>> ^Issykitty:

Actual astounding commentary copied/pasted from YT comments:

"I'm tired of the MUSLIM pResident not taking any action and ruining r reputation by bowing to these TERRORISTS in PAKISTAN.Talk to r congressmen they will find a way to show his BIRTH CERTIFICATE from KENYA.We need this tea party movement grow so that we can go back to the principles of our founding fathers.Allow slavery and segregation in certain states so that we can keep the minorities in line so they don't cause too much trouble because it worked in the past.TEA PARTY '12!"
TeaPartyAryan (<----- Yeah. NO RACISM.)

Somewhere deep inside my brain, a homunculus just hung himself.

Actual astounding commentary copied/pasted from YT comments:


"I'm tired of the MUSLIM pResident not taking any action and ruining r reputation by bowing to these TERRORISTS in PAKISTAN.Talk to r congressmen they will find a way to show his BIRTH CERTIFICATE from KENYA.We need this tea party movement grow so that we can go back to the principles of our founding fathers.Allow slavery and segregation in certain states so that we can keep the minorities in line so they don't cause too much trouble because it worked in the past.TEA PARTY '12!"

TeaPartyAryan (<----- Yeah. NO RACISM.)

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Lions Endangered in Kenya. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

nice to see QMs' racism is still alive... why does it matter Obama is from hawaii and has relatives in kenya... seems to matter a lot to your racist brain.. you know hawaii is part of the US...so you have a problem with his african side... so you must just be racist fail troll. see thats how we connect dots in reality.

Kenya Believe it?

>> ^NetRunner:

I've been thinking it might be worth having a godwin channel.
It should include any hyperbolic comparison to a totalitarian dictator (and/or his regime) though, and not narrowly limited to Hitler/Nazi comparisons.


How about we generalize it more? How about #fallacy? So few people even properly understand Godwin's Law that I'd hate to see it be the namesake of a channel, especially one that covers more than just that.

>> ^NetRunner:

I also think we need a delusion channel. This would be for the "Obama was born in Kenya", "Vaccinations cause mental retardation", strain of lies. They're not true, but they're not really lies per se -- the people saying them seem to believe they're true, they're just delusional.
It'd also give rude atheists the chance to slap it on religious videos for added hilarity and hijinx.

#lies does actually cover this, despite its title.

Any videos stating,showing or blowing the whistle on blatant falsehoods are welcome here.

I've been thinking it might be worth having a *godwin channel.

It should include any hyperbolic comparison to a totalitarian dictator (and/or his regime) though, and not narrowly limited to Hitler/Nazi comparisons.

I also think we need a *delusion channel. This would be for the "Obama was born in Kenya", "Vaccinations cause mental retardation", strain of lies. They're not true, but they're not really lies per se -- the people saying them seem to believe they're true, they're just *delusional.

It'd also give rude atheists the chance to slap it on religious videos for added hilarity and hijinx.

Kenya, 2004. Climbing to the top of a small mountain I never thought I was going to make it up. I sprinted the last 100 or so metres up to the summit through cloud forest and the trees opened up to the most amazing view. So exhilarating. That whole day was unreal. Ran down that mountain after our Masai guide, drank a cold Kenyan beer on top of a massive rock overlooking miles and miles of Acacia trees, catching the occasional fleeting glimpse of Elephants or Giraffe picking their way through as the sun set. I never thought the real Africa would live up to Africa I'd seen in nature documentaries...then it did.

>> ^dannym3141:

@Skeeve don't forget, nothing you say would convince a conspiracy theorist off this idea. Because nothing can convince them off it - no authority is high enough because their nature makes them question authority. The only way they'll change is by letting them go and see for themselves and find the evidence glaring them in the face, but how the hell do you do that with a building that burned down years ago?
These people are so quick to shout "Hah, that building wouldn't fall down in a fire!" but honestly, what do you people know about that? What do any of you really know about the internal structure of a high rise or its construction, or exactly what a fire in a high rise can do? Do you even know what a fire in a normal room can do? Are you sure you're not guessing?


It's worse than just "questioning authority" -- questioning authority can be a very positive thing.

We're talking about the people who think Obama was born in Kenya, that global warming is a hoax, that vaccines are dangerous, and that the government is gonna send the army to take away their guns any day now.

America seems to have been totally overrun by a strain of people who have absolute, unshakeable faith in things that aren't supported by even a shred of evidence, or worse, are demonstrably false.

They aren't questioning authority -- they're lashing out at people who question their authority.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I don't think it's the right thing to do now - but maybe in biblical times when hygiene was a real issue, it was a way to give a male offspring a head start against the many ailments that were around at the time. I don't think it's a practice that was just pulled out of a hat- it has some practical background, just like dietary laws. >> ^hpqp:

@dag and @lucky760
Don't be fooled by the studies saying circumcision prevents the transmission of HIV etc. Several factors render those studies' results doubtful and/or moot. For one, many of them concern 3rd world countries where simple hygiene is still an issue (e.g. Kenya). The odds ratios are very low. I would also add (with reserves though) that cultural bias may play a role in some of those studies (look at the names).
Most doctors and doctor associations disprove of neonatal circumcision btw: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_analysis_of_circumcision.
But even if circumcision were proven to drastically reduce the transmission of STDs and/or penile cancer, I would still be against it. How many kids have sex when they're babies? Can't they be given the choice when they reach their teens? As for penile cancer, it tends to develop in old age (60 and on), so plenty of time for a "preventive" chop if one chooses to do so to one's own body.

@dag and @lucky760

Don't be fooled by the studies saying circumcision prevents the transmission of HIV etc. Several factors render those studies' results doubtful and/or moot. For one, many of them concern 3rd world countries where simple hygiene is still an issue (e.g. Kenya). The odds ratios are very low. I would also add (with reserves though) that cultural bias may play a role in some of those studies (look at the names).

Most doctors and doctor associations disprove of neonatal circumcision btw: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_analysis_of_circumcision.

But even if circumcision were proven to drastically reduce the transmission of STDs and/or penile cancer, I would still be against it. How many kids have sex when they're babies? Can't they be given the choice when they reach their teens? As for penile cancer, it tends to develop in old age (60 and on), so plenty of time for a "preventive" chop if one chooses to do so to one's own body.

It's attacking others like a cross between an elementary school bully or a overzealous used car salesman is what it is. And that crap isn't criticism; it's name calling.

OK, so you agree then that:

The earth is on average on a warming trend.
CO2 is in fact a greenhouse gas.
CO2 levels are increasing.

You just don't believe humans are causing any of the above, correct?

FYI, I didn't say the consensus opinion is always right. If the consensus opinion is based on solid science and fact, then it tends to be correct. Good scientific theories are produced by solid experiments, data I just want to be clear I'm not saying that human induced climate change is a scientific law. I'm saying it's a theory, one based on mounting evidence that supports it. I'm perfectly willing to suggest that the theory is not 100% correct, or could end up proven to be false altogether. I do not have a vested interest to a preconceived outcome.

But the evidence is increasingly overwhelming that it is occurring, and it is caused by humans. I don't need this issue to underscore a core believe of mine that free markets left unchecked do societies severe damage. I've already got hundreds of examples of that. (Unsafe working conditions, child labor, unsafe to consume goods, massive banking fraud, environmental damage other than climate change, unlivable wages, just to name a few)


>> ^quantumushroom:

LOL, you don't try to limit personal attacks. You call Obama "Obummer", "His Earness", various derivatives from the falsehood that he was born in Kenya, etc. You also label people liberals, when in truth, they're moderates, or even moderate Republican, and you suggest having liberal beliefs is somehow innately bad instead of something you disagree with only. You're not fooling anybody.
Only you can fool yourself. Since I don't know HIS EARNESS personally, it's not a personal attack on ODUMBO. Any real leader (or pretend leader) should expect criticism. I have my own standards for who is a liberal and who is Kenyan, and don't expect anyone else to give a crap.

So, I'm just gonna point out once again that your claim that the science behind human contributing climate change is fake, yet you did not identify which part of the theory is false. You immediately launched into a political discussion about giving up rights, etc.
Since you offered: "(You're saying) CO2 increases are not due to human activity?"
That's right. There's no solid objective evidence that man-made industrial activity has a direct, notable effect on climate. Weather is weather and there's nothing puny humans can do about it. For now.
BTW, you do realize that conflicting scientific theories don't make other theories incorrect, right?
Nor do they make the "consensus" opinion correct by brute majority.
You of course have a vested interest due to your desperate clinging belief that capitalist systems and policies are the only right ones to follow, and it's virtually impossible to deal with the problem of human induced climate change with that philosophy.

It's like you're finally figuring out what the alarmists are trying to do! It's all about control and has nothing to do with 'saving the earth'.
Therefore, you flat refuse to look objectively at the data we have, which the majority of it suggests human induced climate change.
This idea had its moment in the sun. It failed. Public opinion is against the alarmists. Capitalism works, socialism "kind of" works until if flops (Greece).
The climate heretic has spoken.

LOL, you don't try to limit personal attacks. You call Obama "Obummer", "His Earness", various derivatives from the falsehood that he was born in Kenya, etc. You also label people liberals, when in truth, they're moderates, or even moderate Republican, and you suggest having liberal beliefs is somehow innately bad instead of something you disagree with only. You're not fooling anybody.

Only you can fool yourself. Since I don't know HIS EARNESS personally, it's not a personal attack on ODUMBO. Any real leader (or pretend leader) should expect criticism. I have my own standards for who is a liberal and who is Kenyan, and don't expect anyone else to give a crap.

So, I'm just gonna point out once again that your claim that the science behind human contributing climate change is fake, yet you did not identify which part of the theory is false. You immediately launched into a political discussion about giving up rights, etc.

Since you offered: "(You're saying) CO2 increases are not due to human activity?"

That's right. There's no solid objective evidence that man-made industrial activity has a direct, notable effect on climate. Weather is weather and there's nothing puny humans can do about it. For now.

BTW, you do realize that conflicting scientific theories don't make other theories incorrect, right?

Nor do they make the "consensus" opinion correct by brute majority.

You of course have a vested interest due to your desperate clinging belief that capitalist systems and policies are the only right ones to follow, and it's virtually impossible to deal with the problem of human induced climate change with that philosophy.

It's like you're finally figuring out what the alarmists are trying to do! It's all about control and has nothing to do with 'saving the earth'.

Therefore, you flat refuse to look objectively at the data we have, which the majority of it suggests human induced climate change.

This idea had its moment in the sun. It failed. Public opinion is against the alarmists. Capitalism works, socialism "kind of" works until if flops (Greece).

The climate heretic has spoken.

LOL, you don't try to limit personal attacks. You call Obama "Obummer", "His Earness", various derivatives from the falsehood that he was born in Kenya, etc. You also label people liberals, when in truth, they're moderates, or even moderate Republican, and you suggest having liberal beliefs is somehow innately bad instead of something you disagree with only. You're not fooling anybody.

So, I'm just gonna point out once again that your claim that the science behind human contributing climate change is fake, yet you did not identify which part of the theory is false. You immediately launched into a political discussion about giving up rights, etc.

So I'll ask again, which part is it you object to? That CO2 levels are rising? That CO2 causes a greenhouse effect, aka warming on average? That CO2 increases are not due to human activity? That global temperatures are actually rising? What exactly?!

BTW, you do realize that conflicting scientific theories don't make other theories incorrect, right? There was once competing theories of the structure of our galaxy - heliocentric and geocentric. There was of course the third belief that the earth was actually flat, supported by an elephant standing on a turtle. The existence of the geocentric and other models do not disprove the heliocentric model in the slightest.

You of course have a vested interest due to your desperate clinging belief that capitalist systems and policies are the only right ones to follow, and it's virtually impossible to deal with the problem of human induced climate change with that philosophy. Therefore, you flat refuse to look objectively at the data we have, which the majority of it suggests human induced climate change. It's like a priest who wouldn't dare try to reinterpret/retranslate passages in their holy texts in light of scientific data that proves the whole world is flat supported by an elephant on a turtle theory is BS.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Dude, you label your opposition socialists, communists, call Obama childish names, etc. all the dang time! That's all you do! You haven't proven a single thing with any credible scientific data. Not one thing. There are some basic facts that illustrate global warming:
I call 'em as I see 'em but try to limit personal attacks (I hope). Those with opposing viewpoints to mine are usually variants of communists, socialists, anarcho-libertarians and even liberals, aka Socialist-Lite.
What precisely do you object to about the theory?
The worldwide power grab in the name of "safety". It's odd how we pick our battles, don't we? The same guy who hates the Patriot Act as limiting his freedom may simply hand it over when told it will extend the life of a dolphin. Or vice versa.
Do you object to CO2 being deemed a greenhouse gas? That CO2 levels are in fact rising? That humans are the main culprit to CO2 levels rising? That temperatures globally are rising? What?!
PROOF PROOF PROOF. For every theory there is another opposing it, and a third plausible theory that has nothing to do with the original argument.
Remember, credibility is the burden of those trying to change society to suit their vision.

And btw, it's a silly argument that we don't know for sure because it's a scientific theory. If the best evidence suggests global destruction caused by this phenomena, then it would be wise to move as quickly as possible to take action to stop it. It's like sitting on railroad tracks, hearing a train horn in the distance, feeling rumblings on the ground, but deciding you're not gonna move until it's too late. After all, the train could stop well short. It could be someone making It could be someone making train noises, with small earthquakes going at the same time.
The best evidence doesn't point to a looming crisis. TIME IS RUNNING OUT! Do you know where you hear that the most? Commercials. Artificial countdowns. HURRY! THIS SALE ENDS SATURDAY! It's a sales tactic to get people off their butts and ACT, without thinking.
You guys can just write me off as another one who refuses to see THE TRUTH(tm)
Provided I don't get hit by a natural-gas-powered bus, I'll be here, you'll be here and the earth will be here and doing fine 50 years from now.
Climate change alarmist alarmed they’re wrong

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?