No better than an 80's drug hysteria video, and even on that level it fails. Does anyone really give a crap about Family Guy characters? They're all one-dimensional punchlines.

The writers were likely warned by the network not to make shroomin' appear to be enjoyable, just like no TV show depicts a successful professional kicking back with some weed.

Lol typical Coco, funny as hell. The 'I lost my virginity to REM' had me lmao. Though I personally lost my virginity to Def Leppard. Hysteria album brings back so many memories lol.

You are truly a moron. I've tried not to say so, but you are. Your conspiracy theory videos and this retarded attack on immunisation just prove it.

Widespread vaccination has the potential to reduce cervical cancer deaths around the world by as much as two-thirds, if all women were to take the vaccine and if protection turns out to be long-term. In addition, the vaccines can reduce the need for medical care, biopsies, and invasive procedures associated with the follow-up from abnormal Pap tests, thus helping to reduce health care costs and anxieties related to abnormal Pap tests and follow-up procedures.
—American National Cancer Institute, [22]
(source)

If you're all fine with NOT trying to prevent two thirds of cervical cancer deaths based on a misguided fear of immunisations, then have at it sir, and then don't bitch when any woman you knows dies of it.

Go and look up what immunisation has done for the world, go on...

Children DIED because of the hysteria created around the MMR vaccine by the slime ball Andrew Wakefield. Children who would NOT have died did so because idiots like you made parents incorrectly fear a vaccine, so their children were not immunised, infection rates sky-rocketed, and children DIED.

I mock the fucking shit out of you because you are wrong, and your decisions put the lives of other people at risk too, not just your own. There's no two ways about it, vaccinations are a HUGE benefit to society, a HUGE life saver, a HUGE preventer of pain and suffering.

Do you use homoeopathic remedies to ward off evil do you?


>> ^marbles:

>> ^spoco2:
>> ^marinara:
mercury causes mental retardation, vaccines contain mercury, therefore vaccines=retardation.

A 6-ounce can of tuna fish contains an average of 17 micrograms of mercury, vaccines that contain mercury contain roughly 25 micrograms.
You think you're going to become mentally retarded by eating two cans of tuna?
No?
Then what you're saying is retarded.
That sort of knee-jerk, mindless shit is what causes people to stop getting their kids immunised and starts getting kids killed.

There's a big difference between ingesting mercury and injecting it straight into the vein.
Do junkies eat heroin? Why the fuck do you think they go to the trouble of injecting smack, why don't they just eat it?
Hardly any mercury is absorbed through ingesting, like around .01%. So that would be 1/1000 of 17 micrograms actually absorbed or .0017 micrograms / 6oz can of tuna.
And what do we actually know about mercury? Well, we know it's HIGHLY toxic. Let's go to the wikipedia page for Mercury poisoning:
Mercury is such a highly reactive toxic agent that it is difficult to identify its specific mechanism of damage, and much remains unknown about the mechanism. It damages the central nervous system, endocrine system, kidneys, and other organs, and adversely affects the mouth, gums, and teeth. Exposure over long periods of time or heavy exposure to mercury vapor can result in brain damage and ultimately death. Mercury and its compounds are particularly toxic to fetuses and infants. Women who have been exposed to mercury in pregnancy have sometimes given birth to children with serious birth defects (see Minamata disease).
Mercury exposure in young children can have severe neurological consequences, preventing nerve sheaths from forming properly. Mercury inhibits the formation of myelin.
/source

And since we're at it, let's have a peak at Thiomersal's wikipedia page:
Thiomersal is very toxic by inhalation, ingestion, and in contact with skin, with a danger of cumulative effects. ...
Few studies of the toxicity of thiomersal in humans have been performed. Cases have been reported of severe poisoning by accidental exposure or attempted suicide, with some fatalities. Animal experiments suggest that thiomersal rapidly dissociates to release ethylmercury after injection; that the disposition patterns of mercury are similar to those after exposure to equivalent doses of ethylmercury chloride; and that the central nervous system and the kidneys are targets, with lack of motor coordination being a common sign. Similar signs and symptoms have been observed in accidental human poisonings. The mechanisms of toxic action are unknown.
/source
But you can keep talking out of your ass like you actually have a fucking clue. And keep shooting up your children with neurotoxins too, while mocking those that oppose forced inoculations.
BTW statist idiot, the video is referring to the HPV vaccine. Why do fucking 10 year olds need to be vaccinated for STDs?

We just finished this same pant-pissing hysteria in my country, before the politicians saved us all by 'banning' synthetic cannabanoids via laws requiring them to be proved safe before going on sale.

I'm sure that's going to work out well.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

I sort of wish this wasn't a comedy. Women complaining of PMS like symptoms around this time period were either given one of two things (depending on the doctor); either a vibrator, or they were forced against their will into an asylum.
I'm sure it will be a good movie but the truth still retains the title of being much more interesting than fiction.


Too soon? /smirk

Your video, Hysteria (trailer), 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 5 Badge!

>> ^berticus:

Speaking of Freud (who was a fucking asshat)... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=664eq7BXQcM
Hooooooo boy.


What? He's just having sex with a crazy woman...who among us hasn't done that?

I think it's a good thing to play up the comedic aspect of something that was also terribly tragic at the time. Laughter can be very cathartic.


::looks forward to a comedy about the end of religious superstition::

>> ^JiggaJonson:

I sort of wish this wasn't a comedy. Women complaining of PMS like symptoms around this time period were either given one of two things (depending on the doctor); either a vibrator, or they were forced against their will into an asylum.
I'm sure it will be a good movie but the truth still retains the title of being much more interesting than fiction.

I dont buy the argument that it had any practical health benefits in the bronze age or anywhen else. It was a massive way to show god whose side you were on by cutting a lump of your(or someone elses) penis off. Performing surgery circa 6,000BC on a newborn (or adult) with a sharpened stone is not going to increase anyones chances of survival. Look at the African tribes that carry out the same ritual today, the families have to wait to see which of the young men even survived the surgery, nevermind the ensuing infections.

If it was a detriment to survival we wouldnt have one, other mammals wouldnt have them, they are there for a reason and has been said for decades about circumcision "Its a cure searching for a disease". The latest attempt to find a disease is the AIDS/STD studies in Africa, none of the findings of which have been borne out in further studies.

I have yet to hear of a boy dying because he didnt have a circumcision, but I have heard (locally) of a baby boy who died as a result of a circumcision, an african immigrant whose mother was following her religious/tribal custom while living in Ireland for example.

I was loling when I first did some reading about this stuff online, so much hysteria about foreskins from people who dont even know what a normal penis looks like flaccid or erect, about how much special maintenance they require etc. (none), propaganda as far as I'm concerned.

My 2 cents

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

MASS HYSTERIA!


But it was fine until dickless here shut down the containment unit.

MASS HYSTERIA!

dannym3141:

Claiming that people should stop burning fossil fuels would HEAVILY dent the income of just about every country because of how much tax they can charge from it. Britain's economy is almost based on fossil fuel tax. How can you possibly argue that they are a politically influenced source over fossil fuel use when they criticise such a money earner?

Politics aside, fossil fuels remain the cheapest, most abundant source of energy, and new supplies of it are being discovered all the time. I never said people should stop burning them.

I hesitate to even mention that "science" as a global community is above reproach in ways that hardly anything else can be due to the method of a scientist. If you are not performing science for truth and discovery, you are not a scientist, so you're not part of the community anymore. That's why it's above reproach. I'm sure you'll argue with me about that, but i know that you'd argue about the time of day if you were proven to be wrong.

I'm not arguing, but I am astonished you would believe scientists are above politics (and reproach), not because the scientific method is flawed, but because scientists are fallible humans with their own beliefs and interests. As W. Pennypacker said in so many words, governments reward scientists which confirm a pre-determined outcome (like secondhand smoke killing 100 billion people a year). Junk science is real; it may not be everywhere, but it's out there. And not just "the oil companies" which have "scientitians" in their corner.

Another thing, gang. Over the last few years, global warming hysteria has been relentless. It's the alarmists who declared, "The debate is over." There was even one smug a-hole who compared "climate deniers" to Holocaust deniers. Classy! There was the faked data scandal. These are not the actions of scientists confident in their conclusions. Yet the lazy media continues to back the alarmists without question.

100 storylines blaming climate change as the problem:

1. The deaths of Aspen trees in the West
2. Incredible shrinking sheep
3. Caribbean coral deaths
4. Eskimos forced to leave their village
5. Disappearing lake in Chile
6. Early heat wave in Vietnam
7. Malaria and water-borne diseases in Africa
8. Invasion of jellyfish in the Mediterranean
9. Break in the Arctic Ice Shelf
10. Monsoons in India
11. Birds laying their eggs early
12. 160,000 deaths a year
13. 315,000 deaths a year
14. 300,000 deaths a year
15. Decline in snowpack in the West
16. Deaths of walruses in Alaska
17. Hunger in Nepal
18. The appearance of oxygen-starved dead zones in the oceans
19. Surge in fatal shark attacks
20. Increasing number of typhoid cases in the Philippines
21. Boy Scout tornado deaths
22. Rise in asthma and hayfever
23. Duller fall foliage in 2007
24. Floods in Jakarta
25. Radical ecological shift in the North Sea
26. Snowfall in Baghdad
27. Western tree deaths
28. Diminishing desert resources
29. Pine beetles
30. Swedish beetles
31. Severe acne
32. Global conflict
33. Crash of Air France 447
34. Black Hawk Down incident
35. Amphibians breeding earlier
36. Flesh-eating disease
37. Global cooling
38. Bird strikes on US Airways 1549
39. Beer tastes different
40. Cougar attacks in Alberta
41. Suicide of farmers in Australia
42. Squirrels reproduce earlier
43. Monkeys moving to Great Rift Valley in Kenya
44. Confusion of migrating birds
45. Bigger tuna fish
46. Water shortages in Las Vegas
47. Worldwide hunger
48. Longer days
49. Earth spinning faster
50. Gender balance of crocodiles
51. Skin cancer deaths in UK
52. Increase in kidney stones in India
53. Penguin chicks frozen by global warming
54. Deaths of Minnesota moose
55. Increased threat of HIV/AIDS in developing countries
56. Increase of wasps in Alaska
57. Killer stingrays off British coasts
58. All societal collapses since the beginning of time
59. Bigger spiders
60. Increase in size of giant squid
61. Increase of orchids in UK
62. Collapse of gingerbread houses in Sweden
63. Cow infertility
64. Conflict in Darfur
65. Bluetongue outbreak in UK cows
66. Worldwide wars
67. Insomnia of children worried about global warming
68. Anxiety problems for people worried about climate change
69. Migration of cockroaches
70. Taller mountains due to melting glaciers
71. Drowning of four polar bears
72. UFO sightings in the UK
73. Hurricane Katrina
74. Greener mountains in Sweden
75. Decreased maple in maple trees
76. Cold wave in India
77. Worse traffic in LA because immigrants moving north
78. Increase in heart attacks and strokes
79. Rise in insurance premiums
80. Invasion of European species of earthworm in UK
81. Cold spells in Australia
82. Increase in crime
83. Boiling oceans
84. Grizzly deaths
85. Dengue fever
86. Lack of monsoons
87. Caterpillars devouring 45 towns in Liberia
88. Acid rain recovery
89. Global wheat shortage; food price hikes
90. Extinction of 13 species in Bangladesh
91. Changes in swan migration patterns in Siberia
92. The early arrival of Turkey’s endangered caretta carettas
93. Radical North Sea shift
94. Heroin addiction
95. Plant species climbing up mountains
96. Deadly fires in Australia
97. Droughts in Australia
98. The demise of California’s agriculture by the end of the century
99. Tsunami in South East Asia
100. Fashion victim: the death of the winter wardrobe


Do you really expect free people to surrender to THIS?

>> ^Chaucer:

Actually, Yogi, it is your opinion that you think (or would like) a majority of the scientific community to agree about climate change being man driven. I have not seen you offer any proof to back up your claim. Therefore, it is your opinion.
Personally, I dont believe the climate change is man driven. From what I have read, it is driven more by solar activity and other natural causes. It's already proven that we have hot spells then ice ages and back to hot spells (called cycles). This is just one of those hot stages. Now I do believe that man can contribute to the environment is negative and positive ways but do not feel we are the majority factor.
A friend of my uncle used to work for the government as a scientist. One of the projects he was on was to figure out why there was acid rain around the New York area. I cant remember exactly what they found but it was something wierd like sap from the trees from further north was causing the rain to be acidic. Regardless, it was the normal course of nature. When they turned in their report to the government, the report was rejected because it did not align with the governments view that the acidic rain was cause by global warming.
The government needs and promotes global warming because it causes hysteria and takes away focus from issues that the public should really be concerned about.
>> ^Yogi:
>> ^quantumushroom:
There is nothing close to a consensus among scientists that global warming is man-made, and even if there was, a consensus does not equal scientific proof.

See this is the easiest way to argue. Deny the fundamental facts and you cannot even have the argument. Jon Stewart pointed this out awhile ago, there are facts and then their are opinions. It is a FACT that a vast majority of the scientific community agrees Climate Change is caused by mankind. Yet if you deny this, the argument is over...it's very smart, good on you QM.



I'm sorry...who the fuck are you?

Actually, Yogi, it is your opinion that you think (or would like) a majority of the scientific community to agree about climate change being man driven. I have not seen you offer any proof to back up your claim. Therefore, it is your opinion.

Personally, I dont believe the climate change is man driven. From what I have read, it is driven more by solar activity and other natural causes. It's already proven that we have hot spells then ice ages and back to hot spells (called cycles). This is just one of those hot stages. Now I do believe that man can contribute to the environment is negative and positive ways but do not feel we are the majority factor.

A friend of my uncle used to work for the government as a scientist. One of the projects he was on was to figure out why there was acid rain around the New York area. I cant remember exactly what they found but it was something wierd like sap from the trees from further north was causing the rain to be acidic. Regardless, it was the normal course of nature. When they turned in their report to the government, the report was rejected because it did not align with the governments view that the acidic rain was cause by global warming.

The government needs and promotes global warming because it causes hysteria and takes away focus from issues that the public should really be concerned about.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^quantumushroom:
There is nothing close to a consensus among scientists that global warming is man-made, and even if there was, a consensus does not equal scientific proof.

See this is the easiest way to argue. Deny the fundamental facts and you cannot even have the argument. Jon Stewart pointed this out awhile ago, there are facts and then their are opinions. It is a FACT that a vast majority of the scientific community agrees Climate Change is caused by mankind. Yet if you deny this, the argument is over...it's very smart, good on you QM.