search results matching tag: Nevertheless

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (57)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (4)     Comments (360)   

Sarah Silverman Feels the Bern

kingmob says...

He can't be elected he is not relatable to minorities. He got the youth vote but missed his mark on that.

He caused quite a stir but missed the mark.
Nevertheless i believe the Democratic Party still has to uphold some of his spirit.

and I have been voting long enough to know you don't vote with your heart.

gwiz665 said:

I feel this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. "He can't be elected, there I won't vote for him, so he won't be elected."

If you just suck it up and vote with your heart instead, he'll win no problem. Any of the republicans this time around are complete batshit crazy, at least George W. was just a little slow. Trump and Cruz are both completely off the rocker.

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Abortion Laws

woman destroys third wave feminism in 3 minutes

Babymech says...

You don't need to link any angry man-hating feminist videos, and I don't need to link any angry woman-hating videos by people calling themselves humanists while threatening Anita Sarkeesian's life. We both know that they exist, and should ideally agree that this doesn't mean most self-labelled feminists hate men and most self-labelled humanists don't hate women. In fact, the vast majority of feminists and humanists don't even make angry videos on the internet.

Then you go into statistics on rape by men against women outside of prison and rape by men against in prison. This is a fucking horrible cultural phenomenon, and I discussed that. Above. You saw it? Yeah you did. But you wanted to make pretend rape threats instead, which fine, that's your deal, I guess. Nevertheless I can quote myself, again:

"if we concede that there's a pervasive and destructive culture of rape of women by men outside of prison, I will also concede that there's a pervasive and destructive culture of rape of men by men in prison. In fact, I'll go ahead and concede that anyway. Which is fucking awful, but doesn't mean that feminists are wrong for railing against the situation outside of prison."

Furthermore - I gave you some quotes specifically showing you good sources of arguments. Not examplesof things men should tolerate or be fine about it. Quite the opposite, in fact. Don't pretend that I said that men should be fine with rape, because I never did. I said that just as white people have the privilege to shrug off inflammatory comments by BLM activists while still respecting the underlying movement, men have the privilege to be able to shrug off some inflammatory comments by feminist activists while still respecting the underlying movement. I am a little surprised that you responded with "I should have some people rape the fuck out of you" but okay, that's how you roll. If you don't want to go back on that comment - we'll just let it stand on its own, I guess.

As for Nicholas Cristakis in the video you link to, there's a shitload to discuss there, but it's much more nuanced and weird than feminism vs whatever.

- There's the weirdness of the role of a 'Master' and what it has come to mean at Yale. While I think the students are being unbearably unbearable, it would be a little different if they did it to a teacher rather than a master, who has a sort of weird guidance counsellor / therapist role. I don't know why that role needs to exist, or what it means in practice normally.
- There's the absolute insufferable pampered entitled gall and rudeness of those students which makes my goddamn blood boil.
- There's the question of racism and cultural appropriation at halloween (which started the whole thing) which to me is both a silly and difficult debate; I'm absolutely disguested by blackface, but I don't really mind if some four-year old white or black or hispanic girl wants to dress up as Mulan.
- There's the issue of job security in the academic world and what kind of protection Christakis has from fallout over a perfectly reasonable letter his wife wrote...

Those are all interesting, I agree, but I don't see what the video has to do with this one.

newtboy said:

It makes a better counterpoint than silly, misrepresented, just plain wrong 'bullet points'....and was followed with more.
The argument is not worth linking the dozen recent angry man hating feminist videos...you wouldn't see the ridiculousness anyway.

No, you're wrong about what you said (or didn't say)....here's the proof you require.
In that same post where you wrote '"We can take it...we don't need a safe space", you said "Also, please don't say that men suffer from most or all of the opression that women suffer, as much or to a greater degree, without sources. I'll give you some examples of what you could have done:
•Women suffer from sexual violence at much greater rates than men (Example source: some man-hating bull dyke known as the CDC, "Sexual violence facts at a glance, 2012")"

Which, as you KNOW, just plain ignores MOST sexual assaults perpetrated on men and pretends they aren't victims in order to make a mistaken point....that men aren't victims, only women are, when the reality is that men are the victim of sexual abuse MORE often than women.

The two certainly seemed related when you wrote them together.

EDIT: How about this guy (the teacher, not the douche narrator)? Doesn't HE need a safe space? Note: 16 men and 9 women in the group attacking the teacher...it's not just women putting this crap out.
http://videosift.com/video/secondclancy-the-new-face-of-social-justice-warriors#comments

Now go back, admit your mistake. I can take on insult AND disgusting lies, but not at the same time.

Proper format does not a correct argument make.

Swing Hip Hop. Or Crump Swing. Dance Battle!

gorillaman says...

My ultimate social terror is that one of these fucking things will somehow spontaneously generate itself around me, obliging me to improvise some sort of limb-flailing bullshit in response.

I don't know what sequence of events could lead to that actually happening, but the sight of two lines of people dancing at each other brings me out in the fucking sweats nevertheless.

The Mythbusters Do Walter White's Machine Gun Booby Trap

The Lexus Hoverboard - It's Real!

MonkeySpank says...

Many superconductor elevation stunts like it have been around Youtube for a while. However; this is being portrayed as a novel idea, which it is not, and a similar hoverboard has 0% chance of being practical considering superconduction is a major ingredient in the recipe. Nevertheless, great PR video!

Why are there dangerous ingredients in vaccines?

worthwords says...

Wrong, a 100% bioavailability is when a substance is introduced *intravenously* not intramuscularly or subcutaneously.

>> ocassional inadvertent ingestion and inhalation.
This is the most common rout - the skin is a major part of the immune system to keep pathogens out. we are exposed to thousands of compounds which trigger immune response and antibody creation each day via he respiratory system.

>>These damaging elements have perfect access to the brain
There is something called the blood brain barrier but nevertheless the pathogen is injected locally as mentioned not systemically.

>>Did you know autism is a known neural disruption?
this is a nonsense statement. the truth is we known very little about autism but while there are association, cause is not clear and the association with vaccines were initiated by a dishonest and discredited 'researcher'

I understand your basic premise but this is cargo cult science at its worse. very sad.
If you would like to learn more about bioavailability and how it's measured there are some good basic books on pharmcodynamics which are quite easy to read.

Sniper007 said:

Our bodies are best at responding to pathogens that enter our system normally - over mucus membranes, through skin contact, and via ocassional inadvertent ingestion and inhalation.

Directly injecting pathogens (and a whole host of other known toxins) straight into the bloodstream puts their bioavailability at 100%, instantly. These damaging elements have perfect access to the brain, and all other internal organs, giving the body's almost no chance whatsoever to deal with the invading harmful elements. You can expect to see symptoms manifest in minutes, hours, or days - and this is exactly what you do see in vaccine related injuries.

Aluminum, formaldehyde, cyanide, and other elements we do eat, and are harmless when found embeded in their naturally occurring places. Injecting those refined elements (mixed together with all kinds of other poisons) directly into the bloodstream is no where close to eating un-refind foods that have the same elements bonded to other molecules which render them intert or beneficial.

What is the bioavailability of aluminum found in a banana when eaten?

What is the bioavailability of that same quantity of aluminum when the banana is pulverized and injected into the bloodstream?

What is the bioavailability of that same quantity of aluminum when it's refined, and no part of the banana except the aluminum is injected directly into the bloodstream?

Their description of the actual affect of the aluminum in particular is incomplete. Aluminum is a known neural disruptor. If it reaches the brain directly (remember, bioavailability is at 100%) the aluminum will disrupt neurons. This may result in some cases in a neural disruption. Did you know autism is a known neural disruption?

I started a YouTube gaming news channel - Factual Gamer (Videogames Talk Post)

ChaosEngine says...

Some (hopefully) constructive criticism.

I'm not sure about the premise. I don't really watch videos for facts (they're almost always better conveyed by text or infographics). I watch videos for opinion or analysis or insight.

Nevertheless, it's well executed and I wish you well.

VideoSift v6 (VS6) Beta Video Page (Sift Talk Post)

eric3579 says...

So now im finding myself opening videos by left clicking my mouse and opening 'open link it new tab' so i can avoid having to use the new sub menu to get to where i need to go. May be more difficult due to i'm just not use to it yet. Nevertheless my work around is easier for me is it just me?

cops pepper spray crowd

lantern53 says...

A google search for 'cop fired' returns over 31 million results. Of course, many of those refer to the same story, but nevertheless...

robbersdog49 said:

No, not is it's a police officer. They are allowed to do what they want.

They aren't supposed to but the system makes sure that there's never any repercussions. In every practical and real sense they are a law unto themselves.

jon stewart-rage against the rage against the machine

Lawdeedaw says...

If I was racist I would argue that Gardner was also deserving. No, I lost a great hero beside me in Iraq that were of the black skin. Further, his best friend was wounded in more ways than most people can imagine.

And you just stated what I stated--that the more men on Gardner was an inappropriate use of force...which incidentally makes me look like I did not agree with it.

As for the low intelligence comment, you have to understand. One, mobs are always of low intellect. No matter how smart each individual might be. Two, poor neighborhoods are statistically at a disadvantages in education, to say the least. That is more systemic racial policies at work. So yes, they are lower intellect for both of those reasons.

I remember once witnessing an accident. Immediately a woman stated her "eye-witness" account. I looked at her and wondered how the fuck she could have the accident as remotely backasswards as she did. In fact, had it not been for me, the wrong driver would have been cited. Only because I pointed out the physical evidence of where the damage was and that the car spun around did things come out correct. On a side note, she was definitely poor...

I know what Lantern said and he is worse than a Ferguson witness. He is inherently the type of never-changing sludgery that would make a fine Islamic fanatic if he were born in different circumstances. I only point this out because you used witnesses unjustly. Just like the woman in my situation was not a criminal mastermind, nevertheless she was not fit to speak. If there were a 100 women like her around, the same would hold true. And how long do you think everyone had to talk to each other? Definitely enough time to feed off one another.

newtboy said:

From my point of view, your argument is asinine.
He (Lantern) made a definitive statement based on some witnesses and evidence by saying 'credible evidence' (which strongly implys that only the witness and evidence/interpretations that agreed with the police version is credible, and all others are not), I pointed out that far more witnesses had disputed that version of events, and the evidence is up for interpretation, not definitive.
You also discount (nearly) all local witnesses (and go on to insult them for no reason, or is it just racism that makes you label them 'low intelligence'?), then you try to make a point about group impressions using a group that absolutely DOES lie, in the performance of their duties they are TRAINED to lie to get information and/or compliance, and some are just natural liars to boot, and also a group that's historically well known as being incredibly over-defensive of their own, even when it's insanely obvious their own are in the wrong. I can't fathom how you think that makes a good point. (also not sure why you bring race into it again)

Another interpretation of the head shot evidence is that he was falling, having been shot multiple times already, and was shot in the top of the head on the way down. That was what more than one eye witness said happened. Are you implying that they were (low intelligence) criminalist masterminds that instantly knew what false story could still be born out by evidence, colluded, and gave that version? There was no gun shot residue on him, so he was not within arms length to grab anyone. That's fairly certain.

Yes, the DA certainly seemed to throw the case away. He did not act as prosecutor, (giving only evidence and interpretation that implies guilt,) but instead gave the jury all 'evidence' (including that which implied innocence, and allowed the jury to interpret it), allowed 'defense testimony' (without question, cross, or dispute), and gave insane legal instructions in order to confuse (like giving them the long invalidated law, then last minute telling them it might or might not apply, but don't worry why, it's not a law class). That's all totally abnormal, so the grand jury process was clearly abused by the DA with an aim to not get a trial. I'm fairly certain that's how most people see it too. It seemed fairly blatant.

I would agree that the more officers the better seems logical, but no longer holds true if ALL the officers over react (like 8 people on top of one man for an infraction, or never trying tasers because they 'might not stop the aggressor', even when there's already 10 officers with guns drawn). If officers tried the least amount of force required FIRST, rather than jump to the maximum allowed instantly, everyone would be happier. Sadly they do not.

If the feeling in the community (local and at large) was that this was an isolated incident, no amount of cajoling by a single distraught parent would cause rallies or riots. Instead they're happening across the country, and yet you blame a grieving father rather than the aggrieved's stated issue(s)/targets.

I'm glad that at least in the Garner case, you can see the injustice of killing an unarmed man (or even 'just' brutally attacking him) over such a minor infraction.

The Fine Tuning of the Universe

shinyblurry says...

For the anthropic principle to be a legitimate way of dealing with fine tuning, there needs to be a multiverse, but there is no evidence for a multiverse. Even if there was a multiverse, as the video pointed out, the Universe generator would be even more finely tuned than this one. You would have to explain the fine tuning of the Universe generator before you could dismiss the fine tuning in this Universe. Even still, the anthropic principle is not adequate to rule out design to begin with. I found an argument which explains why it is not adequate. The anthropic principle has a couple of basic principles in it:

1. we should not be surprised that we do not observe features of the universe which are incompatible with our own existence.

2. We should not be surprised that we do observe features of the universe which are compatible with our existence.

For although the object of surprise in (2) might at first blush appear to be simply the contrapositive of the object of surprise in (1), this is mistaken. This can be clearly seen by means of an illustration (borrowed from John Leslie): suppose you are dragged before a firing squad of 100 trained marksmen, all of them with rifles aimed at your heart, to be executed. The command is given; you hear the deafening sound of the guns. And you observe that you are still alive, that all of the 100 marksmen missed! Now while it is true that

3. You should not be surprised that you do not observe that you are dead,

nonetheless it is equally true that

4. You should be surprised that you do observe that you are alive.

Since the firing squad's missing you altogether is extremely improbable, the surprise expressed in (4) is wholly appropriate, though you are not surprised that you do not observe that you are dead, since if you were dead you could not observe it. Similarly, while we should not be surprised that we do not observe features of the universe which are incompatible with our existence, it is nevertheless true that

5. We should be surprised that we do observe features of the universe which are compatible with our existence

billpayer said:

The answer is the anthropic principle =
It had to be that way for us to evolve here to then look at the universe and ask "why are we here?"
Likely the universe has had many iterations, and may even have regional laws of physics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

It's pretty much the same argument that goes into Evolution

Conservative Christian mom attempts to disprove evolution

ChaosEngine says...

Don't confuse disdain for lack of understanding. I understand it perfectly well, and because of this I can recognise it as nonsense.

Nevertheless, have a good Christian appropriation of the solstice

shinyblurry said:

If you're unwilling to consider the evidence, and mock those whose positions you don't truly understand, what would you call that? You seem to think that is reasonable for some reason. In any case, have a good one, Chaosengine. Hope you and your family have a wonderful Christmas and New Years.

Russell Brand debunks David Cameron's War Mongering

billpayer says...

Thanks for the link... seen it before, but good nevertheless.
In the media lock down we have right now it takes someone like R.B. to make the mental leaps and join the dots.
If there is better sociopolitical commentary out there about current events I am all ears (links please).

If Brand was more 'together' he'd be towing the corporate news line and sucking that teat or joining the rest of the celebrity morons in drowning us in bullshit.
btw. this guy was just (days ago) character assassinated on Fox news, so he's making waves and also under fire.
Massive props for what he's doing and for keeping it 'real' ie. fuck bland talking heads and regurgitated government/corporate propaganda.

Doctor Disobeys Gun Free Zone -- Saves Lives Because of It

modulous says...

In the United States there is still a high prevalence of firearms, even in areas with some slightly more stringent restrictions. France is not the US is not Germany is not Spain is not Norway. They are more different from one another than Florida and Colorado are. Nevertheless it is possible to compare the countries. Comparing US drug policy with Columbia on its own may be foolish, but when you compare it to all the countries of Europe you are getting a better idea of what works and what doesn't. If decriminalization works in every European country it would be unusual if America was so different it would make things worse. On the other hand, you have been trying to compare Spanish speaking Caribbean islands with mainland USA, so I think you are hoist on your own petard there, I'm afraid.

Trancecoach said:

However in the United States, the exact opposite is true, because, as I said above, the effect of a law is defined by the reaction of those who are subject to it. Not all people respond the same to laws everywhere around the world and, as we see, time and time and time again, in the United States, legislation does effect the amount of guns in circulation nor does it effect people's use of them.

Comparing gun control in other countries to gun control in the United States is about as fruitful as comparing comparing drug policies in Colombia with drug policies in the U.S.

But alas, this common sense notion continues to evade most people. Which is why this and every other debate on the subject has had and will continue to have exactly zero effect on gun control policies in the United States.

But, you can waste your time... nobody's trying to pass a law to stop you from doing that (yet)!



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon