As a father of a young child and also a professional photographer, this is really close to my heart.

I really hate that people associate nudity with sexuality. Of course nudity can be sexual, but that's not the same as saying all nudity is sexual. Running around with nothing on is just something kids do. They aren't body aware and at that age they shouldn't be.

If we're going to make something illegal or think of it as wrong because some weirdo finds it sexual, well where the hell does that end? A lot of people have a foot fetish, so are we all to keep our socks on at all times? Really?

The photo of the little girl jumping on the bed is a great shot. It shows the carefree abandon of a little kid trying to amuse herself. To me it speaks to my inner child and makes me realise how much we've lost as adults. The nudity is important in this shot, but not for any sexual reason. When was the last time you just didn't care? When was the last time you thought it could be OK to jump on the bed naked? More to the point when was the last time that you didn't even have to think that and just did it, just because?

It makes the shot interesting that her naked body is not sexual. It's the opposite. It's innocent, there's nothing more to it. She's not at an age where all of these rules and restrictions should apply to her because they are meaningless to a toddler.

The problem comes when people take innocent shots like this and try to make out that they are sexual. That's when the damage happens. That's when the little girl is sexualised. Not by the photographer, but by the people who claim to be trying to protect the kids.

Everyone here saying "you can't call for revolution without the answer already in hand" is missing the point. If you come to people with an answer in hand, most of the time they will use their current political BELIEFS to decry your plan as impossible and shut down from the conversation all the same.

This whole "it's not broken, so don't fix it" nonsense doesn't work when it comes to our societal structures. We have poverty in all the modernized, rich nations still. How the fuck is that a thing? It needs to change, we need to change that. Recognizing that need for change comes first. After we've come together and said "hell yeah, we need to make this a real priority!," THEN we can start discussing potential answers.

When you still have a huge portion of society either drowned in garbage rhetoric they've been force-fed since youth ("America is the best! Drugs are evil!") or blindly ignorant of the problems because they've grown up fortunate enough to live away from poverty and violence, you have to bring attention to the fact that what we're doing isn't working first before you can agree that you need a revolution, before you can decide what that revolution would entail.

It sounds like what you're saying is "yes, we need to fix this shit," so instead of complaining about calling for revolution, how about you start figuring out how to impact attitudes and opinions of people around you about things that need to be fixed/change? This is the long and difficult part of the process, but it has to happen before anybody can really expect political action to occur, especially with how our societies roll these days.

The reason South Africa has so much more wealth than it's neighbors is because European folks built it.

After they weren't in power anymore, the skyscrapers they built fell into decay, Detroit style.


Expect to see more of that as Whites become minorities in all of their nations (except Russia) in the coming decades.

People of all ancestries should vote against immigration if they like stable societies.

"They don't all agree with it, which is why it's not science."

If anyone is looking for absolute certainty, they should turn to their priests, their gurus, their investment brokers, their politicians, their snake-oil salesmen.

The only absolute certainty science can provide is in proving a wrong. Everything else is probabilities and exclusions, all the way to the end.

The fact that the public expects a proof of absolute certainty of a positive is maddening to me. Any assumed equivalency between "not knowing for sure" with "not knowing anything" is frustrating to no end.

Scientists have to enter the public arena and proclaim certainty to match the public's vernacular. If they were to stick to probabilities the way they do within their own realms, they'd fail to communicate the essence of their findings. Just look at how warped the common understanding of "theory" has become.

----------------------------

"Consensus, I repeat, is not science."

Everything scientific that is being communicated publicy is a consensus. The fact that statements of less than absolute, unanimous consensus are met with suspicion and a diminishment of trust in the process itself is one of the reasons why science cannot be properly discussed on the public stage. They cannot present the fuzzy edges of their findings as that would require a qualification in the form of probabilities. A consensus, the greatest common denominator if you will, is the best that can be done. The IPCC's reports are a magnificent illustration of that very issue.

And why can't we talk about the fuzzy edges? About scenarios and their corresponding probabilities? Because people are suspicious, even scared of numbers. Math as a subject is made fun of, a lack of mathematical understanding has become something to be proud of. An intuitive understanding of probabilities is the exception, not the norm. As soon as a prediction doesn't come true, people tend to dismiss the underlying theory, without any regard to the previously attached probability.

That's the climate the scientists have to endure when trying to present their work to the public.

Basically, anytime big gov't gets involved in anything, prices go up. Examples are everywhere. Doctors used to come to people's homes, then gov't got involved.

How about we dis-empower gov't?

If you think the gov't, by raising the minimum wage, will allow people to be wealthier, you are as naive as all the socialist academics who teach the crap you read on these boards.

This is blocked. Come on people.

this song has some serious bounce potential.
come on people!
bounce with me!

To me this clip just points out the absurdities of any "-ism"

The standard nonsense of "I was in X before X jumped the shark and sold out"

"Being an X means I stood for R, S, and T, thereby implying the other team doesn't stand for R, S, and T

If this doesn't demonstrate the fallacies of having a "first past the post" voting system, I don't know what does.

This demonization of "the other" has got to stop, especially when it comes to people in our own nation,

that said, not all opinions are equal, and shitty opinions do deserve, nay demand, criticism, especially when you can't back them up with any sort of basic argument without falling all over logical fallacies.

I have no interest in demonizing the other team, they're doing that all by themselves, I do however want to vote them out. I don't need to make shit up to make the argument either.

Congratulations! Your video, Fox Cub Comes to People for Help, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 6 Badge!

Your video, Fox Cub Comes to People for Help, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 10 Badge!

Come on people!
*promote *quality

For all that you guys care I'll add this: I'm far happier, and feel far safer here in the UK knowing that there aren't weapons everywhere. Police here don't carry guns as standard practice.

Unfortunately I can't quickly find exactly corresponding figures for the UK and America, but this article on wikipedia shows the US had over 10 deaths per 100,000 citizens in 2009, and the UK had 0.25 deaths per 100,000 citizens in 2011.

Come on people, do you really think having more guns around makes you safer? The figures show you're 40 times more likely to be killed by a gun in America than in the UK.

come on people.
*promote

Isn't someone back for Vengeance every time? Wasn't this the same as the first remake and the last of the TNG movies as well? Come on people, I want some hard sci fi like the series.

The series were much better than the movies, because they could calm down for a second.

does the "rage fest" come from people on videosift who watch 20min of a video where nothing ever happens?