I haven't worked it out completely, but I believe it's a very clever device that is worn on the arms (hidden by the sleeves), and somehow extends/retracts or picks up/drops with some cleverly concealed mechanism such as flexing the bicep.

OK, I watched at full res/screen a few more times...they all slow down and stop again shortly after the 'crash' and she's all floppy, then her friends release their brakes but she holds hers a few seconds to give some space between her and the one in front, then she releases her brake, partly. All that time she's flopped over like she's out, but she must have some control or she would still be on the bumper of the guy ahead.
I don't mean to say I think it didn't hurt, just that I didn't think she was completely knocked out when it looked like she was. So I'll retract "faking it" and replace with "exaggerating it".
Also, I don't think she did it on purpose, but she rear ended the guys (apparently her friends) in front of her who had stopped, again.
Admittedly, right after the crash she is on his bumper, but he does not seem concerned in the least and leaves her flopped over, like he knows something. She may have really been out for a few seconds, but I think not as long as she made out. If she is really hurt, isn't her 'friend' still the real douchebag? First for stopping short in front of her without any warning, causing the crash at least in part, and second for not helping his friend when she rear ended him 'unconscious', but instead just riding on?
The guy in back was 'tailgating' a bit, but did not seem to hit her intentionally and had no chance to brake, and may have not had enough time the first time he hit her either. Those brakes are just friction brakes, they don't stop on a dime, especially if you're a full grown man. (agreed, that's a good reason to not tailgate at full speed, so they're all douchebags?)

Interesting the way he seemed to unscrew the nozzle from his car and that the hose just lays there on the ground instead of retracting up out of the way. Some fueling stations outside the US must be much different.

That's a bit of a stretch, but ok, I retract my Outrage(tm) from my previous post. Was at work anyway, no speakers.

EDIT:
[further incentive to argue retracted]

I think you really need to just chill. My comment was just a joke (hence the sarcasm). Sorry if that offended you

You know, initially, I thought this was a good vid. Now that I've learned more about the content, I can see how unfair it is. Quite misleading. I think I have to retract my "good on you" thoughts. I'm allowed to be wrong, I think.

Elevatorgate... This topic of misogyny in atheism... This entire subject still confuses the shit out of me. How it exploded into a huge deal, whether or not it was an exaggeration... God, it still has me feeling conflicted and confused to this day. The original video that sparked the whole thing was:
http://youtu.be/uKHwduG1Frk?t=4m35s

And rewatching it - I remember why it rubbed me the wrong way. Yeah, there were a ton of reasons why the dude shouldn't have done what he did. Yes, it was creepy. Yes, poor timing. Very poor. But it's the "sexualizing me creeps me out" comment that gets me. It wasn't the the fact that she was stuck on an elevator with some creepy dude who had no tact that creeped her out. It was the sexualization. That always rubbed me wrong - but I am pretty sure it's not what she meant.

If a guy likes her and asks for coffee because he's attracted to her, that's not a big deal. But that's not what happened - that leaves out the important bits. Everything else surrounding the coffee request was a big deal - and yeah, she has the right to say "Guys, don't corner girls you don't know in the elevator to ask them out or back to your hotel room. Not a smooth move and it's really scary. Seriously." But that's not what she said creeped her out... Pretty sure that's what she meant, though. Or something close to it. I very much doubt she meant "Guys, never try to flirt with me. Sexualizing me in any way creeps me out."

Words are a bitch and people read the wrong things into them. That term "sexualized" is probably the pivotal piece of the entire "controversy." Which is a shame, since the whole experience is a valuable lesson to socially awkward, dumbass dudes: don't do the shit that guy did, it's not good.

So from this flowered all sorts of controversy... That I'm still feeling awfully confused and conflicted about. I still feel like things got blown out of proportion in areas and I DO feel like I couldn't step into these communities and speak my mind, because I'm afraid I'd just get ostracized or attacked. Which is a shame. And it's probably those feelings which fuel any frustration or anger that I have because of the whole topic.

I'm also feeling conflicted, because I still wonder if I don't get it. Maybe there's some sort of serious problem I'm not seeing and I'm actually a misogynist and I have no idea. Hope not.

Perhaps payback is right. I watched it again and retract my first comment.

Fragility? Hmm.

In any case, I'm certainly biased for it, because I think people should have the option to choose. The same way I think drugs should be legal, but still regulated. Right now the "drug industry" outside of medicine is like the wild west, and the porn industry is near the same. They should have checks and balances in the same way that other industries have, and honestly they should have significantly more of them, because of the nature of the business. This is nothing compared to what the illegal drug industry goes through - ever seen the results of Mexican Cartels? That stuff ain't pretty either.

She is calling for illegalizing it completely, and that's just stupid.

I don't think my bias is as big (hmm, which word is correct instead of "big"?) as hers and not to the extent that people should feel the need to invalidate my arguments, but that's not really up to me to decide.

When I say that "she's biased" it is to call attention to the fact that I think her bias should be considered when evaluating her point. She is doing these two
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-texas-sharpshooter
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-emotion

And while I don't doubt that's she's been through hell and back, her data is not all the data.

I agree that this was not conveyed when calling it "biased" as I intended, so I'll retract that and stand corrected.

Lol.

Wiki: "Power Balance is a brand of hologram bracelet claimed by its manufacturers and vendors to "use holographic technology" to "resonate with and respond to the natural energy field of the body", and increase sporting ability.[1] Numerous independent studies of the device found it to be no better than placebo at improving athletic performance, and the manufacturer was forced to retract its claims in 2010."

[Retracted]

All O'Reilly has to do is mention it and his devout followers will take his message to heart. Even if he's forced to retract it later, the message is still delivered. He's very clever about his wording.

@Zyrxil No, no. You misunderstood. I guess I should have used the sarcasm box. I was alluding to Romney's silence as a tacit message of "now if not the time to address statements that are entirely pertinent simply because they will make me look bad and I will hide behind the emotion of grief for victims as a cover for why I won't talk about it".

After the cinema massacre a few months ago the gun groups spouted that line. There has been nearly 1 shooting spree per week since then. If not being able to debate an issue (or take someone to task over previous statements) based on the sensitivity to victims then such things will never be discussed. Romney needs to either stand behind what he said or retract it and say he was wrong in this case.

>> ^Barbar:

Applying the oversimplified version of laws that you learned in early physics classes to reality can often leave you in stunned silence when reality seems to defy them. Things like the dimples on golf balls or sailing ships moving upwind are classic examples of things that you wouldn't expect to even be conceivable unless you saw it in action.


Conceivable or not, none of the things you mentioned break the first law of thermodynamics.

One situation where the system could work would be if the car was driving into a strong headwind. This would give an energy input into the system. It could be perhaps developed to extend the blades if there is a strong enough headwind, and retract them if there isn't, but if there is no breeze, there will be a net loss from using the blades.

If the car is driving through stationary air then the air it's passing through will have no kinetic energy. After passing over the blades the air will be moving, it will have gained kinetic energy. That energy will have been taken from the car. It's as simple as that. No complicated equations needed. You'd need the complicated equations if you wanted to calculate exactly how much energy is lost, but you don't need them to see that energy would be lost.

If wind is factored into it then the air already has kinetic energy, which would be extracted by the fan, but the wind would be and external source of energy (in the same way that a wind turbine isn't in any way a perpetual motion device, it's obvious where the energy is coming from).

>> ^Grimm:

Please enlighten me then....either one of you...how is "Billie Jo Armstrong is more like Justin Bieber than Justin Bieber is." insightful?
Yeah I can guess yuo don't like him...OK fine but that statement has about as much punch and originality as "I know you are but what am I".>> ^DuoJet:
For me, one of the more insightful.
>> ^Grimm:
One of the more ignorant things I've read today.>> ^oohlalasassoon:
Billie Jo Armstrong is more like Justin Bieber than Justin Bieber is. Get off the stage you diva.





I retract my statement.

At 154 million Google image results for billie joe armstrong to Justin Bieber's 502 million, Billie Joe is only 30.6% as Justin Bieber as Justin Bieber is.

For comparison:
PJ Harvey is a respectable 0.9% Justin Bieber, David Bowie is 13.9% Justin Bieber. Frank Black is inexplicably the equivalent of 2.7 Justin Biebers, but then he's a pretty big guy.

>> ^direpickle:

>> ^Payback:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperion_Cantos
The "Big Mistake of '08" would be a black hole that dropped into the earth.

In no way are the Hyperion novels "shit scifi!" I will fight people!


I didn't notice that criteria until after I answered. I retract Mr. Simmons' work.