The good thing about tuna is the dolphin.
>> ^deathcow:

Hey, you gotta lift heavy metals to gain muscle.>> ^direpickle:
>> ^deathcow:
She eats clean. She'll gobble a can of tuna while her coworkers share a pizza.

Mmm, mercury poisoning.

Hey, you gotta lift heavy metals to gain muscle.>> ^direpickle:

>> ^deathcow:
She eats clean. She'll gobble a can of tuna while her coworkers share a pizza.

Mmm, mercury poisoning.

Uh, ma'am, we're the Blues Brothers. We do blues, rhythm & blues, jazz, funk, soul. We can handle rock, pop, country, heavy metal, fusion, hip hop, rap, Motown, operetta, show tunes. In fact, we've even been called upon, on occasion, to do a polka! However Caribbean is a type of music, I regret to say, which has not been, is simply not, nor will ever be a part of this band's repertoire.

Gotta upvote the original version.

>> ^probie:

I'm as anti-remake as they come, but I also support the re-imagining of a story in a different medium (a la The Watchmen). Seeing something like this sets my mind a fire about what a live action remake of Heavy Metal would look like with today's CGI, etc. They'd have my money, but only if they kept the initial story intact, like they attempted to do with this homage.


Why in the hell would you want a live action Heavy Metal? And the same story, remade? Are you a Hollywood executive? Jesus fucking christ!

The whole point of Heavy Metal is to make it look exactly like the magazine. How about an all-new Heavy Metal using state of the art hand-drawn animation? ... with tasteful CGI assist or maybe one CGI short like Animatrix. That is what the *real* fans of Heavy Metal (and not marketing victim consumoid bots) want to see.

I don't even know what Heavy metal is. Apparently the trailer is fake, but it's still totally awesome.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'heavy metal, live action, trailer, loknar, charlize theron, totally fake' to 'heavy metal, live action, trailer, loknar, charlize theron, totally fake, aeon flux' - edited by RhesusMonk

I'm as anti-remake as they come, but I also support the re-imagining of a story in a different medium (a la The Watchmen). Seeing something like this sets my mind a fire about what a live action remake of Heavy Metal would look like with today's CGI, etc. They'd have my money, but only if they kept the initial story intact, like they attempted to do with this homage.

I don't remember Aeon Flux being a part of Heavy Metal...

In reply to this comment by jonny:
*promote *quality ideas


a hearty thanks my friend.
good to see you posting again.you have great taste.=)

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^ghark:
It's not made that clear in the video, but the reason he says that the plate is safe to store and handle, but not eat off is because Uranium 238 is usually an alpha emitter. Alpha radiation doesn't penetrate skin that well, but it is very dangerous when ingested and the soft tissues become exposed to it. Please correct me if I'm wrong there.

Depends on if you believe in radiation hormesis or linear no-threshold model . Most likely the truth is somewhere in-between (which by default makes hormesis "more" accurate). In the end, though, it is always best to avoid ingesting heavy metals, radioactive or not.
Learning lots about radiation as of late. There is a lot of fear factor behind it, even though our daily lives are pretty much consumed with radiation...NEATO! Bones full of radioactive carbon, potassium, you name it, you most likely have lots of radioactive isotopes of it Once again, truth stranger than fiction


I find the argument between those two models quite fascinating, they both make sense TBH. One interesting thing I found out recently was the enormous difference in radiation exposure between regular x-ray's and CT scans when visiting the doctor. It makes sense that CT scans expose you to more radiation because they make multiple passes to get a better image - however the difference astonished me - a regular chest xray would expose you to 0.06 mSv while a helical CT scan of the chest would expose you to 8 mSV - thirten hundred and thirty three times as much radiation (although the effective dose only ends up being about one hundred times as much). As a comparison point, the typical human is exposed to 2-3 mSv per year, so with a helical chest CT you're getting 3 years worth of radiation in a few seconds.

>> ^ghark:

It's not made that clear in the video, but the reason he says that the plate is safe to store and handle, but not eat off is because Uranium 238 is usually an alpha emitter. Alpha radiation doesn't penetrate skin that well, but it is very dangerous when ingested and the soft tissues become exposed to it. Please correct me if I'm wrong there.


Depends on if you believe in radiation hormesis or linear no-threshold model . Most likely the truth is somewhere in-between (which by default makes hormesis "more" accurate). In the end, though, it is always best to avoid ingesting heavy metals, radioactive or not.

Learning lots about radiation as of late. There is a lot of fear factor behind it, even though our daily lives are pretty much consumed with radiation...NEATO! Bones full of radioactive carbon, potassium, you name it, you most likely have lots of radioactive isotopes of it Once again, truth stranger than fiction

Dunkerton Community Schools in Iowa paid this guy $1,500 to talk about bullying in school.

http://wonkette.com/466810/bachmannite-provocateur-is-preacher-heavy-metal-rap-artist-in-iowa-assembly-gone-awry

come oooooon.
the man was part of heavy metal FFS!
*promote

@Spacedog79

Indeed, this takes a different approach than a LFTR, I wasn't meaning to suggest this would solve a parallel set of problems. And I don't know if the complexity of it should be a deal breaker right away, look at combustion engines, Diesel is by far simpler than Gasoline engines, however both have their uses; complexity alone can't be the deciding factor.

Also, from my understanding...and let me point out again that I am no expert, but it seemed that while they are indeed firing protons, they are firing them at a heavy metal, and through the spallation effect, producing a beam of neutrons (or that is the plan, they currently are just beaming electrons I believe). Either way, it is a complex way to go about fission; but very much like Gas Vs Diesel with the lack of a perfectly sustained reactor (Uranium or Thorium) of perfect ability, research in this quasi-dieselesk solution might not be a terrible waste of time and money.

There is also a "problem" of using the fissile we have today, as far as I understand it. As they are mixed with many other undesirable fissile and non-fissile fission products in a chemical stew. So to use that, you would need a secure, safe, and practical way to go about reconditioning and reconstituting it in a form you could use. Once again, not a deal breaker for that to happen either, but you have to keep your mind and options open for good technologies that offer a different game plan. Ultimately, I think a critical reactor is the way you want to go if you can get the engineering and physics behind you, if not, or in certain situations, perhaps sub-critical will offer some unique solutions.

Thanks for the well wishes, apparently, one of the better nuclear schools is in my state...score! And one of the others is near my family...double score!

Thanks for the promote Geo sent me the link with a what do think of this type message, and, well, I always liked them There are other vids from the duo on videosift already, which is how I knew of them.

http://www.rodgab.com/press_reviews.html

They met in Mexico City, playing in a heavy metal band, but moved to Ireland. The articles linked above are kinda interesting, too.
In reply to this comment by enoch:
never heard of this dude.very awesome!
*promote