My cards on the table, what I said about "every high school" was actually about Canada. I heard it from a police officer who gives talks about drugs to grade school students. I'm assuming the same is true in America. I'm also going to assume you're not high school aged anymore, and so like me, might have more trouble than the average 16-year-old finding a source.>> ^gwiz665:

We live in very different countries evidently. I have to go to some pretty seedy neighborhoods if I want weed here, which makes the "barrier to entry" relatively high. I'm all for selling it in pharmacies or even on the same level as cigarettes and alcohol. More people will try it, because they can get it legally, and that's fine.
>> ^messenger:
Right. And this bill will make it harder to get weed. Right now, weed is for sale in every high school in America. How much easier could it get? State control of weed would kill the illegal trade.>> ^gwiz665:
No. If it's easier to get it, more will use it. Same with guns.
That doesn't mean we should prohibit either though. Pot is less harmful than guns, or hell, arguably even cigarettes, why are they legal while pot is not?
Arbitrary laws based on flawed morality. Bah humbug.

We live in very different countries evidently. I have to go to some pretty seedy neighborhoods if I want weed here, which makes the "barrier to entry" relatively high. I'm all for selling it in pharmacies or even on the same level as cigarettes and alcohol. More people will try it, because they can get it legally, and that's fine.
>> ^messenger:

Right. And this bill will make it harder to get weed. Right now, weed is for sale in every high school in America. How much easier could it get? State control of weed would kill the illegal trade.>> ^gwiz665:
No. If it's easier to get it, more will use it. Same with guns.
That doesn't mean we should prohibit either though. Pot is less harmful than guns, or hell, arguably even cigarettes, why are they legal while pot is not?
Arbitrary laws based on flawed morality. Bah humbug.

Right. And this bill will make it harder to get weed. Right now, weed is for sale in every high school in America. How much easier could it get? State control of weed would kill the illegal trade.>> ^gwiz665:

No. If it's easier to get it, more will use it. Same with guns.
That doesn't mean we should prohibit either though. Pot is less harmful than guns, or hell, arguably even cigarettes, why are they legal while pot is not?
Arbitrary laws based on flawed morality. Bah humbug.

No. If it's easier to get it, more will use it. Same with guns.

That doesn't mean we should prohibit either though. Pot is less harmful than guns, or hell, arguably even cigarettes, why are they legal while pot is not?

Arbitrary laws based on flawed morality. Bah humbug.
>> ^MarineGunrock:

Also, what fucking logic are people using when they claim that legalization will have a direct effect on consumption? If someone wants to smoke, they will, regardless of legality.

>> ^BoneRemake:

Because I have three minutes to piss away at you peoples expense.
http://videosift.com/video/Steve-Martin-Atheist-Hymn-Atheists
-Don-t-Have-no-Songs
umm posted by ... ?? hrmmm " DerHasisttot " ???


Bah! Humbug! :-)

Nah, I just can't get excited about this. It looks very pretty and all, but it's just going to be another "hide behind shit and shoot out" kind of shooter that's fun on the consoles but pure shit on PCs like the first two and Mass Effect 2. Bah humbug.

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

Oh, quit moaning about the hats in TF2. "Who is that running at me in the distance? Is it a scout or a heavy? I can't tell because they're wearing a hat!"

True nuff to be fair, but I can't tell you the number of times I've put a bullet through somebodies tower of hats thinking I'd be awarded a headshot. They do detract from the style of the game imo, plus they shit all over my framerate...


Weapon unlocks did fuck up that "instantly distinguishable class" thing a little bit tho. Demos are either mid range monsters packing tonnes of explosives, or melee tanks, and I quite often only find out which after I've hit them with a rocket or something.

Moan grumble moan humbug. ANEEEEWAI Brink is bad, TF2 is cheaper, more fun, will probably be around longer and actually runs on AMD cards.

Bah! Humbug.

>> ^deathcow:

Movies come out so quick now on blu-ray and DVD that there is practically no reason to expose oneself to the risk of getting logged as a copyright infringer.

Except the big part of not wanting to pay for a movie that you haven't seen.

I have four kids 7 and under, we hardly ever get to go to the movies any more, so that avenue of seeing a movie before buying is out of the question for most movies. Going to a DVD store and hiring discs, and then having to find the time to take them back is just fricken painful to the extreme, can't remember the last time we did that.

>> ^deathcow:

It would take less time to dupe a bluray from BB and leave out all the ads and unskippables than it does to download and burn it.
Bah and humbug. Setting a movie to download and forgetting about it until it's there, waiting to watch on my media server is WAAAAAY less time consuming than going to a video store, bringing it home, waiting for it to rip, then choosing the bits you do and don't want etc. etc.... man, that takes TIME man.

I have been downloading torrents for 7 or 8 years now, and have had ONE notice from a movie company emailed to me via my ISP at the time, and that was years ago. Nothing AT ALL came of that, and the ISP I'm with now, iiNet is on the forefront of battling the movie companies in court against them having to do anything at all to customers who download. So I don't think I'll be seeing much from them.

Again. I really DO download as a precursor to buying IF I actually like the film. If I didn't like it then they didn't lose anything by me doing so because, as I said, I never get time to watch them any other way.

indeed.

Much of my work is on somatic theory.
Chiropractic, as an osteopathy derivative, has some solid basis in that they look at nerve compression at the spine, and while it is certainly true that decompressing innervation at the spine can help with other problems, such as GI issues and asthma, in a technique sense they are only focusing on one aspect of distortion - that of restriction at the spine. However, once there is a distortion at the spine (the bottom of the brain) it becomes a whole body pattern and issue...which requires far more time, patience, and attention to detail than merely popping a facet joint. It requires the type of time and patience that is non-existent in most of western medicine, or chiropractic. The body is a seamless whole.

It's very hard to make a lot of money doing this work.
But a chiro can pop 10 people an hour. A western doc can write 40 scrips an hour.

Massage is typically working by accident. It helps, but it is premised on a muscular approach, which is incredibly misleading. Muscles may dominate the body in terms of size, but they are a reactive system, not a controlling system, and the lowest man on the totem pole in terms of the hierarchy of survival mechanisms. Physical therapy is also stuck on the muscular approach to the body. In fact, this approach typically dominates western thought when it comes to somatic/structural distortion/pain. And most people go to hospitals with essentially somatic complaints. See where i'm going with this?

Harrington rods for scoliosis should one day be properly viewed as barbaric.


In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
A friend of mine had scoliosis, at least I think that what she had, I never heard the proper medical term for it. She had it corrected by doctors inserting some metal rods by her spine, so now her back is all stiff - I'm a little vague on the details since it's a while since I heard the story.

In any case, I agree that we must also heavily scrutinize the medical system, since companies go where the profits are, and if there are no profits to be had, then that kind of medicine is discarded and abandoned. This is what has happened with many potential cancer treatments, since there is less profit in un-patentable formulas than those that can be patented.

If your methods actually do work consistently then it would certainly stand up to scientific standards, it must be replicable and verifiable and that's basically it. The problem is that often it works like "magic" and heals some, but not all with what appears to be the same illness. This is due to a lack of understanding of what is actually wrong with a patient.

The back and nervous system is notoriously hard to "fix" since few people understand it very well and each person is unique (to some extent).

Some "alternative" medicines are perinormal - they work, but we don't know it yet. They are essentially medicines, but we have not determined precisely how and why they help. "Home remedies" are really a proto-version of alternative medicines in this way, in that someone once used it and it worked. Others, like homeopathy, are demonstrably false and are indeed scams. The make wild claims based on nothing but superstition and humbug.

Prayer is also not medicine. If you get bitten by a snake and pray for the venom to leave your body, you die.

The court of public opinion is highly subjective and cannot be trusted to make reliable judgments. This is why the scientific method exists - to eliminate the need for "he said, she said".

It is smart to be weary of the medicinal industry, I'll grant you that, but your doctor is not an arm of that - he (or she) is a healer, that is their goal. I am deeply troubled when certain doctors are influenced by incentives that go against the patient's best interest - it does happen, medicinal firms offering bonuses if you use their products even though they're inferior and so on. But the fact remains that this inferior product has still gone through channels which ensure that it does work, alternative medicine does not.

It is absolutely imperative that people are not deceived to believe that some treatments do more than they think, like when chiropractic offers treatments to non-musceloskeletal problems like ADHD or asthma. It may help your back, fair enough, I've cracked my own back and I think it helps, because it feels good - chocolate feels good too, but it doesn't help my health.

The second such a snake oil salesman does not want to stand up to proper scrutiny is when he has revealed himself to be a fraud. Because if his method is disproved, then he cannot fake it anymore.

I do not doubt that massage therapy does offer relief and helps with muscle problems, I could also believe that chiropractic helps with joint pain, muscle pain or some skeletal problems - but they must be studied and analysed properly and not just pretend like it works, we must know WHY it works.

In reply to this comment by criticalthud:
Some great insights.
My difficulty is in the gross generalizations that are taking place.
I do what some people call "alternative" medicine. I don't necessarily take exception to that title given the state of western medicine.
Growing up with a scoliosis I searched for different approaches to fix the problem, and eventually ended up practicing and teaching manual therapy from a neurological model of the body, focusing on rotational distortion. It is essentially cutting edge, and i can do things with a spine that would make a western neurosurgeon question his approach.

However I may not stand up to scrutiny by western standards, since I essentially view the body in a much different manner, and certainly work with it in a much different manner.
Tomorrow however, may be a different story, as it has been with acupuncture, massage, osteopathy, non-freudian psychology, or any number of treatments that have made their way into the mainstream. Scrutiny is often the court of public opinion, although this court of opinion is greatly effected by what we have been brought up to believe and who we automatically give status and credibility to.

I think it is essential that all practitioners of the healing arts, including western medicine, realize that our actual knowledge of the human body, it's functions, and it's abilities, is very small. And it is exceedingly important to keep those doors to possibilities open.

At the same time, it is incumbent upon us to heavily scrutinize the current accepted treatments which are more often than not inadequate, reliant upon drugs, or are barbaric in nature. At the same time we must heavily scrutinize an overall system which is premised on the industry making a profit, which lends itself to indefinitely treating symptoms rather than preventative medicine.

In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
Scientific method.

"Alternative" medicine wants to do the same thing as Intelligent Design, it wants to take the easy road. ID wants to be in the class room without having sufficient evidence to support its claim. Alternative medicine wants to be sold and used to heal sick people. The latter is fine and even admirable, if it works, but there is insufficient evidence to support the claims that alternative medicine makes.

If you buy a service from me that I cannot provide, then you have been scammed and my claim was bunk. This is what alternative medicine does.

Defining alternative, it's medicine that hasn't gone through thorough scrutiny and does not stand up to it. It is medicine that doesn't work.

Pick your poison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_medicine Homeopathy, Chiropractic, energy therapy, crystals all that stuff.

Regarding massage and acupuncture, I'm in a more relaxed approach, because they don't promise magical solutions. Massage works at healing muscle pain, certainly, and it certainly relaxing. Acupuncture, I don't have sufficient knowledge about to make a definitive judgment about. Naturally, I'm skeptical, because as far as I know, it has not been tested to the proper extent that it should to be called medicine. When I read about more details of it "Qi" and whatnot - I get more skeptical.

It may work, but it should be tested experimentally, before making claims of healing.

People are allowed to use their money as they want, but these things should damn well not be able to call themselves medicine. Relaxation, sure, therapy, perhaps, healing - no.

In reply to this comment by criticalthud:
would you care to define alternative? do you mean non-american, non-western?
does acupuncture stand up to western scrutiny? how about manual therapy? who's scrutiny are you talking about? Tell me how you measure what people FEEL with a machine, or a bloodtest.
how well does typical western medicine deal with back pain? - drugs, drugs, more drugs?
how about a scoliosis? neurological strain patterns? any chronic pain issue?
western medicine, relies on over-drugging it's patients, treating each as a number. What and how they practice is often completely controlled by insurance companies.
perhaps your statement doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
sure there is crap out there, but lets not pretend that western medicine is immune. far from it, it's peddling a good portion of the stinkiest garbage.



In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
Alternative medicine is bunk. Like alternative math or alternative reason.

If there was any truth to it, it would stand up to scrutiny and it would be used as proper treatment. Homeopathy especially is downright fraud.

*debunked

A friend of mine had scoliosis, at least I think that what she had, I never heard the proper medical term for it. She had it corrected by doctors inserting some metal rods by her spine, so now her back is all stiff - I'm a little vague on the details since it's a while since I heard the story.

In any case, I agree that we must also heavily scrutinize the medical system, since companies go where the profits are, and if there are no profits to be had, then that kind of medicine is discarded and abandoned. This is what has happened with many potential cancer treatments, since there is less profit in un-patentable formulas than those that can be patented.

If your methods actually do work consistently then it would certainly stand up to scientific standards, it must be replicable and verifiable and that's basically it. The problem is that often it works like "magic" and heals some, but not all with what appears to be the same illness. This is due to a lack of understanding of what is actually wrong with a patient.

The back and nervous system is notoriously hard to "fix" since few people understand it very well and each person is unique (to some extent).

Some "alternative" medicines are perinormal - they work, but we don't know it yet. They are essentially medicines, but we have not determined precisely how and why they help. "Home remedies" are really a proto-version of alternative medicines in this way, in that someone once used it and it worked. Others, like homeopathy, are demonstrably false and are indeed scams. The make wild claims based on nothing but superstition and humbug.

Prayer is also not medicine. If you get bitten by a snake and pray for the venom to leave your body, you die.

The court of public opinion is highly subjective and cannot be trusted to make reliable judgments. This is why the scientific method exists - to eliminate the need for "he said, she said".

It is smart to be weary of the medicinal industry, I'll grant you that, but your doctor is not an arm of that - he (or she) is a healer, that is their goal. I am deeply troubled when certain doctors are influenced by incentives that go against the patient's best interest - it does happen, medicinal firms offering bonuses if you use their products even though they're inferior and so on. But the fact remains that this inferior product has still gone through channels which ensure that it does work, alternative medicine does not.

It is absolutely imperative that people are not deceived to believe that some treatments do more than they think, like when chiropractic offers treatments to non-musceloskeletal problems like ADHD or asthma. It may help your back, fair enough, I've cracked my own back and I think it helps, because it feels good - chocolate feels good too, but it doesn't help my health.

The second such a snake oil salesman does not want to stand up to proper scrutiny is when he has revealed himself to be a fraud. Because if his method is disproved, then he cannot fake it anymore.

I do not doubt that massage therapy does offer relief and helps with muscle problems, I could also believe that chiropractic helps with joint pain, muscle pain or some skeletal problems - but they must be studied and analysed properly and not just pretend like it works, we must know WHY it works.

In reply to this comment by criticalthud:
Some great insights.
My difficulty is in the gross generalizations that are taking place.
I do what some people call "alternative" medicine. I don't necessarily take exception to that title given the state of western medicine.
Growing up with a scoliosis I searched for different approaches to fix the problem, and eventually ended up practicing and teaching manual therapy from a neurological model of the body, focusing on rotational distortion. It is essentially cutting edge, and i can do things with a spine that would make a western neurosurgeon question his approach.

However I may not stand up to scrutiny by western standards, since I essentially view the body in a much different manner, and certainly work with it in a much different manner.
Tomorrow however, may be a different story, as it has been with acupuncture, massage, osteopathy, non-freudian psychology, or any number of treatments that have made their way into the mainstream. Scrutiny is often the court of public opinion, although this court of opinion is greatly effected by what we have been brought up to believe and who we automatically give status and credibility to.

I think it is essential that all practitioners of the healing arts, including western medicine, realize that our actual knowledge of the human body, it's functions, and it's abilities, is very small. And it is exceedingly important to keep those doors to possibilities open.

At the same time, it is incumbent upon us to heavily scrutinize the current accepted treatments which are more often than not inadequate, reliant upon drugs, or are barbaric in nature. At the same time we must heavily scrutinize an overall system which is premised on the industry making a profit, which lends itself to indefinitely treating symptoms rather than preventative medicine.

In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
Scientific method.

"Alternative" medicine wants to do the same thing as Intelligent Design, it wants to take the easy road. ID wants to be in the class room without having sufficient evidence to support its claim. Alternative medicine wants to be sold and used to heal sick people. The latter is fine and even admirable, if it works, but there is insufficient evidence to support the claims that alternative medicine makes.

If you buy a service from me that I cannot provide, then you have been scammed and my claim was bunk. This is what alternative medicine does.

Defining alternative, it's medicine that hasn't gone through thorough scrutiny and does not stand up to it. It is medicine that doesn't work.

Pick your poison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_medicine Homeopathy, Chiropractic, energy therapy, crystals all that stuff.

Regarding massage and acupuncture, I'm in a more relaxed approach, because they don't promise magical solutions. Massage works at healing muscle pain, certainly, and it certainly relaxing. Acupuncture, I don't have sufficient knowledge about to make a definitive judgment about. Naturally, I'm skeptical, because as far as I know, it has not been tested to the proper extent that it should to be called medicine. When I read about more details of it "Qi" and whatnot - I get more skeptical.

It may work, but it should be tested experimentally, before making claims of healing.

People are allowed to use their money as they want, but these things should damn well not be able to call themselves medicine. Relaxation, sure, therapy, perhaps, healing - no.

In reply to this comment by criticalthud:
would you care to define alternative? do you mean non-american, non-western?
does acupuncture stand up to western scrutiny? how about manual therapy? who's scrutiny are you talking about? Tell me how you measure what people FEEL with a machine, or a bloodtest.
how well does typical western medicine deal with back pain? - drugs, drugs, more drugs?
how about a scoliosis? neurological strain patterns? any chronic pain issue?
western medicine, relies on over-drugging it's patients, treating each as a number. What and how they practice is often completely controlled by insurance companies.
perhaps your statement doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
sure there is crap out there, but lets not pretend that western medicine is immune. far from it, it's peddling a good portion of the stinkiest garbage.



In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
Alternative medicine is bunk. Like alternative math or alternative reason.

If there was any truth to it, it would stand up to scrutiny and it would be used as proper treatment. Homeopathy especially is downright fraud.

*debunked

This appears to just be a conversation between two equal individuals about current events, and of course therein lies the problem.

Bill O'Reilly is incredibly self absorbed and has no respect for Obama but he should at least have respect for the office that Obama holds and as such should maintain some sense of propriety when speaking with him. Now don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that he should show reverence, I am just saying that civility and courtesy would add legitimacy to this so called interview.

Bill doesn't care about the answers to the questions as to him the question is more a method through which he can express his own opinion on the matter. So why should he wait for an answer? He must truly think that people are more interested in his opinion than they are the President's.

As for the general value of this "conversation" that we have been made privy to...
Well, this dynamic has been around for a long long time.

"The 'interview,' as at present managed, is generally the joint product of some humbug of a hack politician and another humbug of a newspaper reporter." ["The Nation," Jan. 28, 1869]

Humbug - a person who is not what he or she claims or pretends to be; impostor.

Bah humbug, motherfuckers.

I get mine dupeoffed to this, and then it gets discarded. Bah humbug. I'll resubmit then.

Good, then we're agreed.
>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^gwiz665:
Bah humbug. I don't like the imagery of burning books, but if no one is hurt in the process, go right ahead. Burn books, flags and whatever symbols you like.

There's a difference between defending one's legal right to do that kind of stuff, and actually condoning what's done.
Legally, yes, let them burn books, flags, and whatever symbols they like, but I'm still going to say hatefully and ignorantly burning Qur'ans is a bad thing that people shouldn't choose to do.