>> ^holymackerel013:

This video is gross and disturbing....Why is that man scrubbing the vagina on that horse!?


That's a gelding mate, and that pussy-lookin' part is horsey's dick sheath...boy horse, m'kay??

@VoodooV
while i totally agree that one cannot discern the intent of the person who cast the downvote,i feel @shinyblurry makes a valid point concerning his own experiences.
while circumstantial,18 scrubbed videos is not a normal,nor average,number.

i think i could make a case that those scrubbed videos (due to downvotes) directly correlate to a time on the sift when many were viewing shiny's comments and posts as trollish and confrontational.
and lets be honest...sometimes they were.

but there were a few posts of shiny's that were genuinely of good quality and thought-provoking and they too..were scrubbed.i even promoted a few even though i totally disagreed with the content.

which ties in to the point in which @ZappaDanMan is trying to make.some people vote more on how they feel about the person rather than the content of the video.he also alludes to a cult of personality and its a valid observation.

so while i agree with you that we cannot discern intent and i also agree with shiny that downvotes are more an irrational,emotional response,rather than a logical and thought-out vote but at the end of the day it does not matter.
why?
because they are votes and we all tend to vote with our hearts rather than our heads.

here is a small observation i have made over the years here on the sift.
totally non-scientific.just an observation:
ever notice when somebody posts a horrid,or venomous comment?
and it will have ZERO votes.neither UP nor DOWN.
until it receives ONE downvote and then what seems like minutes the downvotes start coming.like a torrent.

the same will happen with videos.
there is a reason for that.

speaking only for myself i rarely downvote a video and choose to abstain rather than downvote but i will downvote a comment if i find it offensive or un-necessarily attacking another sifter.(which i have been guilty of from time to time).

my videos have garnered more than their fair share of downvotes.
sometimes i understood why and othertimes i did not and i have never been shy in PMing that person to inquire why they downvoted and,to those peoples credit,they always responded.
that was very gracious of them to explain the thinking behind their downvote and i always appreciated the time they took to share their reasoning with me.

so in conclusion to my point (do i even have a point?).
even when we consider that some (or many) use downvoting as a passive-aggressive way to punish those they may deem unworthy or simply because they disagree.
the downvoting system is just as vital as the up-voting because it can promote discussion and interaction and that is always a good thing.
the positives far outweigh the negatives.

@shinyblurry is a perfect example of how interactions and attitudes can change on both sides of the spectrum.

if we do not interact with those we disagree with then we will be doomed to hold pre-conceptions and presumptions as inviolate and stagnate on our own hubris.

there are so many here on the sift that have surprised and delighted me by shattering my assumptions about them.
oftentimes it was the downvoting that sparked that interaction.

i think we all felt that sting that @Boise_Lib speaks of concerning our first downvote but if we can get past that initial slap in the face we can explore a whole new range of interaction and discussion in which we all can benefit and garner a much more dynamic understanding of people whom we may disagree with.

now that this rant has come to its conclusion i shall remind my gentle and kind readers that i shall be here all week and to not forget to tip their bartenders and waitresses.

thank you wisconsin!!
and good night!

The New York Times stealth-edited their article to remove all of the objectionable content, apparently.

http://observer.com/2012/08/new-york-times-article-on-julian-assange-asylum-scrubs-its-toilet-reference/

Don't have to watch the video. Been dealing with second and third degree burns on my arms from hot oil. And I got layed off sooo, yay! No health insurance!

The real fun comes when you scrub the layers of dead skin on the wound and then pour hydrogen peroxide over it. Mmmm...good stuff.

What the hell - what possible explanation could they have for this?
Why would that be in there?

Some better audio on what we are seeing would have been great. Once I realized that they were scrubbing through the video to isolate the one frame in the commercial, I realized how messed up this is.

I should think heads should roll for this one!

>> ^spawnflagger:

I like the idea, but didn't he do a simple product search ?
or hell, even the domain itself - http://www.gojo.com/ . It's a brand of hand cleaner (good stuff too) that's been around for years.
I don't see how he isn't infringing on the brand/trademark "gojo", so a lot of legal battles ahead...
Oh, and lastly - cancer. Do you want a high-powered cell phone transmitter next to your brain, or a low powered bluetooth headset?


Trademarks are only supposed to protect against similar products. It would be trademark infringement to make another soap or cleanser and call it Gojo. A shampoo would probably be considered too similar; maybe something cleaning-related like a sponge or scrubbing brush, too. A headband with a suction cup is not in the same market so it shouldn't be in violation.

The microwaves that are emitted by a cell phone are non-ionizing and thus, not linked to cancer. They're in the same carcinogen group (2B) as coffee and pickles.

>> ^Crosswords:

>> ^kceaton1:
It goes beyond evolution though, if I'm getting this right. FOR HELL'S SAKE we can use the speed of light to see things FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR^100 older than 10,000 years!!! It's a fucking joke. If you believe this you are an idiot. Period! = .
It's not just light and carbon dating, we have LOTS of ways to show this place is WAY older...

You're forgetting the Law of God Physics which clearly states God can do anything including making the universe appear much older than it actually is for the purposes of fooling his human creations so he has a way of testing their loyalty when he's not asking them to kill their first born son and saying, JUST KIDDING, at the last minute.


The funny part about this stuff is that they typically say that God "moved the photons" (atleast the semi smarter ones will) and the STILL dumb ones will say that, well light was, you see going a different speed back then so it still all adds up...YOU SEE!!!

BUT THEN!...If you understand relativity correctly like me you understand that you can change the speed of light all the time you want. In fact make it go 1 ft/second! It doesn't MAKE A DAMNED difference in how we will STILL measure the time gone/go/will go by! People never get this at all and it really is the sort of thing were someone mumbles under their breath when they finally understand what I'm saying/going to say: "Is that not amazing!!!". You see mass and energy are the same thing and light is special, it goes the same speed EVERYWHERE, EVERY-TIME, ALL THE TIME--and this thing called "light" are these little tiny particles/waves called photons that as I said before, but not quite as directly, they literally ARE mass and energy, so the relationship between us and light is so fundamental it SHOULD blow your mind. But, so many people went through school and listen to their preachers and have no idea how vitally important that "little" discovery that Einstein made was!!! So, even we at 1 ft/s light speed STILL notice everything moving and everyone we know moving at that same "time" measurement of one second (funny isn't it; but, light is traveling at one second as well, how can this make any sense..!?!?! Well here it comes, it is called relativity and the fact that light is a constant and the other very important fact that our measurement of one second really measures...what?) as we are literally stuck in a cage (this "cage" is called The Universe) that cannot be tampered with. This is all due to that little fact that our perception of time IS relative and our view of one second can be EXTREMELY messed with, but to us it will always seem to be one second--even if 1 Billion years went by. The age of the Universe comes from the SHIFT of energy in the photons present that we can see coming from other places in any direction around us; so God would need to put THAT hologram there nothing else, BUT there is a giant problem in doing this (because due to our friends that want God to actively fuck us over for some reason--the hologram only extends technically 10,000 years out and "hides" the rest--if God put everything the way we see it and it isn't even an illusion--what can I say at that point if God was real I would join the Devil in less than a heart beat to overthrow his LYING, SADIST, and moreover EVIL ass!) If the hologram WAS there then: the hologram, it would need to be different in EVERY single direction you look; every time you move one Planck length (I might be wrong, maybe just the length of a photon) further out into space God would need to fix the energy distribution to make his illusion look correct... YOU HAVE no idea how absurd to the absurd degree this sounds, even GOD would spend his entire existence doing this because the job would require this long to do it: forever (until the UNIVERSE STOPS!). I'm not kidding it would be utterly ridiculous (from Earth his "image" would look right, on Mt. Everest, it would look wrong,; in space it would look wrong--in fact if you have sensitive enough equipment every square foot you took would somehow end up looking incorrect--we're talking about the cosmic background radiation, the little thing that lets us know how old our Universe is and that everything around us is moving away from us...

So that comes to the "putting the photons into place syndrome". For the most part I'm starting to think that these people like to abuse their brain in secret rooms with paint, huffing it until they collapse in a heap. in the morning they slowly scrub the white vinyl paint off their nose and mouth and go start with the blue. The problem with this is God had to of atleast put photons 13.5 Billion years out for this to even work--so in the end it falls so flat on it's face it makes no sense. If he was using a hologram, where is the border? Why do we detect gravitational anomalies when those have been proven to be real locally? It just goes on, and on, and on, and on.

I'd love to hear them explain why space may be full of Dark Matter or better yet why is "nothing" full of something called "The Quantum Foam"--you may have heard of "Vacuum Energy", same thing more or less--look it up it's fascinating and may even be the source OF "The Big Bang". Why can we pull photons (from "nothing") out of the Quantum Foam? According to lots of religious folks you can't create something from nothing, but WHAM, there it is! Sometimes, it just might be a bad idea to hold onto your old per-conceived precepts if they do not allow for change. BTW, the photon coming out of thin air was in a very well-known (now) experiment and is HIGHLY worth looking up; you can find details about it in my Videosift Blog (which is entirely about it).

You could disprove their crap all day. The truth is is that they did bad in their science classes, they just didn't get it and for some archaic left over juvenile resentment, they must have their righteous rite of "The Comeback Minister (or Preacher/Prophet/Father/etc...). So in revenge they are taking the easy way out and saying, "Hah, see I didn't need to learn that stuff from Mr. Scrampton in 12th grade! I'm a Minister now and I can just TELL you what is right, because I know it's right in my gut; especially after five cases of Budweiser!". Now they never tell you the truth. They lie, they tell you it "came" to them, like their a prophet now or something. ...Well if they can be prophets, why can't we? Oh wait, scientists do in fact fill this role and they do a good job at it. they constantly warn us of dangers and things the government should do. But, there are far too many damage control freaks with their own agenda running around and they seem to cling to religion as it satisfies very easily their questions, making it so they don't have to work to find the actual hard ones that exist and that we DO need.

It's not in the Bible that any of these idiots would tell us anything meaningful, nor the Koran, or any other holy book. So I find it strange that so many line up and then sit down and listen to these idiots blather on about the world and how to cure it and what it's ills are. They also as I said do a great deal of "re-education" in THEIR vision satisfying that old juvenile, washed up nothing who couldn't get over the fact that he wasn't good at science off the bat or maybe even when he tried too. This is the bane on America (and I would assume many other places, but America has a lot of this). They are teaching and re-teaching our people ridiculous notions and since they require very little work to understand, just community, people believe it--especially because it's being believed in numbers and that is the important part.

Now this was a longer post than what I wanted it to be and it also went past the scope of my original intentions. BUT, the reason why those statistics exist is due to the nature, the epidemic of how people are being re-taught forcibly (you think like us or you are no longer with us--it can have shocking community affects, especially when it becomes a inter-family problem...I know this EXTREMELY well due to my Mormon upbringing; when I became an atheist I was shunned and cut-off from the community, at first. they slowly let me back in when they realized I was an extremely good person, usually a better person than many of the people in the Church and so my neighbors finally no longer cared--cared what the churches stance was either--who or what I was, they took me for what I was--IT TOOK 20 years to happen!). So many people are started and taught young this is a HUGE problem, I know it's a major one with the Mormon church. You are baptized into the church at eight. You should hear the things they ask you to accept and agree to--they are things that only and adult with experience could properly answer (more like someone that is 25) yet an eight year old surrounded by their family and peers of course can give only ONE answer.

After that, you being to be taught all the incorrect things you could possibly think of. If you are even semi-devout like me (and this goes for many other religions as well) going to public school in Utah, the church has LITERALLY built seminary schools next to every High School and Junior High (and this is true outside of Utah too, as I'm SURE Idaho, Arizona, Colorado, Wyoming, and Nevada--maybe more too, I'm sure they have them locally to attend--I'm sure many of these states have these institutions built right next door or somewhere for kids to attend) you will attend seminary due to the wishes of your parents (my parental situation was beginning to change--and for the better).

Still I attended seminary through grades 7-12 and could have continued in College, but I was agnostic by then...if not basically atheist, just not strong enough to say it. Seminary had it's wonderful parts, but the mis-information was a joke. luckily I was smart, very smart. So I was able to separate the information apart from each other and it allowed me to ask STRONG questions about my one time faith. These questions and their mis-information EASILY killed that religion for eternity, for me--for A LOT of reasons. Many of which, many of you know...easily. It came to ME slow. SO when i talk about helping other people you need to realize what we are up against. facts that do come to us easily usually don't to them and it typically has to do with their past. but, it is HARD to get them to talk about their past openly. For one thing there is no possibility of them being wrong or in danger of it. Somehow we MUST change this.

/Like I said longer, but I hope it was worth it.
/edited for more clarity and a few additions

This one ?

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

Wow that's a large wall of text, @newtboy.
But yes, it appears that:
"Calleja has developed a lighting system that requires no electricity for power. Instead it draws CO2 from the atmosphere and uses it to produce light as well as oxygen as a byproduct. The key ingredient to this eco-friendly light? Algae."
I guess that's why the video empathized that Calleja has been a biochemist for twenty years. i.e. years of research have helped developed a strain of algae with such properties
Apparently the electricity the algae produces is stored in a battery underneath the unit.
http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cete
ra/biochemist-creates-co2-eating-light-that-runs-on-algae-2012055/


>> ^newtboy:

The written description said 'with no electricity for power', but the video clearly shows an electric light in the center of the tank...not bioluminescent, electric. They tell you it only works 'in a lighted aquarium'. You even see the operator plug it in and the light turn on at :32, and again at :40, with the electric cord also clearly visible. The audio never claims the device or the algae MAKES light or electricity, only that it takes in CO2 and releases O2. The video of the garage version also shows this clearly, with the plain fluorescent lights turned on while they add the algae to a fish tank. If the power is supposed to be coming from the algae, not the grid, how is the light supposed to be being powered without any algae in the tank? There is never ANY mention of POWER being produced from the algae in the video itself, and the few ways I've read this could be possible are NO WHERE NEAR being financially viable, just possible. They require specialty genetically altered algae (expensive) and reactors with exotic materials to capture electrons from charged algae (also expensive), and the algae must be exposed to light to become charged. If, as the written description claims, they have solved this problem and ARE generating electricity from nothing more than an anaerobic reaction without external heat/light/energy required, you would think they would have said so in the video itself, and made a HUGE deal about it. They did not.
If this really worked without outside electricity added, they could put panels of the algae and reactors outside and run the white light (now inside the algae tank) indoors as a living solar panel/light setup, I note they did not do or even suggest this.
Without the 'magic', unmentioned light/electricity generating portion, this is NOT a new idea in the least as he claimed, people have advocated using simple algae and micro algae to scrub CO2 for decades, and usually in sun light rather than electric light so it's better than carbon neutral. What this really seems to be is a filter you can put OVER a light to make it produce some O2, but it also gives off far less light. There is no indication whatsoever from the video that this is intended to produce light or electricity itself without external power. I can't see where the poster got that idea. Perhaps they are involved in the project and want 'investors' that can't see the difference and can't do any research?

The written description said 'with no electricity for power', but the video clearly shows an electric light in the center of the tank...not bioluminescent, electric. They tell you it only works 'in a lighted aquarium'. You even see the operator plug it in and the light turn on at :32, and again at :40, with the electric cord also clearly visible. The audio never claims the device or the algae MAKES light or electricity, only that it takes in CO2 and releases O2. The video of the garage version also shows this clearly, with the plain fluorescent lights turned on while they add the algae to a fish tank. If the power is supposed to be coming from the algae, not the grid, how is the light supposed to be being powered without any algae in the tank? There is never ANY mention of POWER being produced from the algae in the video itself, and the few ways I've read this could be possible are NO WHERE NEAR being financially viable, just possible. They require specialty genetically altered algae (expensive) and reactors with exotic materials to capture electrons from charged algae (also expensive), and the algae must be exposed to light to become charged. If, as the written description claims, they have solved this problem and ARE generating electricity from nothing more than an anaerobic reaction without external heat/light/energy required, you would think they would have said so in the video itself, and made a HUGE deal about it. They did not.
If this really worked without outside electricity added, they could put panels of the algae and reactors outside and run the white light (now inside the algae tank) indoors as a living solar panel/light setup, I note they did not do or even suggest this.
Without the 'magic', unmentioned light/electricity generating portion, this is NOT a new idea in the least as he claimed, people have advocated using simple algae and micro algae to scrub CO2 for decades, and usually in sun light rather than electric light so it's better than carbon neutral. What this really seems to be is a filter you can put OVER a light to make it produce some O2, but it also gives off far less light. There is no indication whatsoever from the video that this is intended to produce light or electricity itself without external power. I can't see where the poster got that idea. Perhaps they are involved in the project and want 'investors' that can't see the difference and can't do any research?

Brilliant speech, and also a brilliant crowd. Like a hall full of Laverne from Scrubs.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

Well, that didn't work either.
Hey, @lucky760 what the hell do we do now?


Ban doesn't work if the user is already banned. I'll scrub his mess off the floor manually...

This video is meaningless without time stamps. I've heard it was taken 4 hours after the event, more than enough time for Zimmerman to clean up. Is there no record of anyone anywhere treating his injuries?

-----
Please enjoy the Evil Zimmerman Theory, based on the idea that Zimmerman planned to corner and execute a minority, which is the radical left's consensus:

1) Zimmerman sees the target (Martin) and decides to directly confront him.

2) To cover his ass, Zimmerman calls 911, creating audio evidence of the encounter. Because his judge father is so beloved that every single cop on the force will hide or distort all forensic evidence in his favor, he's not worried. Also, because he "owns" the police, Zimmerman doesn't care if they catch him in the act (or beat him to the target).

3) Without knowing 100% if Martin himself is armed (or working solo), lone vigilante Zimmerman walks/runs within audio range (20-50 feet?) of Martin and starts yelling racial slurs to get Martin to attack him. He yells the slurs with confidence, since the 911 operator will scrub any lines from Martin like, "Mister don't shoot!" or "I'm unarmed!"

4) Zimmerman has lied to 911 about being lost, he knows exactly where he is, and he knows when he confronts Martin, it will be in a place Martin has nowhere to run. Zimmerman also knows that even if there was an escape route, instead of running away, Martin will take the bait and attack him.

5) Before all this Zimmerman has drawn his gun and put in his pocket (or already has it there). He says some more things to get Martin to attack, and Martin charges him. Zimmerman has to very carefully time this. Shoot too soon (outside of 25 feet) and it looks like what it is, a planned hit. Wait too long and Martin will get the drop on him, beat the shit out of him and probably kill him in an adrenalin-filled rage, with or without taking his gun away.

6) Zimmerman gets lucky and shoots Martin once around 10 feet. Even though he has "diplomatic immunity" through owning the local police through family ties, he doesn't bother emptying his gun into the fallen Martin to end the slightest possiblilty that Martin might pull through and testify against him.

7) Zimmerman has no idea how many witnesses--if any--heard or saw the ruckus or possibly even filmed it. He doesn't care: the police are backing him up. He flops around in the grass and whacks his head a few times, drawing blood, but just enough that a backup alibi about a scuffle could go either way. He knows his father will lie for him, but the lies do have to be consistent.

-------------------------------

The Evil Zimmerman Theory will remain theory until the forensic evidence about shooting distances/angles/et al. is released.

So heres the current list with my own interpretation of the subjects of each.

COFFEE MAKES ME POO = bowel movements
Eddie Izzard - Do you want a cup of coffee? = mating rituals
The Most Expensive Coffee in the World = civet droppings
South Park on Coffee = caffeine's affect on kids
Charlie Brooker vs. Nescafe - (VideoSift Coffee Mug Compo) = commercial/advertising
The latte zoo- (mixed animal latte pours) = drinkable art
Kramer CaffeLatte -- Seinfeld = caffeine's affect on racist comedians
The Office - Coffee and Cocaine = caffeine's affect on business quotas
The Simpsons - Beer Coffee = stereotypes of Aussies
Wish I had this coffee maker! = middle American consumerism
Coffee Snobs - snobby hipsters
This is Coffee (1961) = **coffee**
How to make Iced Coffee = what ice is used for
Six million dollar man coffee commercial = commercial/advertising
The Clover Coffee Machine - Hand Built By Stanford Engineers = Engineering
Denis Leary - Coffee = douchebag
How Sherlock Likes His Coffee (Sherlock BBC) = a fictitious characters taste/preferences
Dr. Cox and the Coffee (Scrubs) = flirting
How to make cold brew coffee the homemade way! = how to throw off the shackles of consumerism
Chad Vader Coffee = Star Wars copy right infringement
Austin Powers' coffee mix-up = the old Switcheroo comedy bit
History of Coffee = average joes bid for youtube attention
Join the Coffee Achievers! (Weird1984 coffee ad with Bowie) = commercial/advertising
Mad TV Coffee Maniac = caffeine's affect on Keanu Reeves
Coffee Panda = drinkable art
Charlie Chaplin Drinking Coffee = bowel movements
La recette des cupcakes jamais vus... au tiramisu = Tiramisu
Vodka & Coffee = alcoholics
Latte Art - Swan Lake = drinkable art
How To Cold Brew (COFFEE) = commercial/advertising
How to Pronounce Cappuccino = Linguistics
Strange To Meet You = caffeine's affect on European Directors/Actors
Columbian Coffee Crystals = commercial/advertising parody
Juan Valdez ~ Colombian Coffee 1982 = commercial/advertising
Coffee and the Brain = health benefits of caffeine
Milk With Your Coffee? = how boobies lactate
"The Coffee Wars" - (Mockumentary) = dangers of caffeine addiction
60 Cups, 1 Bald Head = how German scientists are full of shit!
It puts the coffee on its skin... = dangers of caffeine addiction
The Journey of the Coffee Bean = **coffee**

http://videosift.com/video/Dr-Cox-and-the-Coffee-Scrubs