Favorite part is the contrast between 11:37 John Wayne as Genghis Khan and 11:44 Meryl Streep as Julia Child. Awesome.

The human species measures elevation relative to sea level, as they are both a terrestrial and a single-planet species. So to adopt the common parlance of this species one must accept that Mount Everest is indeed the tallest mountain on Earth. To vocally argue against this point amongst the humans would either clue these clothed-primates to your extraterrestrial origins, or may otherwise cause them to view you as the most haughty of pedants, and cast aspersions on you who revels in the intentional abstrusity of abstract technicality.

I want to like these, as I enjoy the concept, but find the guy's presentations are always both deceptive and entirely superficial.

'Microscope from Scratch! Watch as I stumble through making a glass-like substance again in a way that is so incredibly ass-backwards its surprising I don't burn down my garage, then watch me copy a paper microscope with paper I technically made using a bunch of equipment other people let me use, then finally watch me use glass (which I purchased and nearly failed at making into simple beads) in that microscope to eventually show you a ridiculously fuzzy image of a stained microscope slide I also purchased. Thanks patreons!'

And here we are, just about 2017, and 'freethinkers' are still convincing themselves that sending 100 million tons of carbon up into the sky every day does nothing to the air, water and soil carbon sinks. And to suggest it does and also own a car or fly in a plane? You're a degenerate hypocrite.

Very glad you pointed this out, as the international cabal of hundreds of thousands of researchers (people who literally earn their livings by questioning established norms and developing new ideas and solutions, and are therefor pretty hard to keep toeing the line in this cabal) will certainly be angry at Neil deGrasse Tyson for owning that nice car, and flying in airplanes, and no doubt eating burgers while wearing clothes made in China. We, the cabal, definitely need to chat with Neil, as that luxory sedan only get 19 city/29 highway,... with such hypocritical actions, he may as well be handing out pamphlets telling people about our secret anthropogenic global warming cabal, and its goals to, um, regulate the human contributions to the warming of our one habitable planet.

Sorry I lost the snark there at the end because I forget what reason the conspiracy theorists give for 'AGW shills'... is it somethng to do with a moral argument against Exxon and other energy mega companies? Again, sorry, would appreciate help with that part.

back of the envelope!

hey, lets talk about x-rays!
skin is boring; I want to see skeletons!

hey man!

http://videosift.com/video/HEALTH-We-are-Water-dir-Eric-Wareheim-wow-so-creepy

ahoy! I replied to this note, and attempted to maintain civility. cheers!

In reply to this comment by BansheeX:
Forget about stupidity on both sides, you people always pick a punching bag who can't defend their position to make your own dumb viewpoint seem like the right one.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/01/co2_fairytales_in_global_warmi.html

CO2 is a fundamental building block of life, and current levels are NOWHERE NEAR where they have been in the past. Moreover, the correlation of CO2 and Earth temperature is deeply flawed. It's far more likely that temperatures rise and fall in the short term as a result of solar cycles or some other phenomena, and that increased CO2 levels are a corresponding RESULT of temperature change rather than the cause. That's what gives the idiots that nice correlating graph where they can claim the opposite. A more detailed look at ice core graphs show us that temperature changes occur BEFORE changes in CO2 levels. The global warming crowd has it completely reversed that CO2 is driving temperature.

Moreover, the last century's warming trend has been a mere .8 celsius, well within natural expectations given the last 1000 years. I suppose the vikings were also somehow responsible for the even larger climactic swing in temperature known as the Little Ice Age from 1000 to 1200 AD? From 1940 to 1970, there was a cooling trend which led to a global cooling scare. We were all supposed to be frozen in ice by now.

The idea that mankind is capable of affecting earth's temperature is just laughable. If it was even possible to have globally banned coal and oil the last 200 years, the only thing you'd have accomplished is a complete eradication of 200 years of human progress towards cleaner, more efficient technologies like nuclear (which you luddites have also blocked while countries like China and France kick our freaking asses).

http://www.dailytech.com/Chinas+Nuclear+Power+Efforts+Surge+Ahead/article14911.htm

So what exactly are we supposed to do? We can't do nuclear because you boneheads don't want to recycle or store the voluminously small captured waste, you'd rather burn your fuel and disperse it into the atmosphere than put something in a single mountain for a thousand years until we jettison it into the sun. You herald wind power, which takes massive amounts of steel, land, and maintenance for relatively little power output. You'd have to cover an area the size of Montana with windmills just to meet TODAY'S domestic power demands. That's how bloody inefficient it is relative to nuclear, and unless you magically discover a magical material like steel that is way cheaper and 1% as heavy, it's going to hit a wall pretty soon. Wind is fine for the wind belt and rural areas in Iowa, solar is fine for the desert in Arizona. But to say that wind and solar can themselves provide even a majority of our national need for cheap power is pure insanity. It's pure insanity, and anyone who's looked at the numbers knows it.

hah, i was just listening to that.

and coke is for scumbags. (with the exception of the late r.james, who was more insane than scumbag)

In reply to this comment by Farhad2000:
Um check this out http://www.videosift.com/video/Hexstatic-Wild-Stlye-Mash-Up-Battle

In reply to this comment by bamdrew:
the mix at ~8:30 is rad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_In_Gaza
... the info was in your description,

In reply to this comment by Farhad2000:
What was the name of the Doc?

In reply to this comment by bamdrew:
I watched this documentary a few years back.

Intense to say the least.

I'm upvoting, but I'm not watching this part again.

ahh, many thanks

In reply to this comment by youdiejoe:
In reply to this comment by bamdrew:
do you have a (cheap) video editing software recommendation for a pc?

I use Vegas Pro 8 on the PC, it runs around 600 bucks, they make a home studio version of the software called Vegas Movie Studio 9 which I think is under 100.

do you have a (cheap) video editing software recommendation for a pc?

In reply to this comment by Kreegath:
Could anyone clarify for the uninformed how long ahead of time people are able to cast their vote, if at all? There's been talk of early voting, but is that only for some states?



Most states with early voting stopped today at noon. If you missed out you can still call down to the courthouse (or an Obama or McCain office) to learn how early your nearest vote-sites will be open tomorrow. If you show up late for work but have an 'I Voted' sticker, well... it helps.

I voted on Friday at a nearby courthouse (lafayette,IN), and it was McCain, Nader, Obama or select to type in someone else.

In reply to this comment by swampgirl:
I looked at a 'sample' ballot for Indiana. In every race but president could you write in someone. Why not president?

ever see this site? http://upsidedowndogs.com/

all the floppy dogs are the best.