Totally true....but in all honesty, my car is so rusted that the entire body is really a crumple zone at this point, but not an engineered crumple zone.
The bronco is much taller/higher than the discovery in that vid, and much tougher, with 500%-1000% more bumper, but it only has lap belts, not even a shoulder strap, so in that situation if I don't drive up over them I'll probably take a steering wheel through the chest.
EDIT:The Jeep is even higher, so more likely to drive over anything, with no bumper, just protruding front tires to bounce off or pop, full 2.5" roll cage, and four point seat belts attached to the cage. It's safer than any normal car made today thanks to the add ons.

BUT, remember, the crumple zones work to decelerate BOTH cars in an accident, not just the car with the crumple zone, so as long as the car I hit has them, I'll be OK....maybe. My CAR will certainly survive better than the newer car, at least. ;-)

What I saw actually said she had to stop on that lap, too much damage. I'm not sure about the one that was hit though.

I don't think they're particular friendly, they seem to be interested in the bag of Klenät (kleinur?) the videographer has in their lap.

I read an article the other day that points out how unscientific and flawed the original blog is. But the genie is out of the bottle, people easily believe those "everything you thought you knew is wrong" articles and this will now be treated as fact. Critical thinking can be a conversation killer but it's preferable to believing stupid shit like this.

This "scientific" study was done by randomly picking 250 pictures that people had chosen to upload on the Internet. And then based the conclusion on the fleeting looks that any camera will capture from anybody's face and body position. Hardly can be classified as a scientific study, reviewed by peers, etc. But now there are articles saying "science shows dogs don't like to be hugged".

I'm sure some dogs certainly do not like to be hugged. But my 100 pound buddy climbs up on my lap on the couch, elbow in my crotch, and demands to be hugged.

So, vegans don't believe homo sapien erectus is part of nature?

Ever see how terrifying every day is for your typical herbivore in the wild?
I'm not saying the factory farms aren't cruel, they are, and they should be abolished, but your typical small-farm animal lives in the lap of luxury before the axe falls (and quickly).

Nature (and corporations) are cruel, man typically isn't.

While it would be cool, it would be rather difficult to execute.
Weight is a huge deal in these things, and adding weapons would detract from speed.
Altered reality would be very cool with an OSD, but I think that may be a little ways away yet.
Now bumping and grinding happens all the time. Multiple times I've seen quads come up from under another quad and send it spinning.
Most of the times pilots have trouble even finishing the maximum number of laps they can get before they crash. Hell a good number never make it through lap one. Also the crashes never look good through the goggles. An outside view is best. I've see quads hit a pole and shoot 150 feet in the air, spinning the whole way, only to explode in pieces when the hit about 100 yards down range. It was awesome. But from the goggles it just looked like you were inside a spinning top (A blur).

Your video, One lap in the drone racing league, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

To more directly respond to the video though, the answer, as they already talked about is the media's fault. Bernie, despite his open socialism, is not very controversial. He's nuanced, shown that he can give complex answers to complex problems and actually seems to be interested in governance.

THOSE THINGS ARE BORING! Doing your job well is often boring. Media doesn't like boring. The media has their profits to think about, so they're going to generate controversy.

This is not groundbreaking at all. I call it the Cartman effect. South Park episodes usually focus on what crazy thing Cartman is going to do next. The show revolves around it. He does completely insane, amoral, disgusting things that no one should ever do...but the audience laps it up. Similar thing occurs with Sheldon of The Big Bang Theory. As I've already compared it to, Reality shows do the exact same thing. The contestant who everyone hates is kept on as long as possible, who otherwise would have been eliminated long ago. People love to hate that person. They keep watching to see what they'll do next.

This perfectly describes Trump. People who will never vote for him in a million years still follow what he does just to see what happens next. This also describes Fox "News" It recently just got ranked the highest in viewership for 2015 again. The right loves to pretend that means that their views are popular. No, that just means everyone wants to watch the trainwreck.

This is also why the Republican debates got more press than the Democratic ones. All the Republican candidates were fighting each other tooth and nail. All were going after Trump. There were a lot of catfights and lots of drama. Meanwhile, in the Democrat debates, everyone gets along. Even when they disagree, they do so in a constructive manner and everyone gets along. No drama, therefore no press. Being serious is boring and that doesn't generate ad revenue for media.

Having an outrageous, controversial candidate is still not enough to get elected though, in fact it cuts both ways. When you put forth a "Cartman" candidate, sure it rallies lots of supporters. But it also rallies lots of opponents (or more) against the candidate. This is exactly what happened with Palin.

Elections have turned into being more about voting against the person you don't want than voting for the person that should be in office. "Anybody but X"

Recently watched this series on TV. It really surprised me how little I knew about the animal I've spent so much time with my whole life (and is sitting on my lap right now).

So you make up out of thin air the most depressing story of what this guy's life might eventually turn out to be, use words of divisiveness (look! he's scrounging off the taxpayer everyone!) and use that to justify pre-emptively killing mentally ill people who fit the definition of "dangerous" by your Dickensian outlook.

You want to talk about people scrounging off the taxpayer then let's talk about corporate welfare and dodgy tax havens, about how starbucks, google and amazon get away with paying no tax when we are taxed on our earnings. You call this ill man a scrounger, when george osbourne's family no less has a dodgy 6 million offshore tax deal to name but one of a million examples.

Or let's talk about this guy's parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters who paid into the social system, earning potentially millions for this country. In return they only ask that their son is cared for with respect and dignity in spite of the nature of his illness, and the social system would still have made a net surplus off their family.

How about we talk about the recovery he made as a counsellor for PTSD sufferers or other mentally ill people? Or how in ten years time he ends up as a lollipop man helping kids cross the street to school. What about all the tax he eventually paid on his subsequent and previous earnings, does that matter?

Your dim, dark prediction and understanding of mental illness AND socialism is fucking archaic. Were you frozen in Victorian Britain and thawed out last week or something? Go back to watching the idiot box, i'm sure the latest episode of benefits street will keep you distracted while cameron and his cronies swindle this country. I don't mean to make this overly political but this is EXACTLY what the politics of divide and rule is all about. The TV programs, the newspapers - with shows and stories about benefits and migrants - they all conspire to convince person A that they should blame person B, meanwhile person Z is laughing their way to the bank. And you lap it up and take it to the extreme of putting PEOPLE to sleep!?

In this country, we all contribute to the social system so that everyone can be looked after. It drives me potty hearing someone complain about taxpayer's money going to ill and unfortunate people when all it would take is one single bad day for that same person to suddenly need all that help and more.

*promote the never surrender mentality of rally racing.
You can only be sure you've lost if you've quit.
The first off road race I ever saw was a short course race in the LA Coliseum, and the front runner completely lost a front wheel with 2 laps to go...and continued on to win the race. I was hooked from then on.

So when the waiter trips and spills it on your lap, that's just "Surprise Tea"?

Poor woozie babies. Last year, after my Elwood came home from a dental procedure, he was so comfortable curled up in my lap he just peed. Jake pees in the carrier before we even see the vet ... no need for drugs. Reminds me, gotta stock up on pee pads before their yearly exams this coming Monday. Sigh

I watched some snippets of it for amusement. It's pretty clear the US debate, especially during the primaries are geared towards entertainment. I really hope this isn't the direction that debates go here in Australia although our short campaign cycle means we usually only get a few debates anyway.

They did ask the obvious tough questions of candidates like Trump (bankruptcies, PCness) but the willingness to let them ramble on with empty platitudes and campaign lines (not just the moderators not keeping them in check but the audience's willingness to lap it up) really speaks to how it's much more about emotion and attitude than content.