As I'm reading today's articles about the situation in Greece/Europe, Keynes' "Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren" came to mind:

We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues. We shall be able to afford to dare to assess the money-motive at its true value.

The love of money as a possession -as distinguished from the love of money as a means to the enjoyments and realities of life- will be recognised for what it is, a somewhat disgusting morbidity, one of those semicriminal, semi-pathological propensities which one hands over with a shudder to the specialists in mental disease.

There is no such thing as news. No network reports news. Hunter Thompson damned television news for copying his Gonzo journalism. In documentary he rants angrily news existed once but they copied his magazine Gonzo style he invented which was for magazine pseudo-fact for enjoyment.

I believe its a small reason he blew himself away. That last documentary was harsh

I got all the way to 1:45 and could no longer listen to this clap trap. It's total BS 'science' put forth by someone who obviously does not understand the science he's 'explaining'.
As has been mentioned, nothing was 'dialed in' because physics forces values to remain in a narrow range. That's anthropomorphizing the laws of physics, and is simply ridiculous.
If the speed of light were different by a 'hairs breadth', it would change nothing. (I'll say that definitively because it is different depending on the medium the light travels through, btw)
If gravity were different, yes, the universe might be ever expanding or eventually collapsing, that does not erase the possibility of life, it only puts a time limit on the period that it might exist, under our current understanding of what's required for life. It might not actually limit life at all.
I hate pseudo science videos created by non scientific people with a purpose to confuse other non scientific minds into believing insanity. Downvote!

"Russell Brand destroys Nigel Farage on immigration"???
I can only assume you are joking. Brand was WAY out of his depth. In fact, much as I dislike the pseudo revolutionary, vainglorious half wit, I actually felt sorry for him. He was put firmly in his place by one astute person; "If you think you can, why don't you stand (for election)?" His response; " Mate, I'm frightened I'd become one of them." So, he doesn't even have confidence in his own childish rhetoric. He calls for anarchy just as long as he is not at the helm. He should put up, or shut up. Oh, and his call for people not to vote is one of the stupidest, most irresponsible things I have heard in a while.

I'm mostly on the same page as you, however I am also obsessed with the politics and pseudo-science of the fictional universe.

Everything is doublethink. I could shit on a piece of toast one second and then eat it the next -- and believe it was nutella.

But that's just me.

The problem with Anita Sarkeesian is that she's essentially, a hack. The whole gamergate incident has been one ugly affair, and absolutely there are valid points on both sides. But Sarkeesian is still someone who knows nothing about games, doesn't like games in the slightest, but tries to pass off as a gamer. And there are videos of just 4 years ago, of her saying to an audience she doesn't like videogames, she's not a fan. This person who doesn't even like or play videogames comes in, and starts pointing fingers around saying that this and that are wrong and that this and that must be changed. That, I think, more than anything is what pisses gamers off.

You wanna know what I think is the problem? What REALLY made this happen? Not the Zoe Quinn scandal. That was just the event that ignited the powder keg. A terrible event obviously. Her private life is nobody's business (unless it was absolutely true she got reviews from sleeping around with game journalists, which it wasn't).

The actual powder keg, was the CONSTANT barrage of pseudo-feminist and patronizing articles on sites like Kotaku. Day in and day out. A site for gamers who was, essentially, constantly offending their target audience.

Cross posted from my other video: "If the majority of Americans were anti-gun ownership, then the 2nd amendment would have already been disposed of (as has happened with most of the other amendments on the Bill of Rights).

So folks here can complain all they want, but there's never going to be any progress on the (out-of-touch) anti-gun effort in the United States. That's where most Americans seem to draw the line: "The state can do whatever (e.g., surveil its people, drone foreigners indiscriminately, devastate the dollar, etc.), but don't touch the guns." In this, it's the anti-gun contingency that remains in the minority in the U.S. Even Joe Biden campaigned on his gun ownership.

Alas, most of the (conservative, rural state and Southern state liberals, inner city minorities, or NRA-supporting, and anti-NRA) gun-owners are not among the "progressive" (pseudo-)intellectuals on Videosift."

If the majority of Americans were anti-gun ownership, then the 2nd amendment would have already been disposed of (as has happened with most of the other amendments on the Bill of Rights).

So folks here can complain all they want, but there's never going to be any progress on the (out-of-touch) anti-gun effort in the United States. That's where most Americans seem to draw the line: "The state can do whatever (e.g., surveil its people, drone foreigners indiscriminately, devastate the dollar, etc.), but don't touch the guns." In this, it's the anti-gun contingency that remains in the minority in the U.S. Even Joe Biden campaigned on his gun ownership.

Alas, most of the (conservative, rural state and Southern state liberals, inner city minorities, or NRA-supporting, and anti-NRA) gun-owners are not among the "progressive" (pseudo-)intellectuals on Videosift.

Videosift is a fascinating forum. Questions with which the greatest minds in human history have wrestled for millennia are easily disposed of in a sentence or two by the most supercilious sophomore -- and not in a nice way, either, but with a full measure of pseudo-intellectual condescension.

I don't mind if a certain amount of suspension of disbelief is required to enjoy a movie but when your writing is shitty or your basic premise is too silly that won't help. Some things just make people cringe, some tropes and clichees just become too stupid. Especially if you take yourself too seriously.
I don't have to watch "The Happening" to know it's a ridiculous movie that'll make me roll my eyes 'till I'm dizzy. Or make me laugh hysterically about it.
It's the same here. A really stupid and completely wrong pseudo-fact about brain is exploited to tell a superhero story. If the very first response you get is "Brains don't work this way. Good night!" you have a problem. And that's coming from someone who's perfectly willing to accept that gamma rays make you a green ragemonster.

^ I don't know guys, I still say if I had to choose which of these dipshits to defend it'd be the biker guy. I wouldn't defend his actions because they're obviously idiotic. Check. I get that part. But I can respect that he actually speaks his mind to pseudo-journalists like these. They're scum and are a sideways step from paparazzi. Does the biker not have a point that it's rude to film people without their authorization? Who here likes that?

You're justifying your inability to spend time with people of other races because of "shared experiences" with other white people? Buuuuuuuull-shiiiiiiiiiit. I've found that I have common ground with just about anyone in the world, just involves me trying to be a good human being and not being afraid of disagreeing or having conversation with people of differing view points. Most of my friends are worlds apart and it doesn't matter. Birds of a feather -- die together. (Whoa, that was way more ominous than intended.)

But I do agree, the banning, and fining of Donald Sterling is akin to punishing someone for thought crime. I don't understand how a comment made in private could be used in such a way. I don't agree with his racist views, or in your justified segregation, but I don't think it's a wise decision, nor a justified one, to punish anyone for having such views or even for expressing them in public, let alone private.

If you don't like someone's you have the right to ignore them and to NOT give them your money, and to convince others to shun that person. But that should NOT givbe any institution the right to go after anything in your estate.

Our justice system is a sham of personal opinion blurred into pseudo civil rights.

Anyway, people shouldn't be afraid to express their views, even if it's offensive to others.

Being stuck between political correct asshats AND conservative christian fuckbags is the real crime -- and I should be able to collect money from racist bigots AND the NAACP. (Just kidding.)

Definitely would.. if only she hadn't turned down the offer to take the Randi test.

From Wiki:

"In 2012, the James Randi Educational Foundation awarded Caputo a Pigasus Award for being, in its view, the "psychic" performer who fooled the greatest number of people with the least effort in the preceding year. A Pigasus award was also given to TLC for continuing to air the show.[59] In an article published by Wired Magazine the organization's founder James Randi explained why he believed shows like Long Island Medium were deceptive and potentially harmful to its participants:

Why do these pseudo-psychic spectacles bother those of us at the James Randi Educational Foundation? First, and foremost: They are not true. [...] But much more importantly to us, such performances seem to prey on people at their most vulnerable moments — those who have suffered the loss of loved ones — and these mediums use such grief to make a buck. Psychologists tell us this keeps the grieving stuck in their grief, rather than going through the natural stages of acceptance that are healthy.
—James Randi[1]

In June of that year, Caputo appeared in a commercial for Priceline.com in which she portrayed herself "connecting" with the late Priceline Negotiator character previously played by William Shatner.[60] However, this commercial has sparked controversy, since the commercial appears to make light of the Native American belief of smudging.[61] JREF President DJ Grothe issued a statement decrying Priceline.com: "It is difficult to watch the show and not feel heartbroken for those who are desperate to hear from the departed... and even more so if they are being manipulated by a charlatan." Grothe urged the organization to have their new spokeswoman take the James Randi Million Dollar Challenge and prove her paranormal claims."

No, that would be literary device facilitating whatever the writers want. If it's not a hero or villain, it's an object of power or a dimensional force. Or some other meaningless pseudo-scientific babble. The concept of "cosmic consonance" and the forces which balance the Marvel universe use whatever means necessary to maintain it.

Our job in the 21st century is to dismantle our obsessive desire to take root in humanity's collective canon of B.S. You'd think internet savviness would usher in this understanding, but it seems to exacerbate the emotional attachment and selfish need to require "explanation" in a fantasy world where anything can be explained with anything.

(P.S. I love comics -- just not the tendencies it creates in the readers, who see comics as words of minor gods.)

Life is a horror show but let's make the best of it and laugh. Sometimes the worst of things are the funniest; laughter itself being functionally horrific. That's called harmony. Understanding harmony, I still refuse to relinquish my anger. So I am angry that Billy suffers.

But I smile and laugh, because that is life.

And I laugh at my own inability to give up my own suffering -- my anger; to not let go of old wounds and to let rage consume my being and redirect tendrils of hostility in inappropriate, pseudo-harmony; evenly distributed to all.

It's comedy gold from a philosophical perspective.