Wow yourself.

Those are mostly really horrible examples and gross misinterpretation of things that've been said here.

Most of the things you're talking about are not even closely related to someone putting themselves into a position of imminent danger.

Smokers, second-hand smoking, addiction, extreme sporting, and *anyone* who does *anything* *potentially* dangerous? Say what? Your nonsensical examples have no relation whatsoever to what I've been discussing.

Laying under a moving car or playing Russian roulette or climbing into an alligator pit or shooting at cops with machine guns... Yes, those kinds of things are exactly the same as someone with a lifetime of addiction or who uses safety gear and expertise with a reasonable expectation they'll walk away from their sporting activity unharmed. Right? Pshaw.

You're either doing a really bad job of trolling or just a really bad masterdebater.

Just read the rest of this conversation and totally agree with @Tusker.

The pickpocket analogy is no analogy for this situation. For it to be even relatable, the criminal would have to attempt and fail to pick the pocket of a police officer in uniform, then run out onto a shooting range where the officer then mistakenly shoots him without being aware the guy tried to pick his pocket.

But climb into an alligator pit? You don't *deserve* to be eaten, but if you are, how can I feel sorry for you when you made a conscious, concerted effort to put yourself into the position where that could happen to you and there's no possible way it would have ever happened to you otherwise.

More like unaware bike rider trying to take selfie nearly runs over alligator minding it's own business, then blames alligator.
You don't get photo bombed by things that aren't moving, dude.

Ok, I will grant your point about ignorance vs malice, and certainly for uneducated people in decades past it's understandable that they just went along with it because they didn't have access to the information.

But it's 2014 and it's still going on, and the US of all places. It's not like the information is hard to come by.

Call me crazy, but maybe when someone suggests cutting pieces off your child, you should take a few minutes to research it?

As I said before, what mentally competent adults do to their own bodies is their own business. The only reference I could find to the alligator people is 1950s horror movie, but I have no problem with it as you describe it.

Regarding the "hardcore nipple chafing" (and this conversation is REALLY starting to get weird now ), if there was a real, practical reason, then that certainly mitigates it, but then the analogy is kinda muddled, because there is no real practical reason for circumcision. It's purely a cultural/idealogical practice. Again, I don't have a problem with that in adults (you're not hurting anyone but yourselves), but it strikes me as a particularly messed up thing to do to defenceless infants.

OK, if you KNOW there's no good reason for it and do it to your child anyway, that's more barbaric. If you believe, because of misinformation, it's a good thing for the child and is safe, to me it's much less barbaric. People do harmful things all the time trying to do the right thing, intent and level of understanding should be considered when judging others, that's all I'm saying.
and in your analogy, I would be semi OK with that (if there's a male equivalent so it's not just sexist mutilation) because the social issues of not being accepted are far worse than having only one nipple, totally OK with it if it's by choice at the accepted age of choice or 'adulthood' (even if the other choice is leave the tribe).

EDIT: same hypothetical, is it OK if it's explained that they have to remove the nipple because otherwise they can't use the tools available needed to hunt without constant, often deadly bloody and infected hardcore nipple chafing, and so they would either likely starve or would likely be killed at birth because the tribe couldn't support them?

I'm 100% OK with the rituals of the 'alligator people' in Africa that cut themselves to look like they have alligator skin, done in adolescence or later by choice as I understand it, and that's certainly 'barbaric' by most standards.

Like I said, here's an alligator's wide open mouth. If you feel the need to stick your head in, go for it. I just don't have it in me to feel sorry for you when it bites down.

I do, however, hope you at least get something out of it, otherwise you're especially stupid.

In their case, they're getting attention. I imagine that was their goal.

Hey stupids, you're not in America. In communist Russia, cops can and will fuck your shit up, even with cameras and an audience.

Don't put your head in an alligator's mouth then be surprised when it bites down.

But if I have my bullet proof vest them I'm safe! And how has that video not gotten more votes? It's friggin hilarious!

I agree with almost everything you said except one thing: the safest place for a cyclists is actually in the middle of the road just like any other car. I've done my fair bit of research on this topic (board member for the states bicycles association) and the stats are glaringly obvious. Cyclists who behave just like a car live the longest. The ones who ride on the sidewalk, ride opposing traffic, don't wear their helmets, no lights, don't signal, or try to cut through traffic get killed the quickest.

Also, there's the issue with bicycles being the last resort. There's those of us who drive a $40k car, but choose to ride a $300 bike down to the coffee shop or to grab a bite to eat. Then there's the idiots who lost their $2k clunker in a DUI and have been banned from driving for life. These ones are already dumbasses and they continue their dumbassness on a bike, giving cycling it's high fatality rate. Then there's the spandex warriors who simply get a bad rep because they ride in packs and drivers get so nervous when they're confronted with other people they freak out and complain. And then there's the hipster.

To your point about driving along a country road at a "safe" speed and then suddenly having to deal with a pack of cyclists, thus making it "unsafe." If you're going to fast to respond to a group of cyclist who can and do ride up to 50kph or 30mph, then what happens when a deer walks out? Or an alligator (yes, that happens here)? Or there's a car stalled? Obviously you weren't going at a safe speed. Point is, a pack of cyclist taking up the road for a hundred feet isn't going to cause anyone to miss saving the world or something. It's a matter of having patience.

And then, there's the matter of idiots. Like those wearing a helmet but not strapping it in . . . there's probably just no hope for them. EIA?

(Seeing as you appear to not be American, there's also the issue with American's already being hyper pumped up full of fear and hatred in general from too much media and taking it out on anyone who isn't like them. Dunno if that applies where you're from.)

Stupid freaking alligator sound from every game and movie ever made...

The narrowness of your definition of intelligence depresses me and is ironically not very intelligent

You talk about improving the gene pool yet you appear to lack a basic understanding of the fundamental importance of genetic diversity.

Even if we accept the premise that risk takers are idiots (which is so demonstrably not true I can barely be bothered to try but feel free to go read up on the Nobel laureates, plenty of "idiots" in there!) they are still essential to a healthy and diverse gene pool.

Mountain climbers, Motor racers, American Football players, Alligator wrestlers etc. etc. This is the same gene pool that brings us Astronauts, Fire-fighters, Soldiers etc.

Some of them may simply be "showing off" but
A. this is what they feel the need to do in order to feel stimulated and alive (they are wired up differently to others, they require higher levels of risk in order to feel the same level of stimulation you you might watching TV)

B. Watching such individuals perform or simply appreciating their existence is a source of untold pleasure for many of the rest of us (you dislike all dangerous sports? They are just as "pointless" by comparison)

But most of all

C. They all die in the end, just like EVERY HUMAN THAT HAS EVER LIVED. Putting all your emphasis in life on just staying alive and un-injured seems a little foolish in the grand scheme of things don't you think? The result is the same whether you spend your life racing powerboats or knitting jumpers in a padded room. You still die thus rendering any choices you made about how to spend your life entirely arbitrary and temporary (unless your religious but even then I'm not aware of anyone believing that risk taking alone sends anyone to hell or otherwise).

"Better to live an hour as a tiger, than a whole lifetime as a worm"
-The cat (red dwarf)


Also do you have a better way of getting an alligator out of a pool for a reasonable cost? The only alternative I can think of would be to tranquillise it but that would A. shift the risk of death and injury to the animal and B. be very hard to administer underwater. Nets and ropes seem like they would be prohibitively expensive and horribly impractical here also.

Hoisting the alligator above his head actually strikes me as potentially one of the safest way to carry the thing away, out of the water with no feet on the ground etc. but then I'm not an expert in dealing with Gators......crucially however neither are you and if i was going to take advice on how to get rid of one I'd be much more inclined to listen to people who have clearly spent their whole lives doing it than some random person who bases advanced genetic theories on a comedy film (for the record a very enjoyable one which was clearly not intended to be realistic).

No, intelligent people don't take stupidly dangerous risks to show off. There's no equivalent payoff for the pointless risk he took in hoisting that alligator over his head, -or- in teasing a dangerous water-dwelling creature while underwater.

You can try to make up excuses for it all you like, but it was a fucking stupid stunt. And when, sooner or later, the universe collects on one of his stupid stunts, he'll be all "It's so unfair!" And -if- he survives, he doubtless be counting on the rest of us to pay his medical costs, and probably some sort of disability as well. Fuck him.

You mean... be inside an alligator?

You've really got to admire the patience and tolerance of that alligator.

So intelligent people never take risks or choose riskier lifestyles according to their own balance of self preservation and stimulation?

By that logic a truly smart person would only ever choose to live in a virtual bubble. There's basically no need to go outdoors for many people any more, so why would you risk it if you didn't have to?

What about all the idiots that drive cars!? Don't they know car's are dangerous? (waaaaaaaaaay more dangerous than an Alligator!)


Life is risky, in fact last time I checked it had a 100% mortality rate. Each of us has a (probably genetic) pre disposition towards a particular balance of risk and preservation. The diversity of this mix is VERY important to maintaining a healthy gene pool and social structure.

We need risk takers, they are the ones that forge ahead into new territory, test new & dangerous technologies and thrive performing essential tasks that the rest of us are too chicken shit to do like rescue people from burning buildings (or more trivially removing alligators from pools lol)


I would also like to point out that many a dumbass couple has produced genius children, just as many genius parents have produced dumbass children. Genetics are only half the story & intelligence in particular does not appear rigidly linked to your genetic history.

The nightmare Idiocracy scenario you are so worried about has a lot more to do with education than genealogy

Except that moment at 0:38 where you know he lifts up the alligator, only to clumsily drop it...