I think if I could just smash voodoo in the face one time that he would learn some manners because he does wallow in glee whenever he is able to troll someone, push all their buttons, and get away with it. Voodoo is not civil and needs to know that there are limits. Voodoo is the 'internet tough guy'. He knows that I cannot reach through the cloud and bust his nose.

Having said that, I have never struck anyone in 30 yrs of law enforcement experience. I have wrestled a few women, restrained a few men, tased one guy who was resisting arrest, never shot at anyone or used an asp on anyone.

I get along with everyone except for people who are temporarily full of themselves with attitude, but it's remarkable how docile people get after a few days in jail (I don't put them there, the court does). People with the biggest attitudes really go through a change of heart. I treat them kindly and considerately and get great results. I feel that if I treat them kindly that the next time they are less likely to assault another police officer.

Please don't call them skeptics. They're not. Skepicism is the questioning of ideas or beliefs until presented with evidence that supports them, and it's a Good Thing(tm).

With climate change, there is overwhelming evidence to show that it's real, it's happening now and it's man made.

The people that don't accept it aren't skpetics, they're in denial. We don't call creationists "evolution skeptics", don't give AGW deniers a more elevated position.

Oh, and @A-Winston, you won't believe Nye because he's "only a mechanical engineer" (ignoring the 97% of actual climate scientists that agree with him) but you're perfectly happy to believe an author (someone who makes up stories for a living!) and whose book is full of

flawed or misleading presentations of Global Warming science exist in the book, including those on Arctic sea ice thinning, correction of land-based temperature measurements for the urban heat island effect, satellite vs. ground-based measurements of Earth's warming, and controversies over sea level rise estimates

"Considering how many videos showing clear police assaults on innocent people one can see on any given day on Facebook, one cannot help wondering: how many such assaults occur in the country each day -- a hundred for each one caught on a video, a thousand, ten thousand? I am genuinely puzzled that, at this late date, anyone still fails to see that the principal-agent relationship between the police and the public has been completely reversed. The police now feel free to abuse and assault anyone and everyone at their pleasure and caprice. (Please do not give me any bullshit about bad applies. Such claims no longer have any standing whatever.)" ~Robert Higgs

This is a really good site for looking up any urban legend or folk tale.

http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/babybird.asp

Looks like it depends how you store it...

http://www.hairofthedog.com/beers/Vintage_Fred.asp

I went to this brewery once and they were selling glasses of the old stuff for something like 25$ or more a pint. Their new beer was very good on its own and with quite a kick.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/advertisements/pingpong.asp

Essentially, ^.

To be sure, it does not take "studies" and "experts" to "prove" that smog turns healthy breathable air into unhealthy unbreathable air.

But, again, the consensus among proponents of man-made global warming pretty much all agree that the cause is greenhouse gases. And the consensus is also that cattle accounts for the main source of greenhouse gases. I honestly don't see how anyone concerned with man-made global warming can ignore this and, therefore, not be vegetarian (i.e., be congruent in their behaviors and beliefs).

I recommend reading "Hot Talk, Cold Science", endorsed by respected physicist the late Frederick Seitz, William Harper professor of Physics at Princeton, Richard Lindzen, meteorologist at MIT, written by physicist Fred Singer.

If you want to know where Prof. Singer is coming from, read this (and skeptics are not "deniers"- that's just a slur).

But before you freak out, let me restate, it matters not; clean air is good either way; do things that contribute to clean air (like end the state -- > good luck with that!).

(Better to read and have these discussions with actual working climate scientists than to bother with Internet pundits either way.)

There is also "consensus" as to the three types of "deniers." If anyone calls me a "denier," I'd be curious as to which of the three types of "deniers" you think I belong to (as indicated in the Singer article linked above). And you can then give me your scientific explanations as to why my stance is not valid.

This is something worth keeping in mind (from Singer):

"I have concluded that we can accomplish very little with convinced warmistas and probably even less with true deniers. So we just make our measurements, perfect our theories, publish our work, and hope that in time the truth will out."

The warmistas matter as much as the deniers. And the bottomline remains: what are you going to do about it anyway? As has been shown over and over, your "votes" don't count for much (or anything at all). So, what are you going to do about this (other than fume and get your panties in a twist on videosift)? The same is true with the "deniers." And the skeptics (i.e., true scientists).

Science also doesn't work by consensus. No real scientist will say otherwise. You either prove/falsify some hypothesis or you don't. You don't determine the truth in science by "consensus." Scientific consensus, as has been said, is itself unscientific.

There is no "consensus" on the acceleration speed of falling objects. There is no "consensus" on whether the Earth is orbiting the sun. There is no "consensus" on water being made up of H2O. These you can measure and find out for yourself. (In fact, Galileo had less than 5% "consensus" on whether the Earth orbits the sun at the time of his experiments. Facts matter. "Consensus?" Not so much.)

But,

“If the science were as certain as climate activists pretend, then there would be precisely one climate model, and it would be in agreement with measured data. As it happens, climate modelers have constructed literally dozens of climate models. What they all have in common is a failure to represent reality, and a failure to agree with the other models. As the models have increasingly diverged from the data, the climate clique have nevertheless grown increasingly confident—from cocky in 2001 (66% certainty in IPCC’s Third Assessment Report) to downright arrogant in 2013 (95% certainty in the Fifth Assessment Report).”

Still, this does not in any way equate "denial" of man-made global warming or whatever other "climate change." That is simply an unfounded conflation made up by the propagandists which so many here take on as gospel.

And it still does not let anyone "off the hook" about actually doing something that matters if you care about it so much.

Let me know if anyone finds any "errors" in the science of the NGIPCC articles and studies that I posted above.

I'm no lawyer, but I think the citizens in this case didn't properly understand the law. Normally, they are right--the 4th amendment states that the police need a warrant to search a private residence. However, there are several exceptions to that rule including two that are applicable here--the plain view exception and the emergencies exception (see this link).

The plain view exception states that if the police have a clear view of what they believe to be illegal activity, they may enter a private premise without a warrant. And those airsoft guns, which from a distance do indeed look like real firearms, are in plain view from the street.

The emergency exception states that police may search a premises without a warrant if the evidence can be easily destroyed or moved before a warrant can be issued. In this case they had an anonymous tip that illegal activity was taking place at the location? If the citizens were actually selling guns, by the time the cops could secure a search warrant the sellers could have packed up all their stuff and left town.

I think in this case the fact that the guns were on sale in the driveway in plain view coupled with the anonymous tip gives police all the probable cause they need to search the premises without a warrant. I think if these people decided to be assholes and file a lawsuit claiming their civil rights had been violated or something, they'd be up shit creek without a paddle.

It's an interesting idea, but only works on a subset of surveillance cameras. It's possible to detect almost any digital image sensor, and in fact there are commercial products available to do this - for example http://www.jaycar.com.au/productView.asp?ID=QC3506 (I don't know how good they are!)

They won't work on film cameras though.

*length=89

I swear they said 4TB HDD & a 480GB SSD for games. The case they are using is the Digital Storm Aventum II Pro. http://www.digitalstormonline.com/aventum-ii.asp?workstation=1
Except for adding multiple video cards, you can almost build the PC in the vid on that site.

http://www.snopes.com/media/goofs/ktvu.asp

Snopes article on what happened: http://www.snopes.com/food/warnings/goldencorral.asp

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by oritteropo.

More proof that facts have a definitive liberal bias, as your claim is 100% absolute bullshit. Guess you need another bogeyman. Unfortunately, about the only group you asswipes haven't blamed for some perceived ill in this nation is the 50+ million paranoid, angry, rightie dolts that vote directly against their interests every two years because they believe every oily huckster that tells them that the country is going to come to an end unless they check all the "R" boxes on election day. Blaming blacks and Mexicans makes it even easier, doesn't it? Douche.

RSNML.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/advertisements/jeffgordon.asp