Damnit, I thought the point of monkey sex ed was to get them to eat the banana.

Not only am I a bad teacher, I am also both stubborn and happy.

I......
Um......
Holy fucking sheep shit. Bob, did you have a lobotomy recently? You're in rare form today. Rarely are you this ridiculous.

It's not ok to have aids (not just a gay thing you bigoted moron) and knowingly spread it to others. You go to prison for that.

It's certainly not ok to give a pregnancy to a fourteen year old....you go to prison for that.

So I agree, let's treat anti vaxers like your examples and put them in prison.

Their intentional irresponsibility makes them all collectively guilty of manslaughter hundreds of thousands of times over... and that's being generous. Really it's murder, they knew it's deadly.

So...if you realize it's in your best interest to take it, based on old data of who was most vulnerable BEFORE Delta, why the fuck are you so against it for others? Delta is different, it targets young and old. In the first two weeks of August, infections in those under 18 went up over 5%, a trend that started with the onset of Delta and continues to accelerate. Epsilon may target the young. Your ilk hesitating to get vaccinated helped create this new variant and others, so consider yourselves 100% responsible for the increase in child deaths, your stubborn ignorance has killed hundreds if not thousands of children and disabled tens it not hundreds of thousands that need not ever have been in danger. Edit: and for what?! With all your bluster, you got it anyway, but will probably continue to persuade others to not get it.

Totally agree with @StukaFox, "me, me, me, me, me, and fuck you." Is your mantra. I hope you meet up with yourself and take each other out.
Would you have been against it if Trump was still president and telling you it's safe? I bet not....you are exactly that dumb.

In this instance, you shouldn't have a free choice anymore than you have a free choice to poison your community's water supply with a poison that ONLY kills 2%+ and disables >10% (and makes most everyone sick for weeks). Refusing to vaccinate against a deadly airborne virus is like refusing to stop tossing your lawn darts straight up in the air in a crowded stadium because, to paraphrase you, "my fweedums, my wites, fuck you". Is it a certainty you're going to kill and maim people? No, but it's a high likelihood and a crime to put them in that kind of danger even if you never hit anyone, and murder if you kill some.

Republicans have decided that deadly irresponsibility should not just be their right, but their choice....but not their responsibility when it's deadly. So much for personal responsibility.

Enjoy that new underwear I sent you. Ignore that little sponge in the taint area, it's for your comfort, not just to infect you with fournier's gangrene.

Remember that time you said if climate change and sea level rise were real, insurance in places like Florida would skyrocket or disappear. Guess what.

Not only has it skyrocketed like I told you was happening back then, but many companies have now just left places like Florida altogether because it costs them far too much to payout over flooding and extreme weather events that are now regular occurrences.

My guess....you'll ignore what you claimed, ignore what the companies say, and ignore the data that's undeniable and blame liberals for faking the insurance fiasco and faking constant repeated flooding and extreme weather decimating many areas, especially coastal and low lying areas....or you'll just deny things are demonstrably worsening.

What I know for certain, you won't admit you were/are wrong, and won't accept any responsibility for dragging your feet and obstructing vital progress with unending stubborn denial of reality and making the situation exponentially worse and the time to mitigate it exponentially shorter.

Woo boy, this is a doozy! The fact of the matter is a video comment section is not the place to have this conversation. There's too much to discuss, too many questions from one another that are best asked soon after they're conceived, etc. I frankly just don't have the time to respond to everything you said. Don't take this as acquiescence; if you'd like to have a Zoom chat some time, I'd be down.

In any event, I'll respond to what I find either the most important or at least most interesting:

Having theories is definitely the best way to go about most of the things you consider fact (for the moment), but the fact of the matter (no pun intended) is that at some point you'll need to use some of those claims as fact/belief in order to take action. And it's just human nature to, if one believes in a claim for long enough, it becomes fact, despite all your suggestions of objectivity. It's easy to say you're a scientist through and through, but if you're really someone who doesn't believe anything and merely theorize things, I think you'd be a sad human being. But that's a claim that I leave up to the scientists.

> Yes, and I eat animals because they're delicious.

You think that's a defensible moral claim? I find that disgraceful. If you truly think your own pleasure is worth sentient beings' lives then... I don't know what to say to you. That strikes me as callous and unempathetic, 2 traits you often assert as shameful. This is my point. You sound pretty obstinate to at least a reasonable claim. To respond with just "they're tasty". You don't sound reasonable to me.

> You may be correct, but eating meat is hardly the worst thing humans are up to.

Aw, come on @newtboy, I thought better of you than to give me a logical fallacy. The fact that you're resorting to logical fallacies wwould indicate to me that either you're confronting some cognitive dissonance, otherwise why would you stoop to such a weak statement?

> I gladly discuss vegetarianism with honest people, but I'm prepared when they start spouting bullshit like " eating any red meat is more harmful than smoking two packs a day of filterless cigarettes" ...

There is a lot of scientific research (not funded by Big ___) that is currently spouting this "bullshit". What happened to your receptive, scientific, theory-based lifestyle? It's true nutrition science is a fucking smog-filled night mare considering how much money is at stake, but I find it telling that a lot of the corporations are using the same ad men from Big Cigarette to stir up constant doubt.

Again, I find it peculiar that you are highly suspicious of big corporations... except when it comes to something that you want to be true.

Again, this is my point. Take a moment, take a few breaths, and look inside. Can you notice that you're acting in the exact same fashion as the people you purport to be obscenely stubborn?

Check out NutritionFacts if you want to see any of the science. Actual science. I would hope that it would give you at least somedoubt and curiosity.

That's a true scientist's homeostatic state: curiosity. Are you curious to investigate the dozens (hundreds?) of papers with a truly non-confirmation-biased mind? How much of a scientist are you?

> I've never met a vegan that wasn't a bold faced liar in support of veganism, so I'm less likely to give them a full chance at convincing me.

This, for me, raises all sorts of red flags. That's quite a sweeping claim.

> Again, that would be long held theories in my case, and it's not hard to change them. Mad cow disease got me to change until I was certain it wasn't in America. No, I'm not recoiling. I'll listen to anyone who's respectful and honest.

So, you're willing to make decisions based on self-interest and not morality? Well, duh. Everyone does that. It doesn't sound like you had a self-reflective moment. It sounds like you merely had a self-interested decision based on the risk to your own health.

And finally, all your talk about Bob -- of course he acts, consistently, like a twat. I just don't like feeding trolls. I don't think there's anyone on Videosift who's on the precipice and would be pushed over into the Alt-right Pit by Bob's ridiculous nonsense.

> Edit: in general I agree that dispassionate fact based replies with references are better at convincing people than derision, there are exceptions, and there are those who are unconvinceable and disinterested in facts that don't support their lies.

Ironically, I think science has disproved this. Facts don't change minds in situations like this. There are lots of articles on this. I didn't have the wherewithal to dig into their citations, but I leave that (non-confirmation-biased) adventure for you. [1]

---

I knew I wouldn't make this short, but I think it's shorter than it could have been.

Lastly, I'm with @BSR; I do appreciate your perseverance. Not everyone has as much as you seem to have! Whenever I see Bob... doing his thing, I can always be assured you'll take most of the words from my mouth. [2]

[1]
Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds | The New Yorker
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds

This Article Won’t Change Your Mind - The Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/this-article-wont-change-your-mind/519093/

Why People Ignore Facts | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/words-matter/201810/why-people-ignore-facts

Why Many People Stubbornly Refuse to Change Their Minds | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201812/why-many-people-stubbornly-refuse-change-their-minds

Why Facts Don't Always Change Minds | Hidden Brain : NPR
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/743195213

[2] This comment has not been edited nor checked for spelling and grammatical errors. Haven't you got enough from me?

Ahhhhhahahahaha.....you delusional fool.
That's not an answer, it's the same fact free nonsense stupidity you started with.

Every claim, every word is true.
Do you deny Ivanka got a gift of patents worth millions? She did. They bragged about it.
Do you deny Trump owes China money? He does, prove he doesn't.
Do you deny his trade wars cost America tens to hundreds of Billions in losses and tariffs? They did.
Do you deny his trade talks failed? They did.
Do you deny Kevin Bacon was in Footloose? He was.
https://videosift.com/video/That-s-one-stubborn-mule

I can't find a word in it that's untrue, but I expect nothing less from you. You can't factually declare any statements untrue statements with evidence or facts so, like a two year old, you just claim it's all untrue and think you won an argument, but you have lost both the argument and your adulthood.

You still haven't said what's untrue, and claiming it's all untrue is just so stupidly infantile I feel bad for you, but it's the best you've got without direction on how to answer, isn't it?

So sad, Bob. You've got nothing but insist you're the one with everything. You don't bluff well, Bob. Grow up.

I expect you deny Trump's stated lust for Ivanka as a YOUNG girl, I expect you deny his multiple fraud convictions, I suppose you deny his lifetime ban from charities due to charity frauds, or his children. I suppose you deny his having more felons in his cabinet than any two previous administrations, and more convictions while in office than any three combined. I know you deny that tariffs are paid by the country that enacts them, but they are. I expect you deny his trade deal fell through, it did.

That covers weak and corrupt thoroughly.

You have an established pattern of denying facts and spouting lies, so if you agreed with the truth it would instantly come into question. You saying it's 100% un true is a great indicator it's 100% correct.

So you didn't look? It's clear in the photo, and there are plenty of zoomed in versions that are unambiguous. Google image it.

Because being a speed addict explains all the other bat shit crazy shit he's done, and the 3am rambling rage tweeting, the manic paranoia, the inability to form a cogent thought, inappropriate anger, stubbornness, etc. It's not a bit trivial imo. It could be a great reason to insist on random drug testing for presidents.

There's also multiple recent reports that one of his doctors from the 89's-90's was convicted of overprescribing speed to his patients...a Dr feel good. The hippy doctor admitted he was a front, not his main doctor, and admitted he didn't write the medical opinion of Trump's health he produced, Trump did.

"Warned about"....by Noah, not God, right? So Noah failed to convince them it was true, no? If they knew it was coming because they KNEW God was real and had warned them himself...good riddance, they must have been incredibly dumb or suicidal.

I've been warned that Zenu is coming back too....I've been warned that Vikings will pour over a rainbow and murder the world, or many other tales that existed far longer than this Jesus guy's been heard of. I've only been warned of these things by humans who were clearly delusional (or liars), never anyone trustworthy. When the message is unbelievable, and so is the messenger, and the proof is "believe", and there are dozens of contradictory messages with exactly the same level of proof, the idea that a person should choose correctly or suffer eternal punishment is the definition of evil.

If God withholds judgment capriciously out of fickle mercy based on no discernable pattern or rule, and just as often punishes the righteous and rewards the wicked as the reverse, how is that different from random chance?

Why do you stubbornly deny the undeniable existence of El and his son Ba'al, though you see their works daily? Their tales, which predate even the earliest Hebrew scriptures or stories, prove their hand in your existence, yet you refuse to give your devotion and would unfairly discredit them and hand all credit to this Johnny come lately deity. Mot shall have you if you don't repent.
Sounds silly, doesn't it?

No, it wasn't Noahs failing. The scripture says he preached righteousness, so the message was endorsed by God. The reason no one was converted was not due to a failure on Noahs part, or Gods. The message wasn't misunderstood, it was rejected by a wicked generation, which was their free will choice to do so. Because they rejected Gods message they weren't prepared when the flood came. The choice to reject God doesn't eliminate the consequences of rejecting God, in this case being unprepared for the impending global flood which you were warned about for 100 years. In the same sense you are unprepared for the impending second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, which you have been warned about your entire life.

When God withholds or suspends judgment out of mercy, ironically it has the opposite effect on the callous hearts of men:

Ecclesiastes 8:11

Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil

Because you don't see God out and out punishing people when they do evil, you feel free to live how you want regardless. That is how the pre-flood world felt, and that is why they were swept away. In your ongoing effort to put the worst possible spin on everything in scripture, you neglect to understand the fundamental narrative of the story. The reason for that is your stubborn refusal to say God did something good even when it is integral to the narrative which you use to unfairly discredit Him.

Bob. You're just being stubborn.
They didn't refute anything..
Guess all logic escapes your brain. "I don't know" is different from "it didn't happen", they all said "I don't know, I don't recall, I don't think he would do that", not "I know it didn't happen"....guess that's too nuanced for today's republicans' education levels. Sad.

Democrats (all senators) are barred from discussing the FBI report in detail at all, so it's against Senate rules for them to refute any details. They did contradict the idea that it's a report of an investigation of the charges since the fbi refused to interview the accused, the accuser, anyone the accuser named as having knowledge, or inspect her medical records, or any other evidence she has offered them.

No, democrats aren't saying you have to believe her, they're saying you have to actually investigate her charges, democrats and independents are saying his demeanor is unsuited for the supreme court based on his Senate testimony, which was all a display of Republicans spinning on their uncontrolled emotions. Watching it confirmed that "feeling".

Jebus Christ, you can't even keep your own made up numbers right, yesterday it was 17, today it's 10, by next week it will be 15 agreed with her at this rate. Facts are Ford said one thing, others say they didn't see that, only Kavanaugh says it didn't happen.

You heard RGB is upset with democrats enough to quit? Lol...from where, Alex Jones or Trump?

I hope Dumbocrats pull the same move retardicans did and refuse to hold hearings if there's another opening, but they have no spine so likely won't.

Yeah, that lone number looks good by itself, you must be so proud of winning so bigly, and pleased your president has strengthened our union so well instead of dividing us further. Unemployment rates are down, but so is average worker income. More people are working more today, but for less money. I would prefer much higher unemployment with wages high enough that single worker households and stay at home parents become a thing....we're going the other direction to the point where multiple wage earners require multiple jobs just to keep a modest family solvent. If full employment still leaves one in poverty, having more people employed hardly helps escape poverty.

Congratulations on getting a hugely divisive temperamental judge forced through by the skin of your teeth. No whining if democrats do the same things in 2.5 years.

Congratulations! Your video, Stubborn Husky refuses to give up front seat, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 263 Badge!

Your video, Stubborn Husky refuses to give up front seat, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

You say it is OK when Trump and his supporters do it.

Who said Satire? Anyone who looked at context.

"Jeong’s episode has also raised complicated questions about the stubborn nature of harassment that women of color face online. In a statement she posted to Twitter on Thursday, Jeong said she regretted the tweets and that they had been made as a satirical response to people who had harassed her because of her race and gender online. She included an image of the racial slurs directed at her and said she had used language that “mimicked” that of her harassers."

Well, in the first few seconds, although this all sounds very poetic...

The moon does not "give light" it reflects light, so if there was an eclipse, then this would mean there would be no sun to reflect, so although partially true. these are both the same point.

And I can assure you the stars will not fall from the sky. You can tell this was written before we knew that stars were actually just distant suns. So written out of ignorance.

So this prophesy immediately looses credibility.

After that it just falls to creative writing all based on the natural occurrence of a solar eclipse. That's it. An eclipse. Someone in ancient times used a natural occurrence to evoke fear and sow seeds of of a story because people were uneducated and didn't know what it was.

Today we know what an eclipse is. We're educated, so why do people still fall for these stories. they're obviously written out of ignorance (unknowing) of what is now common knowledge.

@shinyblurry, I respect your personal religion. I endorse your need to believe in something to give you strength where you are weak. But educate yourself. Don't listen to this rhetoric and outdated nonsense. Be smart. I know you're an educated man. Don't hide behind this obvious and poorly written prose.
And definitely, don't sow this stuff to others. It just makes you look ignorant to educated people. You have a brain, and if you believe in a god, then you need to believe you were given a brain to use it. So do some thinking for yourself. You and your family will benefit from the use of a little intelligence.

I'm not saying you can't believe in your God. I'm just saying don't forsake intelligence. And if you can't engage in intelligent conversation, then don't preach using rhetoric created by people who where uneducated.


(EDIT: Sorry to be blunt. Sometimes we need blunt. I'm not trying to be mean. I've been learning that sometimes blunt is the only way to get through to stubborn people. I myself am stubborn - but smart enough to see, when pointed out, my errors in what I may think of this world - we are here to live and to learn, lets engage our brains).