I know its been years since this was submitted, but its worth noting that the voice of the Piggies was none other than Maynard James Keenan of Tool, A Perfect Circle, and Pucifer fame.

>> ^bamdrew:
oddly disappointing...

I agree, but the song still kicks my ass.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Counting-Bodies-Like-Sheep-to-the-Rhythm-of-the-War-Drums by A Perfect Circle is a good song, not a lovey-dovey pro-peace one, but a rather disturbing one.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'sheep, sheeple, microchip, rfid, verichip' to 'sheep, sheeple, microchip, rfid, verichip, A Perfect Circle' - edited by Fedquip

I thought that this song was written by A Perfect Circle, but apparently they were doing a cover of THIS. Cool.

Some quotes:

"Traffic that grinds to a halt and then restarts for no apparent reason is one of the biggest causes of frustration for drivers. Now a team of Japanese researchers has recreated the phenomenon on a test-track for the first time.

The mathematical theory behind these so-called "shockwave" jams was developed more than 15 years ago using models that show jams appear from nowhere on roads carrying their maximum capacity of free-flowing traffic – typically triggered by a single driver slowing down.

After that first vehicle brakes, the driver behind must also slow, and a shockwave jam of bunching cars appears, travelling backwards through the traffic."

They go on to say they've done this on computers, but did in person as seen above.

"They asked drivers to cruise steadily at 30 kilometres per hour, and at first the traffic moved freely. But small fluctuations soon appeared in distances between cars, breaking down the free flow, until finally a cluster of several vehicles was forced to stop completely for a moment.

That cluster spread backwards through the traffic like a shockwave. Every time a vehicle at the front of the cluster was able to escape at up to 40 km/h, another vehicle joined the back of the jam.

The shockwave jam travelled backwards through the ring of vehicles at roughly 20 km/h, which is the same as the speed of the shockwave jams observed on roads in real life, says lead researcher Yuki Sugiyama, a physicist in the department of complex systems at Nagoya University.

"Although the emerging jam in our experiment is small, its behaviour is not different from large ones on highways," he told New Scientist.

...
Pinpointing the causes of shockwave jams is an exercise in psychology more than anything else. "If they had set up an experiment with robots driving in a perfect circle, flow breakdown would not have occurred. Human error is needed to cause the fluctuations in behaviour," says Rees."

So our humanity is to blame. But of course.

^
Well the caller does ask a good question. Where did the big bang come from? Atheist man suggests, like the caller's concept of God, the universe is a 'perfect circle'. I have no doubt somewhere there's a mathematical model on how the universes can have no true beginning or end, but the question can still be asked, how can such occur, there must be a beginning. I'm not suggesting it must be God, because the same can be questioned of its existence. Where ever there is the assumption of something the source of its beginning can be asked.

I suppose the point I'm trying to make is we can not know for certain that God does not exist. The evidence we observe and measure is used to create a model of how the universe began, and how it works. That evidence does not suggest the presence of a divine entity, nor does it disprove it. Simply believing in God does not mean believing in something in spite of the evidence, it means believing in something despite the lack of evidence. This is the whole concept of faith.

That is not to say religious people will believe in things despite the evidence; that happens all the time. And in such strict doctrine is fairly easy to actual disprove, we can point at different things and say 'look, the earth revolves around the sun, the earth is a few billion years old and we evolved from other primates, *plunk* here's the evidence'. I'd say it takes a whole lot of faith to say, 'that's still not how it happened'.

(This is in very general terms, I am not talking about any specific scientific claim)
Here's the problem as I see it; many a religious person do not simply say they don't believe the evidence, but rather that you have not brought them evidence in the first place. One is a leap of faith and the other is a failure to make a leap because of refusal to believe there is even a cliff there.

While I'm not exactly thrilled over the people who acknowledge you have evidence, but still insist in their belief, I find it a much better alternative than those who say you have none at all. On that note there are also some people who are theists that are very flexible in their beliefs or have a very adaptive belief system. For example, God as the watch maker, general such a stance allows for all scientific observations, with the only caveat that somewhere along the line God was involved. There is nothing to suggest this is true, just as there is nothing to suggest it isn't. I'm not going to say, 'I don't think theists are stupid at times', because I'd be lying to myself if I did, but I also don't think simply believing in God automatically makes you stupid and ignorant. I think being stupid and ignorant makes yo stupid and ignorant (there's your perfect circle right there).

>> ^Crosswords:

As Matt Dillahunty said in the video, any possible argument for a god as creator can be applied to the universe itself, which is one of the reasons Einstein said if he ever believed in a "god" in a religious sense, this "god" would be the universe itself. The problem here is that there's a lot of morons who keep on calling the universe "God" and then instead of sticking to known characteristics of the universe, start going on tangents about this "God" being a "Who" (i.e. an individual, with a human-like will and personality) or having powers he can "use" when he feels like it, or ascribing to it every concept they don't understand like infinity, absoluteness, transcendency, perfection, circularity and what have you.
In this case, God as a perfect circle dates back to the Greeks, and Aristotle in particular, and I doubt very much the caller knew anything about ancient Greeks. Aristotle said it could as likely that a God exists or not, but that he himself thinks there is one and so he postulated one. He also said that since we can't imagine that there is not a first cause, then there must be one, even though time is infinite in both directions. Not much of an explanation you'll agree. Some backward churches, especially in America since they cut themselves from the Vatican a long time ago, still believe in the Aristotelian world-view even though the Vatican has long embraced modern science, although reluctantly (and as long as it doesn't contradict their miracles!).

yes, it's a Perfect Circle
http://www.videosift.com/video/Counting-Bodies-Like-Sheep-to-the-Rhythm-of-the-War-Drums

he look like the songwriter/guitarist of A Perfect Circle.

could one of these perfect circle/tool vids (probly this one) be requeued as i reckon a lot of people would love them if they just heard them...

Afraid I'm not a fan of a Perfect Circle, and it is indeed blasphemy to say that this version is even close to as good as Lennon's original.

A Perfect Circle covered their Let's Have a War tune on the cover album eMOTIVe.

Thanks everyone! As Michie pointed out, the perfect circle thing is no big sweat: O

With that over with, it's time for me to start in on my long-term goal: taking down Jake.

*draws perfect circle in honour of rembar*