*nochannel

*documentaries
*shortfilms
*british

Can't see a kid watching a Louis piece. Good documentary, I watched it a couple months ago.

http://videosift.com/search?q=louis+theroux

***Crap- didnt take out shortfilms. Egads what to do now ! I do not want to mess up the page anymore with spambot.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'cute, kids, love, conflict' to 'cute, kids, love, conflict, do not want' - edited by jonny

Do NOT want.

>> ^Unsung_Hero:

Road trip with his dog = No eating, drinking, changing CD's, picking nose, or crotch adjusting.


Yeah I love my dogs, but I would try sticking him in the backseat or somewhere else to try to get him comfortable. You really DO NOT want to reinforce that behavior, good for a few videos and trips though.

Both my dogs on LONG road trips I stick in the flat bed of the back of the SUV, with the back seats down too. Usually there is a bunch of camping gear and various other stuff back there off to on side and they get the other, but they really like walking around on a flat area with some blankets below them for cushion and the Lhaso Apso needs a stuffed animal to be happy (he's like a 4 year old kid--I must admit it's a bit like this behavior, but it doesn't bug anybody and he seems to feel far more safe with his plush buddy...it's cute). The Terrier could give a rats ass about what is happening in the world, but he just wanders around to the various windows watching, he LOVES looking out the back window. Eventually the Terrier goes to sleep and that lets the Lhaso relax and he snuggles up against the Terrier and they go to sleep cuddled up, should throw a pick up.

Anyway, I really just wanted to talk about my dogs on car trips, but long story short: don't coddle them too much. You got to choose your moments. Hell watching the dog whisperer taught me a lot about dog psychology. It also shows HOW absolutely wrong "dog experts" are ALWAYS wrong about them--like putting down dogs that have been rescued from bad homes because they "puppy-guard" their food and are INTENSELY aggressive about it, they put these animals down. The Dog Whisperer EASILY modifies their psychology and STOPS it.

This guy should watch a few shows. Luckily my parents had parents that had some farm backgrounds, so animals were a must and how to handle them. So I've always been able to train my dogs and get them to do what I want. My friends can be oblivious, but really a show like the Dog Whisperer is perfect for people that have a dog and WANT to teach them to do other things or things they do differently.

I love dogs though, all types. Mans best friend, bar none. Smart enough to be useful (and some even save your damned LIFE) and their psychology allows them to be incredibly affectionate and wonderful, but YOU as their master MUST BE as well!

/I've said too much!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Thanks for reaching out like this - I have to say I'm kind of intrigued. One way to prove identity would be to have these people make a short video wherein they address us directly. Although, it could be BlankFist in Mrs. Doubtfire makeup.>> ^Boise_Lib:

My correspondence with @silverpoint16 via Youtube.
Posted with permission.

I am not a sockpuppet
I think I begin to understand why you where checking up on me yesterday. I am communicating with you via YT to ask your advice on how to proceed because you contacted me yesterday.
The accounts in question are not sock puppet accounts. We are innocent of the charges and we are five real people.
Here's the backstory. It is not coincide that all accounts were opened within a short period of time. The 5 of us became friends on YouTube because we admired the videos each other has created. Most of them are cat channels. When one of us discovered Videosift and liked what we saw, we shared it with the others and all of us decided to set up accounts.
We are an enthusiasic, friendly and supportive group of people on YouTube and we have taken that behaviour to Videosift where we have apparently aroused some suspicions.
This group is active commenters and participants in the communities they join. And yes we have been upvoting and commenting on each other's submissions but it's because we truly like what each other has posted. Is this wrong?
I can't speak for the others but I love the Videosift site and I would hate to be banned because I have been over enthusiastic and mistaken for the sockpuppet of a guy I've never heard of before.
So what is the best way to clear up this misunderstanding? I assure you we have not been trying to deliberately harass anyone. We're just trying to make friends.
Silver

My response to silverpoint16 on Youtube.

Silver,
blankfist is an extremely intelligent and vindictive person who was rightly banned from videosift for being abusive of members here.
As far as clearing up any misunderstandings that's a hard one. Any protests you guys make could be seen (will been seen) as just another ploy by blanky. dag is a very careful person and will not take unwarranted action. If you just continue being yourselves--and avoid dystopianfuturetoday and Issykitty--you will probably be okay (as Issy has said someone posted personal information on reddit about them--if I knew who did that I would kick some ass).
I must admit that I still have doubts--but as I said if you are the person from Canada who puts video cameras on her cats I think you are neat.
Do I have your permission to post your message on the Sift Talk?
Boise_Lib

Received from silverpoint16

Yes you have my permission to post my previous message on the Sift Talk.
I understand that from your point of view it will be difficult to prove we are who we say we are. We will continue to be ourselves, those of us that choose to continue using your site. These accusations are very upsetting. I will tell the others to avoid dystopianfuturetoday and Issykitty. I am very sorry to hear that their docs have been dropped on reddit. That is very wrong and I agree that the culprit's ass should be soundly kicked.
I would like to say a word about Jazzy77. It seems a bit harsh to ban her for having the word puppet in her profile. I know she actually meant puppet as in marionette. I sincerely hope that you will reconsider that decision and ask her directly about any concerns you might have.
I am really the person from Canada who puts video cameras on her cats. I guess only time will convince you of that.
Silver

Is this proof that they are not sock puppets? No, but banning should only be used after actionable activity--not suspicious activity. We Do Not want to kick people out just because we think they might be up to something. @marinara please take the ban off of jazzy77 until we know more about this situation.
[Note to silverpoint16--I wasn't clear enough--I don't represent videosift, I'm just an interested person. dft and Issykitty are my friends and really great people who have reason to be leery--please don't think badly of them--or the sift.]

My correspondence with @silverpoint16 via Youtube.
Posted with permission.

I am not a sockpuppet

I think I begin to understand why you where checking up on me yesterday. I am communicating with you via YT to ask your advice on how to proceed because you contacted me yesterday.

The accounts in question are not sock puppet accounts. We are innocent of the charges and we are five real people.

Here's the backstory. It is not coincide that all accounts were opened within a short period of time. The 5 of us became friends on YouTube because we admired the videos each other has created. Most of them are cat channels. When one of us discovered Videosift and liked what we saw, we shared it with the others and all of us decided to set up accounts.

We are an enthusiasic, friendly and supportive group of people on YouTube and we have taken that behaviour to Videosift where we have apparently aroused some suspicions.

This group is active commenters and participants in the communities they join. And yes we have been upvoting and commenting on each other's submissions but it's because we truly like what each other has posted. Is this wrong?

I can't speak for the others but I love the Videosift site and I would hate to be banned because I have been over enthusiastic and mistaken for the sockpuppet of a guy I've never heard of before.

So what is the best way to clear up this misunderstanding? I assure you we have not been trying to deliberately harass anyone. We're just trying to make friends.

Silver

My response to silverpoint16 on Youtube.

Silver,

blankfist is an extremely intelligent and vindictive person who was rightly banned from videosift for being abusive of members here.

As far as clearing up any misunderstandings that's a hard one. Any protests you guys make could be seen (will been seen) as just another ploy by blanky. dag is a very careful person and will not take unwarranted action. If you just continue being yourselves--and avoid dystopianfuturetoday and Issykitty--you will probably be okay (as Issy has said someone posted personal information on reddit about them--if I knew who did that I would kick some ass).

I must admit that I still have doubts--but as I said if you are the person from Canada who puts video cameras on her cats I think you are neat.

Do I have your permission to post your message on the Sift Talk?

Boise_Lib

Received from silverpoint16

Yes you have my permission to post my previous message on the Sift Talk.

I understand that from your point of view it will be difficult to prove we are who we say we are. We will continue to be ourselves, those of us that choose to continue using your site. These accusations are very upsetting. I will tell the others to avoid dystopianfuturetoday and Issykitty. I am very sorry to hear that their docs have been dropped on reddit. That is very wrong and I agree that the culprit's ass should be soundly kicked.

I would like to say a word about Jazzy77. It seems a bit harsh to ban her for having the word puppet in her profile. I know she actually meant puppet as in marionette. I sincerely hope that you will reconsider that decision and ask her directly about any concerns you might have.

I am really the person from Canada who puts video cameras on her cats. I guess only time will convince you of that.

Silver

Is this proof that they are not sock puppets? No, but banning should only be used after actionable activity--not suspicious activity. We Do Not want to kick people out just because we think they might be up to something. @marinara please take the ban off of jazzy77 until we know more about this situation.

[Note to silverpoint16--I wasn't clear enough--I don't represent videosift, I'm just an interested person. dft and Issykitty are my friends and really great people who have reason to be leery--please don't think badly of them--or the sift.]

lol @ the "do not want' tag.

@Unaccommodated

Humans are no longer a part of the competitive 'survive and procreate' gene-war that is the natural world, or at least we're in the process of struggling our way out of that tangle. Very soon, our evolution will be defined by wholly non-naturalistic parameters.

We are not starving. Nothing is going to eat us. Our decisions are not made purely by instinctual drives. Of course it's usually accurate to say that we're still subject to the laws of physics and their emergent systems; it ought to be obvious contextually that's not the nature I'm suggesting we have surpassed.

Your appeals to natural law are inapplicable to human endeavour.

At the most fundamental level of our existence, more fundamental even than physical law, we are individual consciousnesses possessing a general intelligence - inherited, admittedly, from an evolutionary heritage that is no longer relevant; from which we should always strive to divorce ourselves.

Marriage is ultimately whatever we want it to be. One thing I do not want it to be is a state-driven instrument of social conformity.

He has a point unless...they are not upset because there exists a nativity scene--it's probably because it is on public property.
There are non-xtians who pay taxes for the property who do not want the area used for proselytism. Not because it makes anyone "feel icky."

There are people of the type he is describing (drive me nuts too)--but we don't know the full story about the case that started him off.

This collective is for movies,music,documentaries,angry rants, and any controversial sifts that would qualify as 'historical documents.' If you believe that any posting is a historical document or provides a competing view contrary to 'accepted' history, then please feel free to post it in this collective.

I DO NOT want this to be a collective only of staid government films, videos of Presidents and the powerful giving speeches, or safe-for-toddlers History Channel stuff.

What is historically momentous may be subjective. However, personal MySpace video diary 'histories' are discouraged.

It's natural that atheists proselytize, because atheism is a religion:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/6034949/Atheism-Is-Protected-As-a-Religion-says-Court-

It has its own creation story:

"Thus, a century ago, [it was] Darwinism against Christian orthodoxy. To-day the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with religious fervour, and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith."

Grene, Marjorie [Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, University of California, Davis], "The Faith of Darwinism," Encounter, Vol. 74, November 1959, pp.48-56, p.49

with its own miracles:

"Time is, in fact, the hero of the plot... given so much time the 'impossible' becomes possible, the possible probable and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs miracles."
George Wald, "The Origin of Life," Physics and Chemistry of Life, 1955, p. 12.

In which its adherants have total faith:

I have faith and belief myself... I believe that nothing beyond those natural laws is needed. I have no evidence for this. It is simply what I have faith in and what I believe.

Isaac Asimov
Counting the Eons P.10

I do not want to believe in God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible: spontaneous generation arising to evolution

George Wald - Harvard Professor
Nobel Laureate

They believe it even in the face of contradicting evidence

Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed but rather evolved.

Francis Crick Nobel Laureate
What Mad Pursuit p.138 1988

Much evidence can be adduced in favor of the Theory of Evolution from Biology, Biogeography, and Paleontology, but I still think that to the unprejudiced the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation.

EJH Cornor, Cambridge
Contemporary Botanical Thought p.61

It provides a comprehensive belief system:

Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideaology, a secular religion- a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with its meaning and morality...

Michael Ruse Florida State University
National Post 5/13/00

Atheists know they are right no matter what:

No evidence would be sufficient to create a change in mind; that it is not a commitment to evidence, but a commitment to naturalism. ...Because there are no alternatives, we would almost have to accept natural selection as the explanation of life on this planet even if there were no evidence for it.

Steven Pinker MIT
How the mind works p.182

Even if they have to suppress the truth to prove it:

"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."

Lewontin, Richard C. [Professor of Zoology and Biology, Harvard University], "Billions and Billions of Demons", Review of "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark," by Carl Sagan, New York Review, January 9, 1997. (Emphasis in original)

"In fact the a priori reasoning is so entirely satisfactory to me that if the facts won't fit in, why so much the worse for the facts is my feeling."

Erasmus Darwin, in a letter to his brother Charles, after reading his new book, "The Origin of Species," in Darwin, F., ed., "The Life of Charles Darwin," [1902], Senate: London, 1995, reprint, p215.

They are true believers:

of all choices, atheism requires the greatest faith, as it demands that ones limited store of human knowledge is sufficient to exclude the possibility of God.

francis collins human genome project

It won't be long before there are atheists churches and street preachers handing out tracks.

But here's the thing... who's the idiot who would waste his time to go to a hospital or whatever, sign a waiver stating that in the case he dies he doesn't want his organs to be donated? If you die, you can't sign a waiver saying you don't want to be a donor


>> ^hpqp:

I SO wish this was the case where I live everywhere. But you now what I was told when I asked why it wasn't the case in Switz? "People would automatically sign off because of their beliefs". Well fuck.>> ^EMPIRE:
fortunately, in my country, unless you signed a waiver specifically stating you do not want to be an organ donor, you are one automatically. Like it should be.

I SO wish this was the case where I live everywhere. But you now what I was told when I asked why it wasn't the case in Switz? "People would automatically sign off because of their beliefs". Well fuck.>> ^EMPIRE:

fortunately, in my country, unless you signed a waiver specifically stating you do not want to be an organ donor, you are one automatically. Like it should be.

fortunately, in my country, unless you signed a waiver specifically stating you do not want to be an organ donor, you are one automatically. Like it should be.