>> ^Crosswords:
these tea-party libertarians they elected are really ultra bat-shit conservatives


I'm pretty sure - 100% actually - tea partiers are not libertarians. When did this rumor start? Because I've been hearing it a lot from the Democrats.

Crosswords has a point, maybe in the long run this'll be good for the Democrats.

>> ^Crosswords:

I was going to say that sounds absolutely disgusting, but after hearing its a different beast than the stuff I'm used to I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Still hot mayo... ugh.


Disgusting? Really?

Isn't Shrimp Salad the same exact thing? Or at least it does here in America. Come to think of it, potato salad, chicken salad, tuna salad, coleslaw, egg salad and fruit salad all contain mayonnaise.

Or perhaps you were only referring to mayo being served in hot temperature. Then sure, it's kinda gross.

But even still, we eat lots of dishes that contains with mayo in hot temperature without even realizing it. If your hamburgers have hot-off-the-grill beef paddies and you eat it with mayo, then you've got yourself hot mayo.

>> ^Crosswords:

Long lecture is long. Religion is a malleable idea because it does not require proof in the scientific sense to believe. You can mold it into any shape you want; sometimes it's molded to fit the world and sometimes a person's idea of the world is molded to fit the religion (which sometimes takes the form of out right denying scientific evidence).
The problem of why so many people think religion and science can't co-exist is because there is a very vocal and active religious populations that see science as an assault on their beliefs. They don't want to see religion as malleable, they want it to be TRUTH (as they express on the bumpers of their horseless carriages powered by internal combustion engines). We, us non-believers, see this and are offended, because after all we base our understanding of the world on observable and measurable phenomena, while all their 'facts' are based on things a bunch of drunk goat/sheep herders were going on about 2000+ years ago.
As an atheist I've often given the the existence of a god/s thought, my conclusion has been it doesn't matter what I think since its subject to change at whim. I'd be most likely to see God as the watchmaker, in which case I'm benefited more by figuring out how the watch works than wondering what the maker wanted. I outright reject the God as the psycho jealous controlling girlfriend/boyfriend. 'If you really loved me you'd kill your first born, OMG you were really going to do it? I was just testing you, I wouldn't really make you do that. Now go slaughter some sheep and goats for me. No seriously... do it.'


That's all fine and whatnot... the problem is, religion is constantly retreating, and science constantly advancing.
People are rationalizing more and more. Which is pretty stupid and pathetic.
Religious people, ignorants or not, absolutely refuse to face reality. We see it every single day.
Being religious is, in my opinion, being intellectually dishonest. For example... how can someone say he/she is a christian, and then rationalize their way out from believing in most of the stuff that comes in the bible? The bible is the foundation for their belief (or it should be), yet only a complete ignorant would believe in shit as stupid as the beginning of the universe and creation of men, as described in Genesis. Or the great flood and the Moses story. etc, etc. There are people like that of course, but I doubt that it is the majority.

People are retreating from religious belief (even if unaware) and into empirical knowledge ever more.
Yet, they still consider themselves religious, even if whatever it is they believe in, has absolutely no real relation with what their religion is supposed to be about.

IF science ever reaches a point, where it can be said, with absolute certainty that god is not real, there would still be idiots trying to argue against it.

Shit... look at the amount of morons trying to discredit Evolution.

To conclude, I DO think science and religion are incompatible. One searches for the absolute truth, including the origin of the universe, how we came to be, and all that, no matter how pleasant it is (or isn't), and the other is about defending a stand, even if proven wrong (although every once in a while, they have to take a step back and admit they are being assholes. Nowadays you have the pope saying evolution is real.Oh really??? Well, that's not what it says in your holy book, you might wanna check that).

An institution such as the Catholic Church wanting to be side-by-side with science, after its "awesome" track record in support of science and knowledge, makes me wanna puke in disgust.

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Friday, September 10th, 2010 5:09pm PDT - promote requested by Crosswords.

Video is already flagged long - ignoring long request by Crosswords.

The problem I see here is that the video author is assuming that all the problems created are actually philosophical in nature. The big problem is the human mind and our nature.

We have been selected to first, fight or flight at any unknown variable. Second, evolution plays its core tenet: survival of the fittest (which has a part to play in all these examples). Third, you have resources--which in turn go back to number two. Lastly, reproduction comes into play.

Sillma and Crosswords touched on this. We have to figure out a solution to force a change in our predisposed evolution. Whether that be a biological or technological (or both) solution. What would any such society do about sociopaths? They, by definition, will not understand "being good".

I hope we can get to a semi-Utopian like society, but it will be a mammoth undertaking. The changes he talked about are far easier in comparison (physics and astronomy--oh, and since when was quantum mechanics not messy ). The Utopian change will require an upheaval at every facet of society: government, trade, religion, decisions, structural, biological, technological, industrial, etc...

/I'd like to live in a nice paradise, but this approach would require too much from the one source that made it in the first place.

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued - promote requested by original submitter Crosswords.

Moving this video to Crosswords's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued - promote requested by original submitter Crosswords.

Moving this video to Crosswords's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

>> ^Crosswords:

Wow, bike lanes that aren't half an inch that's been taken out of the regular road. And yet the bikers still ride unnecessarily close to the cars.


I assume they did that to avoid the jackass cameraman standing in the lane filming them as they pass.

Well they don't want to hit the banana peel, they make you lose all your coins

>> ^Crosswords:

Wow, bike lanes that aren't half an inch that's been taken out of the regular road. And yet the bikers still ride unnecessarily close to the cars.

Adding video to channels (Terrible, Wtf) - requested by Crosswords.

Glad I could do it. It's a great piece of history.

In reply to this comment by Crosswords:
Thanks for the quality and for fixing it. I was very disappointed when it died and I couldn't find a replacement.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
*quality