I agree. I love all of them! Kudos for keeping the laid off MythBusters too (dang Discovery!)!

*nsfw *science *scifi *music *wtf

Behind the Scenes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2rlqBlzGN0

Anyone remember the days when Discovery had programming with educational value?

Automata bothered me that they had their own "Rules of Robotics", but felt like trimming those back to only 2, leaving even wider loopholes for creative drama, but still following it to the same conclusion.
I liked The Machine a bit better because instead of a fictional portrayal on AI finding a way through it's man-made cage, it was about experimenting with an AI that had no cage and seeing what self-discovery brought it.
Ultimately both those films just devolved into meaningless action in the end. I hope this one doesn't. Otherwise the premise looks almost identical to The Machine, right down to the robots name (Eva/Ava, same phonetics).

Lots of interesting science fiction out the last couple years though. Lots seem to be dealing with our infatuation of deconstructing our physical bodies to explore what's left. Between this film, The Machine, Robocop, The Signal, and I'm sure at least one other I'm leaving out, they all have viscerally imagined portrayals of human figures with as little recognizable human traits as possible.

How can I show this to my neighbours and make them understand it?Timeline of this weekend - we saw some of them dressed to the nines getting into a stretched limo on Friday.

On Saturday they (as normally) loudly discussed how the person they saw could have performed for 5 more minutes whilst simultaneously stating how this performer had proven Michael Jackson's saintliness because said MJ had stayed with the performer for 4 days.

It's worth noting at this point all we knew was they went out somewhere in a stretched limo and saw someone who had MJ to visit for 4 days.

On the Sunday the normal loud talking over our fence lead to the discovery that not only did my neighbors take a stretched limo to arrive at a Michael Flatley concert. They couldn't recall the name of the long haired blonde peado with a cigar (it was Jimmy Saville - most prolific sexual predator in history) or as they roundly called him "that Australian dude" (Rolf Harris - more cherished, like painted the queens portrait, but still sent down for being a peed).

So the outcome of this is my neighbors who have a very small 4 bed house (would be 3 except they opened the loft), own 9 cars, have a 32, 26 and 18 year old still living at home. They hire a stretched limo so they go an see Michael Flatley perform live then come home and discuss loudly how Michael Jackson was obviously a good person because he stayed with Michael Flatley. Shortly afterwards they then totally struggled to remember the names of the biggest sex offender ever known in the uk and the most treasured letdown of all time.

This is almost par with them discussing a new flavor of chips/crisps for 45 min or that time 4 of them tried to count the same amount of change for >20 mins and none of them could agree the same amount.

Sorry had to rant - I'd love to confront them over the noise/cars/stupidity etc but I'm a mildly tough 40 year old. Their highly violent and the 26 year is a goddamn cagefighter.

I honestly can't vent enough - literally I could write a novel on how much my neighbors suck. Just as a final point to carry things across - I recently needed to cut back some ivy in my backgarden. During the hour this took they played Natasha Beddingfield's "These Words" 5 times. Yes I'm a Maggot, Yes I'm a 40 year old who probably needs to stop jumping into moshpits. But Natasha Beddingfield??? 5 times?? Really????

[author flagged as a spammer - redacted]

I looked up a bit about their owners (Discovery Communications) - they are a publically traded company on the NASDAQ, so it's probably not a big surprise that they have decided to put short term profits ahead of long term integrity.

Quite disappointing Discovery channel.

@Trancecoach Lets take a HUGE leap and say everything in that article is 100% true...

6 of 7 !!!!

http://fortune.com/global500/bp-6/?iid=G500_lp_toprr

How do you reconcile that with the fact that 6 of the worlds 7 most profitable companies are energy corps? TRILLIONS of revenue and hundreds of billions in profit, to say nothing of the track record for that particular industry, and yet THEY are the victims of some 'eco-friendly' conspiracy....

Just a few headlines from that 'source'

Group Claims 80% of U.S. Population Growth Is From Immigration

Globalists Push EU-style “Union” for Middle East

University Fires Scientist After Discovery Challenges Dinosaur Theory

That last one was my favorite... his 'theory' was thousands of years old... not millions.

Rex Curry is the nation's leading authority on the Pledge of Allegiance. You're right to post the video. The video is completely accurate. The salute used by the Nazis was NOT derived from the socialist Mussolini. And the gesture was not based on the so-called "ancient Roman salute" because the "ancient Roman salute" is a complete fictional, as stated above.

Jacques-Louis David's painting "The Oath of the Horatii" did not associate the salute with classical Rome, and David never said such a thing, and the painting does not show the gesture, it shows three people reaching for weapons, including the use of the left hand. The Horatii lie is a very modern lie, fabricated circa 2006(?) on wakipedia in order to cover-up the Pledge of Allegiance's putrid past.

The socialist Mussolini did NOT adopt what he thought was the Roman salute.

No one should stand for nor chant the Pledge of Allegiance because it was the origin of the Nazi salute and Nazi behavior (see the discoveries of the historian Dr. Rex Curry). The early pledge began with a military salute that was then extended outward to point at the flag (thus the stiff-arm gesture came from the pledge and from the military salute). The pledge was written in 1892 for kindergartners to be forced to recite under the flag at government schools (socialist schools). The pledge was written by an American socialist who influenced other socialists worldwide, including German socialists, who used the gesture under their flag's notorious symbol (their symbol was used to represent crossed "S" letters for their "socialist" dogma -another of Dr. Curry's discoveries). The pledge continues to be the origin of similar behavior even though the gesture was changed to hide the pledge's putrid past. The pledge is central to the US's police state and its continued growth.

Ohhh Swirley.....

...vernacular and skills It no doubt has learned first hand in Its many...errr... forced accommodations.

We can hardly wait to have It demonstrate Its new discoveries encountered upon Its next...errr,,,excursion at the GBH.

...were they...mean to our "little...thing?"

*backup=[...snipped...] from http://www.sciencechannel.com/tv-shows/through-the-wormhole/videos/this-fungus-turns-victims-into-the-crawling-dead.htm ...

German Channel ProSieben - Galileo featured Miroslaw Magola who promotes Telekinesis. Real Magneto, X- Men, Miroslaw Magola's telekinesis is achieved by projecting a portion of his consciousness in the object that he want to move.

Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku : THE FUTURE OF THE MIND: The scientific quest to understand, enhance, and empower the mind.” And his quest to promote: “Telepathy. Telekinesis. Mind reading. Photographing a dream. Uploading memories. Mentally controlled robots.”

Kaku claims all of “these feats” have already been achieved. “These feats, once considered science fiction, have now been achieved in the laboratory, as documented in THE FUTURE OF THE MIND,” Kaku’s website declares.

Kaku notes that his “book goes even further, analyzing when one day we might have a complete map of the brain, or a back up Brain 2.0, which may allow scientists to send consciousness throughout the universe.” Miroslaw Magola alias "Magnetic Man," ( Magnet Mann ) known form Stan Lee's Superhumans - MInd Force who allegedly exhibits telekinetic powers aired on History and Discovery Channel born in Poland and now living in Germany. He claims he can lift objects off the floor, transport them through the air and force them to stick to his body - all using the power of his mind .

He was investigated by Prof. Dr. Dr. Ruhenstroth-­Bauer and Dr. Friedbert Karger of the Max Planck Institute and Dr. David Lewis (psychologist), a neurophysiologist at MindLab, one of the United Kingdom's leading neuro-research centers and Dr. Konstantin Korotkov, professor of Physics at St. Petersburg State Technical University in Russia and Alexander Imich from USA. More [url redacted]

Admirable, perhaps, to still cling to said belief, but not convincing in the least, considering it is something that is neither deniable nor undeniably a possibility. Concluding science to be "proof" of God is merely a logical trap to be avoided.

I say that the presence of design features in living systems is proof of a designer, and that is a logical conclusion. Further, ether life is designed or it isn't; how would you tell whether it was or wasn't? And why would you rule it out and on what basis you would do so? "Because science" is not a meaningful answer to the question. There are good reasons to believe it was designed, and it isn't just flipping a coin.

which your logical leaps and bounds are not able to compete with, no matter how hard your brain tries to find a hidden pattern in anything you can grasp for, like a man drowning in an ocean of possibilities.

Anyone can infer anything from something of similar value, ergo inference without a scientific basis is silly.

What we have observed is that information only comes from minds, and when we find a genetic code inside of our own cells, it is logical to postulate a designer from that discovery; that isn't much of a leap. To say otherwise is simply your own bias speaking. It is not inference without a scientific basis; the basis is our observation and lack of any credible theory to explain the presence of genetic information in our cells. There is no mechanism found in nature which has ever been observed to create it.

Here's a maverick idea.....

Replace the state-sanctioned tool of pubic school indoctrination/de-education with an 'actual' education miraculously providing a generation with the cognitive framework for problem-solving. Instill in the youth a tangible, effective foundation of critical-thinking skills instead of constantly drilling them with reinforcement of controlled behavior within a fascist police-state-society and preparatory for insertion into the workforce or civil-servitude. At the same time, legalize ALL controlled substances decriminalizing the individual's innate right as a human to do what the fuck they will.

Cocaine is no worse than hundreds of drugs or foods or habit-forming activities for that matter, control is the problem. A corner on the market by the cunts who are running the planet off a precipice for personal gain is the 'actual' problem.

Don't blame the substance, blame the abuse of power and a fiendish addiction to control. Drugs have done as much to create the world we enjoy today as the discovery of fire and using it to cook food. A few assholes want to tell you what the fuck to do with fire and spend billions to train monkeys to back them up....Fuck these enemies of humanity.

So, this is a major misconception by the public about where the money actually goes when drugs are developed. Read the link you have there, but with a more realistic eye about where the money is going. Drugs are SUPER expensive, but only because they're super expensive to discover. 'Drug discovery' is a tremendously difficult thing, to the point where it is the wetdream of a professional drug discoverer in the pharma world to discover 1 drug in their 30+ year career. During that time, the team of pharma researchers all have to be paid for their PhD level of expertise, and the human cost in developed countries is quite expensive! If there are 1000 people in one pharma company, and each person makes ~70+ thousand, and benefits cost another 100+ thousand per person each year, then the human cost alone in that rough exercise accounts for 170 million yearly for just 1000 people, and can touch the billion dollar figure per year for very large companies. That is where the money is going in that 1.3 billion dollar figure.

The major problem lies in developing a substance that actually does something, and you know exactly what that something is, including all side effects. To get a statistically valid clinical trial is actually a rather hard thing to do; a poorly designed clinical trial can prove whatever you want it to. Considering your St. John's wort example, the most costly 'drug discovery' component is already finished, it would just need to go through clinical trials as a drug for antidepression. The body of evidence in place may already serve for early phase clinical trials, and it may just need to go through a couple of more trials to prove its efficacy (and determine side effects). It would cost some money, but it would NOT be so prohibitively expensive as starting from complete scratch.

Considering this, the idea that it's 'unfair' to make the supplements world actually prove their product does what it is promised to do (or at the very least, not be harmful) is a bit odd. Quackery is illegal for moral reasons, and hard to argue that what the supplements world is doing is not quackery; particularly with the Dr. Oz zeal, false promises are being sold millions of bottles at a time. It is in the public's interest to get this stuff tested and approved!