opinion and nothing else.
You're getting pretty boring pretty quickly. I doubt I'll bother anymore with you, it's readily apparent that you're not going to learn any time soon.
FFS, I'm not trying to make an argument. As for watching the video, that wasn't a waste of my time, it was entertaining and informative unlike the article which was desperately trying to excuse an awful situation.
But fine, you want an argument? Let's do this.
"If one doesn't want the very small set of restrictions that go with some (not all) religiously affiliated hospitals, don't go there. One does have a choice."
You have that backwards. If you don't provide all the services required of a hospital, you don't get to call yourself a fucking hospital.
How would you feel if there was a Jehovahs Witness hospital that didn't do blood transfusions? Or a Christian Science hospital that refused to do medical treatment?
Both of those are real world examples where people died.
There's a big bloody difference between "not equipped" and "unwilling". In a local area, there might be several smaller medical facilities, but finding two major care centres across the road from each other is pretty rare.
And it's a bit fucking rich to bring up false equivalencies when you just compared unavailability of potential life-saving medical treatment to someone whinging over not getting a big mac at kfc.
As for the article:
"First, Bee ignores the fact that Catholic teaching on human life and reproduction is a fundamental, longstanding tradition of the Church, passed down from one generation to the next for centuries. "
Irrelevant. Next...
"But Catholic priests, bishops, and cardinals don’t give “reproductive advice”; they articulate the truth about human life and reproductive ethics in accord with Catholic teaching."
Really? They "articulate the truth"... as I said before, this is self-evidently complete and utter fucking bullshit.
"the claim that women will be without care if they are refused service at a Catholic hospital."
Er, even the article acknowledges that Bee understands this point and makes the point that in an emergency situation, you go to the nearest available centre that can treat you.
"This is another straw man. In most cases, when women want a particular reproductive service, they have ample time to locate and attend a non-Catholic hospital. "
Yes, and in most cases, people do. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE FUCKING TALKING ABOUT.
"Even in the few emergency situations — which Bee presents as if they are the vast majority of cases"
No, she really doesn't.
"Though it sometimes might be inconvenient for a woman to travel to a non-Catholic hospital, the inconvenience surely does not outweigh the importance of conscience rights, which demand that Catholic hospitals not be forced to provide procedures that Catholicism deems morally wrong."
Yes, "inconvenient" is exactly the right word for a woman who is probably in the middle of the worst day of her life.
I mean, she might end up "inconveniently" dead, but hey, we wouldn't want to stop catholics telling other people how to live, would we?
"In reality, a direct abortion (in which a doctor intentionally kills a child) is never medically necessary to save a mother’s life. If a woman is having a miscarriage, having her child killed in an abortion will do nothing to improve her health or save her life."
And here we come to strawman of all strawmen. The problem is NOT that a woman needs a "direct abortion", it's that she may a surgical procedure that kills the child inadvertently. And this isn't theoretical, women have died from this.
The fundamental point is that religion has no place in medicine. If a patient wishes to refuse certain treatments because of their beliefs, well, they're an idiot, but it's their choice to be an idiot.
But a hospital doesn't get to refuse treatment based on some bronze-age belief. If the treatment is legal in its jurisdiction and they have the capability to provide it, they must provide it. Businesses should not be allowed to refuse service on religious grounds ("I am religiously opposed to treating gay people or blacks!!")
As you said yourself "If you don't like it, go work somewhere else".
Letterman Gets a Trim
Dave Letterman starts to look like Ted Kaczynski.
Ted Kaczynski used letter bombs.
Dave Letterman bombs onstage.
Coincidence?
Samantha Bee - Disturbing the PC
They don't know because most people don't know most things.
You probably don't know 0.1% of relevant American history (I know I don't). That you happen to have known who Andrew Jackson was is just simple coincidence.
You're very correct about PC not stopping shit (in the context of the USA). They have constitutionally protected free speech so they can say what they want with very few exceptions.
How the fuck do these people not know what a colossal asshole Andrew Jackson was? I'm not even from the US and I know he was a genocidal dick.
And I'm also curious as to exactly what these people want to say that political correctness is stopping them from saying.
Also not clear on how political correctness is stopping them from saying anything, what with that pesky 1st amendment and so on, but anyway.
either way, *quality