I adore Lindsey's performances, but I'm still trying to comprehend how anyone can think that a wispy flowing dress like that is best finished with pseudo-combat boots. It's just jarring.

I did the "master cleanse" once for about a week. After that I felt like I was doing more harm then anything beneficial.

The most important thing is a healthy diet. The past month I have literary been detoxing.... really, I should have gone to rehab - that is how bad my alcohol problem has been The key to my success (10+ years of drinking 5+ drinks -pretty much every single day) - I started drinking two Kombucha's a day. There is no real evidence that Kombucha has health benefits (it even contains a small amount of alcohol). But, it has been a fine replacement for alcohol and has worked for me, it also doesn't contain many calories, so I've been sober, feeling good, losing a little weight and probably saving some money. It may be a "pseudo-scientific" product, but it's way better than any of the alternatives, as the fermented tea is a little like having an actual drink.

Another detox product is a herb called Kratom. This can be used in place of an alcohol or opiate addiction to overcome sometimes deadly withdrawal symptoms. Some people in the medical profession even use it for their aches & pains as they do not want to be on pharmaceutical drugs... but the DEA is going to be scheduling it as a Schedule I drug. Fucking... idiots....

sign the peitiion: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/please-do-not-make-kratom-schedule-i-substance

I've heard this revisionist history BS so many times now I just can't stand it anymore. There was no magical 'gifting' of Palestinian land to invading European Jews. That's a completely baseless self justification for Middle Eastern anti-jewish hate mongering.

Jewish people were a significant percentage of the population in Palestine long before the Nazi's and their ilk started making Europe look unpleasant. They were Palestinians themselves, not invaders. Both Arab and Jewish Palestinians lived side by side in Palestine for a long, long time before the 1940s. Clearly, come the 1940's there was a large influx of Jewish people from Europe. Calling them 'invaders' versus refugees though seems an easy call given the holocaust and Nazi occupation of the whole of Europe. Still, you insist on calling them invaders. I don't have words for how disgusting that is.

So, in the mid 1940's we have a Palestine loaded with Jewish and Arab Palestinians, plus a good number of Jewish refugees. The tensions between those groups escalates into a full on civil war. Not an invasion, but a civil war between Jewish and Arab palestinians where the only group remotely fitting the 'invader' role are holocaust survivor refugees now in a country were there is AGAIN a war against them on the basis of being Jews. I'm not sure I think they are as callously the aggressor. What is more, upon the UN mandating a two state solution to the whole mess, the Jewish Palestinians immediately accepted. The Arab Palestinians though appealed to the Arab league, and many of the leaders within it that stood alongside the Nazi's pontificating solutions to 'the problem'. So now a fledgling independent Jewish state spent it's first day receiving a join declaration of war upon it by all it's neighbouring countries that each out numbered it grossly. I again can't but see the Israeli fighting as defensive. In fact, I must insist it was an existential fight that, should they have lost, would have us discussing the second and even worse holocaust of the European Jews that fled to Palestine.

But I know it's popular today among pseudo intellectual circles to just declare Israel an invasion and occupation by a foreign army of vastly militarily superior super jews. It's a fantasy though, and it's one that was scripted up by hateful racists to justify their hatred. None of that says anything about white-washing Israeli policies in the decades following. If you want to call them invaders from the start though you are speaking a truly horrific set of lies.

Agreed.

They managed to turn a treatise on Nietzsche's abyss and the nature of Anarchy & Fascism; into a one sided fairytale about extreme neo-conservatism vs pseudo-liberal collectivism.

& don't get me started on the fucking "eggy in a basket"!

V is supposed to be a god-damned monster, not a relatable hero.

Reading V after seeing this film was what made me truly understand why Alan Moore wants nothing to do with film adaptations.

Is there anything more to this story yet? Has any real news outlet said anything? All I can find is a bunch of links to obviously partisan blogs and Enquirer-esque pseudo sites.

Influence is different than belief. People believe in God. People were influenced by many evil men. In this case it is the same. Lie detectors are "mystical" and "fun." Much in the same way Ouija boards are fun as when you are a kid. Yeah, a few take it to the next level, but again it is not "massive amounts of people."

And look at this. "You are not the father," followed by massive antics. "The lie detector determined that was a lie," followed by massive antics. Again, no one gives two shits about the test, they want to see the bullshit. Let me pose this (and answer it please,) do you think people would watch pop culture if it was bland just because it had a lie detector test? Of course not, because no one gives...two shits

In this regard I am actually insulting American intellect far more than if they believed in a pseudo science, lol. Those people are pathetic, just like Springer people.

And I can see the value--if it makes you happy by all means. I am just justifying why I downvoted it (for blowing up the numbers and shifting blame.)

Also, Adam even disagrees with you! Lol; he says at the end about police departments using it to obtain confessions and it not being real, and the police say "yeah we know that!" Ie., police use it as a tool of influence to scared people. What people do fear is the jury not caring that a detector is inadmissible, they fear it won't matter because perception is 9/10ths of the law.

Unfortunately, I disagree. Far too many people believe lie detectors work, in the same way many believe finger prints are completely unique and identifying them is a science...it's not, that's why computers can't be used to identify fingerprints, it takes a human 'fingerprint artist'. Even many law enforcement agencies still use polygraphs as factual tools.

Wait...so in your second paragraph you admit that many probably really believe in lie detectors...but because that doesn't make them degenerates.....um.....what?!? If only SOME Africans believe raping a virgin cures AIDS, you seem to be saying that educating them about their mistaken belief is dumb and a thing to ridicule...ignoring the immense damage those few can do with their mistaken beliefs.

So, you have personal experience with the fallacy of lie detectors, and so you assume everyone knows they don't work? You give others too much credit, I think.

Many law enforcement agencies still treat polygraph results as fact, and have actually tried many times to have them admitted in court as evidence....just like fingerprints, eye witness identification, and even psychics. perhaps most know it's pseudo science, but enough don't know, or don't understand what that means, that pounding it into their heads that it's junk is not just reasonable, it's a necessity.

I agree with everything you said brycewi. And it would apply here too IF Adam was providing information that wasn't well known by nearly everyone today. Most people believe lie detectors are pseudo science. It is not even comparable to global warming, and even less than anti-vaccines (Or if this is somehow untrue, then Adam doesn't provide how truly well believed this phenomenon is as he prattles on.) So that is where we would vary significantly on, not that the service of providing debunking of something taken as true is important/unimportant.

Yes, some people believe it works. Others watch it on talk shows and such for entertainment and even some law enforcement use it for confessional purposes. We get that. But then again some Africans believe raping a virgin will cure AIDs...does that mean their country is a bunch of degenerates? No, because only a few do.

Adam goes off on this rant based on information in what, the 90s? When everyone had this unshakable faith in the lie detector? My family's entire life rested on one of these machines at one time, so I know. (It didn't turn out good, lets leave it at that.)

Further, we differentiate three "uses" of the lie detector.
1-Entertainment:
A-Nobody believes it works, just like nobody believes Jerry Springer or Wrestling isn't fake.
B-Lumping those people in with those who do believe is disingenuous at best, manipulative at worst.
2-Law Enforcement:
A-They really don't care as long as they obtain guilty confessions. In other words, they already know (think) they have the bad guy and use it as an interrogation techniques.
B-You can argue with this practice as shady and deceptive (ironic isn't it?) but we shouldn't confuse belief with reliance.
3-Excluding the examples above, since they DON'T believe, those in the ultra fringe don't constitute "widely accepted."

I'm not a parent, but I am a pseudo-uncle to plenty of kids and yes, I considered them when I saw this.

Basically, I worry that a modern peanuts will water down what made the originals special.

I like your point a lot and totally agree with it. If they add a sister championship class, it'd be great to see the existing one renamed. So although their action of adding women as pseudo-equals is great, they obviously aren't stomping their feet to promote equality. "Look, we renamed it to 'MEN's bantamweight champion' aren't we great and progressive!"

It's definitely like @GenjiKilpatrick says, that it's business driven, but my reply to that is: so what? To me that's kind of a huge part of the point.

The WNBA, WPGA, etc. exist as separate organizations probably in large part because they carry on different advertising relationships and get different television airing days/times and different venues, etc.

To me it's a pretty big deal that the UFC's business is relying on the fact that women competitors can just be thrown right into the same pay-per-views, advertising, venues, etc. as the men. That they can do that and that they do do that means they aren't second-class fighters and they are as good as the men in generating business.

No Bob, you have failed.
You and all the other citizens of the US. You allowed your government to became a corrupt, for-sale pseudo democracy. Why? Because you voted for the wrong fucking people or didn't vote at all.
Maybe I'm wrong but my instincts tell me you vote republican. That's even worse. While you got your panties in a knot over the two gays down the street trying to marry, your party leaders sell the future of your country to the highest bidder. They're throwing one ridiculous diversion after another at you (Obama ain't american, Benghazi!, The gays!1!1), which you gobble up like the good boy you're supposed to be, while they redefine free speech as money donations and bribery as lobbying. Corporations ain't people, my friend. But who cares? As long as we build a big ass fence on our border.
The problem is you. You have a vote, a voice and you could use it to put the right people in power. What have you done with it?

$400+ seems crazy expensive for glasses that offer a pseudo cure.
I think I'll wait until they can inject the cure directly into my eyeballs.

@newtboy With contentious topics like this, the conversation is barely "adult".

It's nitpicky and tangential because everyone thinks they alone are adding some great insight to the discussion.

@Babymech hopped on the "Anita doesn't owe anyone anything" cart.

@Trancecoach was closer to base but then got all "you see, it's really the blacks that are the problem"

@ChaosEngine choose the "well youtube comments are generally insulting & abusive.. therefore it's okay to block valid criticism too!"

Great, what does that have to do with the message of the speaker.
Or my point of "hey, why are you completely avoiding the overall message of the speaker"

Furthermore, what's the difference between Baby's condescending tone and my outright insults?

Both are belittling & incongruent with "adult" behavior/conversation.

Ultimately, he too is trying to swat down argument/opinion that doesn't mesh with his.

Regardless of my brash way of speaking, my points are still valid.

I do my research. I don't talk about topics I'm ignorant on.
And as I said, I was once a fan of Anita Sarkeesian and her videos.

Then I ran into her bullshit.

There's tons of evidence on youtube that points out Sarkeesian's hypocrisy.

So if you're uninformed, why not take it upon yourself.. to educate yourself.

You folks are barely any better then lantern or bobknight with your knee-jerky devils' advocate defense of a pseudo-intellectual prestige-hound who is unscrupulous in the way she pursues her agenda.

Next you're gonna tell me that somehow Bill Cosby isn't a date-rapist.

"Well you know, it was only 25-30 women with identical experiences/anecdotes. ..MJ is still definitely a pederast tho."

My point here is:

You all frame this video with your personal opinion BEFORE analyzing the entirety of it's message & context.

I get that, because it's a pot-stirrer.
But seriously, if you just think it out:

A - Gamergate is first world problem bullshit
B - It has garnered unwarranted hype and a counter-cult of white-knight SJW supporters.
C - It's being conflated with an ACTUAL very serious set of issues.
Online Harassment. Slut shaming. The depiction & plight of genders in pop culture. etc.
D - Actual victims & movements, ON BOTH SIDES, are being undermined by this frenzy.

Juxtapose that with the brutal home invasion & sexual assault..

Then ask yourself if the nitpicky personal opinion you're about to express maintains the situation & context.

Otherwise, you end up expressing terrible mindless thoughts like @Babymech.
in effect - "regardless of her peer's brutal rape.. she has no right to expect an outspoken proponent of women's rights.. to respond to her.. or call attention to the most disparaged & vulnerable/easily victimized members of society, female sex workers"

This is why the videosift community can barely be taken seriously.

It's like 4chan flamewars for boring old people.

..now everyone is on my case for [aggressively] pointing this out.



PHO PHO PHO PHO PHO Bun cha gio, mmm.

That is completely ridiculous.

From the title of the video, to its subject, to the description, and on down through a number of the commentators , Sarkeesian has been held up as an example of 'Modern Feminism'.

I'm not sure which is more ludicrous, the thought that one pseudo celeb your not fond of can by, allegedly, self-appointment define millions of other people, or that somehow @Babymech was the one to present her that way. I think the reality of this is some people want desperately to make Sarkeesian the face of modern feminisom, and i suspect many of those, are not in any way feminists.

The moment you banish God...eye-eating creatures cease to exist?

What we have here is a failure to understand. Why is anyone asking this pseudo-intellectual any questions at all? You can't expect much in the way of profundity. He's a performer. He's an ex-con. I'll grant his intelligence, but intelligence won't get you that far.

Ask someone who spends his life in meditation and you will find far greater answers. Ask Krishnamurti or Tolle or just about any one else. Why are you wasting time with an actor of all people?