This expains the whole bizarre "I know words, I know the best words..." bit.

Such a bizarre little tour ... oddly intriguing. That's my hometown alright.

I'm revolted by the light-hearted way this story has been handled by this TV show and in the press, where I've seen it reported on the last few days. Sulking? I don't buy it. The husband's behaviour is bizarre and cruel and he doesn't change until he's called out on it. It's manipulative and abusive, not just to his wife, but to the whole family who've had to live with this hole in their family life for decades. It's not heartwarming or relatable, it's monstrous.

Hey thanks Payback! Yeah, I feel like I went through some sort of bizarre hazing ritual initiated by chicchorea, but in the end cool heads prevail!
Looking forward to being a part of the active community rather than just a viewer - thanks again!

*quality *doublepromote

This is what we've fucking sunk to.

Remember John Olivers "look way up, you'll see rock bottom" bit?

We have now fallen so far that we have looped around the universe in some bizarre space-time weirdness and are now plummetting toward rock bottom again from the other end of the universe, calmly waiting for the sweet relief of oblivion as we smash face first into catastrophe.

Canada & The United States: Bizarre Borders Part 2 has been added as a related post - related requested by Lendl.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Canada-The-United-States-Bizarre-Borders-Part-2

Bizarre how you can look like that and still be narcissistic.

I took ayahuasca with a brazillian religion called Santo Diame... in the US, we would call them a cult. And cult-like it was! I've smoked DMT many times and I fully encourage "explorers" to start small and smoke it instead of ingesting ayahuasca. It's all very difficult to figure out scientifically, but one of the interesting aspects of ayahuasca to me, was that you could close your eyes and be in another dimension, open them up and basically feel drunk and know everything was OK, get up and walk around.

However, the visions that I had were absolutely violent, with archetypes of the day of the dead and greek mythology emerging while people puked and cried while I was attached to their sound and energies, brains exploding, the power of life telling me it was going to get me, I could fight it all I wanted (I just smiled the whole time), but it was going to get me - and then it let me slide, eventually. DMT has a known effect, that is of "ego-death" or "near death experience"... and I definitely fought it off, having experienced it before. It was a deranged, somewhat fun, somewhat enlightening, traumatic experience that I would recommend to no one. And I can see that it's definitely not a lone man/woman mission as in to dose yourself with this stuff because it's definitely more intense than LSD or mushrooms and the mixture, though simple - would require a bit of practicing and knowledge about it.

I just find smoking DMT to be way better, shorter and much safer, but also WAY more intense and awesome. But, it's certainly not for everyone, it's like unlocking the unknown/impossible laws of the Universe, it's impossible to understand but you understand it while you are there as it is communicated to you; might be just in your brain but somehow nature provided this (bizarre/impossible) experience for you to be able to have.... ---- do not understand

This guy made appearances on Tim and Eric, but I thought he was acting there, turns out he just being himself.
Bizarre.

Basically, a Hyperloop tube is under the same pressure as a tube of sea-level air, 10m underwater. The difference from inside to outside is 1 atmosphere in both cases.

This is close to the underwater tunnel at the Georgia aquarium, and that's made out of plastic...

Not sure why he thinks this is so bizarre.

Both candidates are not the same based on their platforms which he equates to the be same which is a laughably naive notion. Beyond that, he fails to see the importance that the next president will seat at least 2 if not 3 judges on the supreme court. That isn't up for an election every 4 years. That is 30+ years. 1 supreme court vote made a difference between having Citizens United and not. Alito being dead has already had an influence on how some rulings went e.g. Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole and United States v. Texas.

Furthermore, his whole contention lies on the ability for the American people to vote people out of office. Well in 4 years George Bush managed to invade 2 nations and destroy relationships around the world and creating an even larger terrorist threat that Obama had to deal with drones because the American people wanted safety and didn't want troops deployed and you needed a third way. Then the economy tanked. I can't believe people have this view that we didn't need to bailout the banks, it was a difficult decision but the other choice was a complete collapse of the financial system. Obama just came into office. What would you have done?

I don't understand this bizarre view Americans have every 4 years that when a new president gets elected the whole thing resets like the fucking Matrix or something. A lot of what Obama had to do was to undo the damage of the previous administration. 2008 crash can be linked back directly to Bush's promise that every American deserves to have a home. All while the right and the GOP constantly undermined him. Tell me the last time the government was shut down by the GOP over a health care act meant to help Americans?

Nader got 2.74% of the popular vote in 2000, the people who voted for him might as well as burned their votes because there is no post for 2nd or 3rd place. You just lose. Nader was very well known among the American people. Who is Jill Stein or Gary Johnson?

We've all been here before. Last time it was Ron Paul. But Sanders did succeed in creating a new class of fired up people who I hope will focus on the actual battlegrounds of any progressive movement mayoral, state, senate and house races. Not just wake up every 4 years.

This is one of my all-time favourite books, but I have to disagree with @AeroMechanical.

There's very little in the way of exposition in this book. It treats you like an adult and expects that you have at least an inkling of various world religions/mythologies.

For example, the always terrifying Peter Stromare (the guy with the hammer) plays Czernobog. Don't know who that is? Go look it up, 'cos Gaiman isn't bothered telling you.

So far, this looks amazing. My only (very minor) criticism is the bizarre decision to have Ian McShane clean shaven (especially since Ian McShane can rock a beard like nobodies business!) when Mr Wednesday is described as having a beard.

I am really, really excited for this.

*quality

That is mostly quite interesting. Though, it's bizarre that he declares a belief in free will more hopeful than a belief in determinism. Of course determinists think that people can change, they do it all the time. When or why a particular person will change might be unknowable, the determist merely argues there was a cause.

This is vastly more hopeful than Catholicism, the central miracle of which relies on the pernicious belief in hereditary guilt.

Science "works" when scientists bother to actually try to replicate claims, no matter how bizarre they may be. And as this video and my comment shows, that's not happening in a number of scientific fields. Which is really, really bad for human knowledge and society in general, as billions of dollars and countless work-hours get wasted since researchers base future research on what turn out to be unreliable past claims.

The "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" flies in the face of everything the scientific method espouses. Evidence is evidence. It is not supposed to matter who finds the evidence. Someone who is famous in the field should not be given more benefit of the doubt than someone who is not, yet that is exactly what happened in Shectman's case. He was removed from his lab and an actual expert in the field, Linus Pauling, verbally abused him for literally decades.

That's not how science is supposed to work at all. If someone finds evidence of something that contradicts current theory, you're supposed to look at their methodology for flaws. If you can't find any flaws, then the scientific method demands you attempt to replicate the experiment to validate it. You're not supposed to dismiss evidence out of hand because the person who found it isn't a leading expert in the field. In Shectman's case, other labs replicated his results and the "experts" still wouldn't budge... to this day in fact Pauling refuses to admit he was wrong.

Conversely, there are too many papers out there now with shoddy methodology that shouldn't even be published, yet because the author is a name in the field they somehow make it into top-tier journals and get cited constantly despite the dubious nature of the research. Again, that's not how science is supposed to work.

"Spurious bullshit," as you called it, is not being weeded out. Rather it is being foisted on others as "fact" because Dr. XYZ who is renowned in the field did the experiment and no one looked closely enough at it or bothered to try to replicate it. The spurious bullshit should be getting weeded out by actual scientific testing (like the studies in the video that were found to be unreliable) and not by mob mentality.