search results matching tag: encyclopedia

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (41)     Sift Talk (1)     Blogs (1)     Comments (128)   

Crazy Rocketman: Rocketman riding the Rocket Board!

BSR says...

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Asbestos (pronounced: /æsˈbɛstɒs/ or /æsˈbɛstəs/) is a naturally occurring fibrous silicate mineral. There are six types, all of which are composed of long and thin fibrous crystals, each fibre being composed of many microscopic "fibrils" that can be released into the atmosphere by abrasion and other processes. Inhalation of asbestos fibres can lead to various dangerous lung conditions, including mesothelioma, asbestosis, and lung cancer, so it is now notorious as a serious health and safety hazard.

You cruel bastard! That would be like rubbing your junk on a cactus!

C-note said:

I hope he's wearing asbestos undies.

Land of Mine Trailer

newtboy says...

Big assumption. Many Hitler youth made the choice to fight for Germany, and joined on their own before children were being drafted.

As for those that were conscripted, is it your position that draftees are somehow immune from responsibility for murdering their neighbors, women, children, rapes, burning towns, or planting millions of landmines on foreign soil, etc? How convenient for them. I don't believe that's a popular or legal position.

I take responsibility for my actions. If their fate was mine, I would be eternally grateful I was treated so much better than I would have treated them if the tables were turned. I would be part of an invading Nazi army, trying to undo just a tiny bit of the damage we had caused, doing so at the direction of my superiors just like when I caused the situation. I would deserve execution, not release. This assumes I wouldn't have the spine to refuse to be a Nazi and be imprisoned or executed.

If the majority of Germans weren't complicit, the Nazis would have never come to power. You give them far too much credit. From the holocaust encyclopedia- "Opposition to the Nazi regime also arose among a very small number of German youth, some of whom resented mandatory membership in the Hitler Youth." Same with adults, the opposition was a minority by far, not the majority of Germans. Who told you that?

"Survived the fighting"? "Here"? "They"? Please finish your thoughts so they have meaning. You seem to be equating Nazi soldiers with the Jews they tried to eradicate. What?!?

The Geneva convention we know today was ratified in 1949. The accords of 1929 were found to be totally insufficient to protect POWs, civilians, infrastructure, etc. Yes, Germany did appear violate it's vague provisions....so did the allies. That's why it was strengthened in 49.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

What provision of the 1929 version do you claim this violates?

Articles 20, 21, 22, and 23 states that officers and persons of equivalent status who are prisoners of war shall be treated with the regard due their rank and age and provide more details on what that treatment should be.
Or
Articles 27 to 34 covers labour by prisoners of war. Work must fit the rank and health of the prisoners. The work must not be war-related and must be safe work. ("Safe" and "war related" being intentionally vague and unenforceable).
Please explain the specific violation that makes mine removal a "war crime". It's not war related, the war was over, and it's "safe" if done properly.
Since this was done at the direction of German officers, the convention as written then doesn't apply.

Death camp!!! LOL. Now I know you aren't serious.
"The removal was part of a controversial agreement between the German Commander General Georg Lindemann, the Danish Government and the British Armed Forces, under which German soldiers with experience in defusing mines would be in charge of clearing the mine fields.
This makes it a case of German soldiers under German officers and NCOs clearing mines under the agreement of the German commander in Denmark who remained at his post for a month after the surrender - this means Germany accepted that they had responsibility to remove the mines - they just had far too few experienced mine clearance experts and far too many “drafted” mine clearers with no real experience in doing so." So, if it's a war crime, it's one the Germans committed against themselves.

I'm happy to say that anything done to a Nazi soldier is ethical, age notwithstanding. Many Nazi youth were more zealous and violent than their adult counterparts. Removing their DNA from the gene pool would have been ethical, but illegal. Taking their country to create Israel would have been ethical, but didn't happen.

At the time, there were few mechanical means of mine removal, they didn't work on wet ground, they required a tank and that the area be pre-cleared of anti tank mines, they often get stuck on beaches, and had just over a 50% clearance rate, cost $300-$1000 per mine removed, and they were in extremely short supply after the war. The Germans volunteered in this instance. Now, the Mine Ban Treaty gives each state the primary responsibility to clear its own mines, just like this agreement did.

So you know, the film is fiction, not history. Maybe read up on the real history before attacking countries over a fictional story. History isn't nearly as cut and dry as it's presented, neither are war crimes.

psycop said:

These boys neither chose the age of conscription nor to go to war. Given their age and the time in the war, they would have been forcably made to fight. If you had the misfortune to be born then and there, thier fate could be yours.

Being in the German army did not imply being a Nazi, the majority of the German population were victims as well, pointlessly lead to slaughter by monsters.

Those of them that would have survived the fighting ended up here. They didn't feed them. They worked until they died. They expected them to die. They wanted them to die.

The Geneva Conventions were signed in 1929 making this an official war crime if that's important to you. I'd say the law does not define ethics, and I'd be happy to say this is wrong regardless of the treaty.

As for alternatives for mine clearance. I'm not a military expert, but I believe there are techniques, equipment, tools or vehicles that can be used to reduce the risk to operators. Frankly it's besides the point. Just because someone cannot think of a solution they prefer over running a death camp, does not mean they are not free to do so.

If you have the time, I'd recommend watching the film. It's excellent. And as with most things, particularly in times of war, it's complicated.

Nina Simone: Mississippi Goddam

newtboy says...

Is that why republicans usually get <10% of the black vote?
I think they are no different from non blacks in that they can see who is working for their interests and who is working against them. You clearly don't think they are capable of that.

Republicans switched from supporting civil rights to opposing them in order to win the southern white (mostly racist) vote. You aren't ignorant of this historical fact, you simply choose to deny it like any facts you don't like. That history has been accepted for 50 years +-....are you saying I'm so good I made it up at two years old and got the nation to play along?! Damn, I'm good.

In American politics, the Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.[1][2][3] As the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South who had traditionally supported the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party. It also helped to push the Republican Party much more to the right.[4]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

I may not be the walking encyclopedias my parents were, but at least I know my own language, and my nations history.

bobknight33 said:

Conservatives aren't holding blacks down. Democrat policies are.

Conservatives stand for equality for all.. Democrats slice and dice people into groups and keep them dependent on the party. Vote for us and we will help you. inner city poverty have been around 50+ years ... No help just sweet nothings.

So when you say..." 70’s when the southern strategy reversed the parties rolls, now it’s Republican’s turn to be overtly racist."

Who actually switched to being racist?

Nothing reversed.

Quit forging history. You are a party hack who know nothing. Your a tool for the left.

$55,000 for 5,000 votes

bobknight33 says...

You are so duped. You post a link from a far leftest site. You stupid fool.

Find a real fact checker.
About SourceWatch

The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) publishes SourceWatch, this collaborative, specialized encyclopedia of the people, organizations, and issues shaping the public agenda.

newtboy said:

OMG! You fool. Every single veritas video has been proven to be fake, full of lies, and edited to make a point, not to show anything resembling the truth. Borat is more honest and truthful.

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Project_Veritas

But you claim Trump has never lied....then often go on to excuse and explain why it's ok for him to lie, even under oath, forgetting you claimed he never does.

More (fake) "evidence" of republican vote fraud that you claim proves democratic vote fraud. Your desperation paired with your delusion has made you a laughing stock.

🤦‍♂️

Doc Rivers

scheherazade says...

Assault weapon bans. Effectively making illegal the most common rifle in the country (ar15) - even though it's statistically tiny in terms of gun killings.
(~450 people killed per year with all forms of rifle. Only some of that is ar15. That's the ~same amount of people as what die yearly from falling out of bed.)

Suppressor bans. Illegalizing an item that has been statistically as good as nonexistent in firearm crimes.

Banning DIY non-commercial firearms. Illegalizing firearms that have been statistically as good as nonexistent in firearm crimes.

Banning Private Sales (aka gunshow loophole). Effectively banning transfers between family and friends. Even though nearly all illegal arms are acquired by straw purchase at conventional stores by girlfriends.
And commercial sellers at gun shows have to do background checks anyways - this is much ado about old geezers trading collectible wild west / ww2 / antique shit.

Nearly all people are killed by pistols. Nobody is calling for a pistol ban. It makes things like an AWB look like a disingenuous effort - because you can pass all sorts of non-pistol-banning gun control laws and there will be no effect on gun death stats. Meaning you can just make more and more stuff illegal forever so long as you save what really matters (pistols) for last.

Between city, county, state, federal, existing gun laws are fat like an encyclopedia. Most people, unless they are 'gun folk', don't even realize the ways you can go to jail. Put a vertical grip in a pistol and posted it to instagram? Enjoy your time with the ATF. 10 years and $100k, assuming you're lax enough to not hire a lawyer to knock it down a bit. Literally volumes of ways to go to jail for shit you wouldn't even imagine would matter.

Many things people complain about aren't even a thing. Like complaining about buying guns online (you can't, not without an FFL involved), or crazy people buying guns (they can't, unless they've yet to be caught doing crazy shit).

Too many laws as it is. Erase a bunch first.

-scheherazade

newtboy said:

What anti gun legislation do you mean? All I know of is closing a few loopholes that allow people legally banned from gun ownership to obtain them anyway without background checks. I disagree that that is anti gun legislation, and across the board background checks are something a vast majority think is proper.

There's plenty of misinformation on this topic floating about. Is there other actual legislation in the works, or just rumors of other legislation the left will enact....and only according to the right?

Is Success Luck or Hard Work? | Veritasium

newtboy says...

Subscribe to what you want, my birth lottery included trees and butterflies, I was raised in a forest in a glass house in a forest. (We had an atrium inside with a forest of trees growing through the roof, and the house was in the middle of a forest)

If I were born black, that person would be me, but I would be different. Besides, I was born a poor black child, sir. ;-)

If my starting line is 50 meters ahead of yours in a 100 yard dash through nothing but luck, that's pretty lucky for me.

I feel pretty successful having made little effort to get there, that's luck.

I don't feel shame because I'm not a normal American that thinks anything they want is something they deserve and need. Best lesson my dad ever taught me was know the difference between want and need and you'll be far happier in life. It's true.

I don't have too much, I have enough, but I still share with those who i feel don't. I've housed multiple friends for free, and even let one live in my yard for 7 years, which in retrospect was at least 5 years too many. My wife and I live comfortably on <$30000 a year. Most Americans can't live on that for one person. Newts do just fine, we take a vacation every year, pay our bills, and eat well.
Maybe that's why I'm so different. I was allowed to roam the wild woods and bayou alone at just over 3, to the point where the neighbors told my parents they were going to call the cops. This was in the middle of Houston, literally a wilderness of (or at least in) modern civilization. ;-)

I did go to school for 24 years (preschool -the ten year plan at Jr college) but never tried hard or practiced, to the point where my trig teacher insisted I was cheating because I didn't pay attention or do homework so she separated me for a big test, the class average dropped a full grade but not me, my neighbors were cheating off me. She left me alone after that. That might be preparations, but it wasn't hard work. It was boring busy work.

I did that, read encyclopedias and dictionaries. That was punishment at my school through 7th grade....but my grandmother read her set through twice for fun. My mother was called "the encyclopedia" in school, with good reason.

I definitely let opportunities pass often. Sometimes because I don't need them and others might, sometimes I'm just lazy and happy so see no need to expend effort, usually because I see opportunities as traps, the bait being some modest short term gain, the cage being large long term obligations. I'm always prepared for opportunities that are for me without preparation. I'm not Trumpian, I understand I have limitations, and don't tend to obligate myself beyond them.

Who said I waited. I've been lucky enough that I didn't have to wait for, nor do I expect luck. Through luck, forethought, and decent planning things have worked out well with minimal effort or sacrifice. I don't rely on luck to dig me out of holes, I tend to watch my step and not fall in them often. You might call that preparation, I call it paying attention. It's working so far.

vil said:

I dont subscribe to weird oriental religions which presume being born is a lottery that possibly includes trees and butterflies.

Every person is born to a set of parents into a particular time and place and socio-economic position. That is what defines who you are. You cant say "if I was born black" because that would not be you.

That is not luck, that is your starting line. You race from there, that is where YOU start rolling the dice and having good or bad luck.

You may consider yourself lucky to be who you are and where you are, indeed you may feel some first world shame for being so fortunate, but that is surely superfluous, if you have too much you can offer to help other people.

Humans (unlike newts) need preparation, after you are born you need to practice for many years before you can be let out into the wilderness of modern civilization with any hope of surviving, let alone passing tests.

You remind me of my son, he spent his childhood reading encyclopedias and now he is surprised that he knows everything and other people dont. It came easy to him.

I did not have to work hard most of the time, am doing fine, got most of what I have because I was lucky, but I sure had a lot of opportunities run away from me because I wasnt prepared for them. Also got burned by a lot of things I should have been prepared for.

Waiting for luck is good only if you run out of options to do something.

Is Success Luck or Hard Work? | Veritasium

vil says...

I dont subscribe to weird oriental religions which presume being born is a lottery that possibly includes trees and butterflies.

Every person is born to a set of parents into a particular time and place and socio-economic position. That is what defines who you are. You cant say "if I was born black" because that would not be you.

That is not luck, that is your starting line. You race from there, that is where YOU start rolling the dice and having good or bad luck.

You may consider yourself lucky to be who you are and where you are, indeed you may feel some first world shame for being so fortunate, but that is surely superfluous, if you have too much you can offer to help other people.

Humans (unlike newts) need preparation, after you are born you need to practice for many years before you can be let out into the wilderness of modern civilization with any hope of surviving, let alone passing tests.

You remind me of my son, he spent his childhood reading encyclopedias and now he is surprised that he knows everything and other people dont. It came easy to him.

I did not have to work hard most of the time, am doing fine, got most of what I have because I was lucky, but I sure had a lot of opportunities run away from me because I wasnt prepared for them. Also got burned by a lot of things I should have been prepared for.

Waiting for luck is good only if you run out of options to do something.

newtboy said:

So that's another way luck out preformed hard work for me.

I'm just proving that it's not an absolute. Some people find pure luck with zero effort. On average, you do best with both, but there are exceptions.

For a certain few, yes, waiting for luck can be the best method, not for most.

That's certainly the intelligent method, but no, you don't HAVE to prepare yourself, sometimes success just falls in your lap.
For example; It took zero preparation to be prepared to inherit money, not one whit, pretty damn lucky if you ask me.
Second example; most people require preparation to be successful at tests. I took the GED 1 1/2 years after quitting school to work, I didn't prepare one minute, I scored 98 percentile on every test in the pack. That's not from hard work, it's from being lucky enough to have a functional brain and decent memory...I didn't work hard in school, I always claimed to learn by osmosis, I was in AP classes when I left to go work.
Third and most obvious example; Through pure luck, I was born white. I find that to be incredibly lucky considering the roadblocks being any other race puts up, especially in America, especially in the deep south where I was raised, even more so in recent years but it's always been true. I certainly didn't work hard to achieve whiteness, I've worked hard to not take advantage of it at other's expense, probably unsuccessfully.

Some people don't even NEED preparation to succeed during disasters, you often just need to be flexible and quick to adapt, that a might be from preparing, or might be natural traits you're born with.

Grreta Thunberg's Speech to World Leaders at UN

vil says...

I am actually doing just fine simply completely ignoring her hysteria. First time I listened to her is this video.
What is her impact in China? Russia? India? Brazil? Indonesia? On people who make decisions?
Perhaps in the USofA hysteria can have an impact on future elections (I am actually doing just fine simply completely ignoring the current administration) but will global ecology really be a big (or medium..) election theme in the USofA in the near future, like 20 years?

Im washing out those plastic bottles and sorting trash and keep my car serviced properly and fly rarely. But if this type of hysteria is randomly aimed against nuclear power, attempts to talk to women in the workplace, and eating meat regularly on other days, could we please not go that way... too late.

What can be done to move the 6 countries mentioned at least slightly in the direction of Europe on pollution? To stop China building coal power stations all over Africa? Brasil and Indonesia deforesting? What has (or can) Grrreta really do to help there? This is like trying to shame Saddam Hussein to give up those WOMD he hid so well. How dare you Saddam? Bad boy!

Also how dare three quarters of us not just lie down and die without children to save the planet? Or are we evil and not mature enough to forego making money to buy food for our families? Which in most places on the Earth means polluting like hell. Vicious cycle. Maybe people should be more modest, maybe rich white kids should not be the ones saying that.

Grreta so reminds me of west european academic communism in the 60s. CND in the 70s. Greenpeace. And so on. Should find out more about people, now that she has read all those encyclopediae. Everyone has to eat and f*@k or we die out in one generation.

Jeopardy! First Tiebreaker Ever After 37 seasons

ulysses1904 says...

My mom was a contestant on the original Jeopardy in 1967. She wasn't the winner but back then everyone got to keep their winnings, she won $160. And the home game version of Jeopardy, a set of encyclopedias and Turtle Wax or Rice a Roni or something like that.

Kurzgesagt - CRISPR Genetic Engineering Changes Everything

Bill Maher: Who Needs Guns?

newtboy says...

Both. They must interpret the meaning/definition of the law before they can interpret whether actions are in compliance.
No, that IS judicial scope. It's what those that lose call 'judicial activism', but you never hear a winner call it that.
Judges interpret the words AND the meaning of laws. They often 'read between the lines' to determine what they think was intended, not just what was specifically written. That's not new or out of line, it's how it's always worked.
True, it creates a minefield of interpretation of written laws that may not completely jibe with the exact verbiage in the written laws, but they are documented in the decisions.
No, I'm not forgetting those laws, I'm disputing your statement that "Again, it's a matter of what people are willing to enforce.....If everyone is on board with twisting the rules, then that's the norm." Populist feelings do NOT effect the law, only legislation and interpretation do.
Until recently, there was nothing to show that the 2nd amendment addressed individuals. That's why Washington DC had a complete hand gun ban, and that case is what changed the meaning to include individuals instead of simply regulated militias.
Eminent is a word I might use to say 1) conspicuous or 2)prominent (especially in standing above others in some quality or position). I think the latter is how it's used in this case, not the former. EDIT: I expect most people confuse it with the word "Imminent".
My mother is a professional editor, so I admit I'm more familiar with odd words than many people. (Most people didn't have to read the dictionary or encyclopedia while they sat in a corner for being bad as a child). I think if you ask the populace about many legal terms, or really any >3 syllable word, most people won't know the actual definitions.

SURGEON SIMULATOR (CO-OP) (REACT: Gaming)

shang says...

Fuck fine bros

Real time link of watch them losing subscribers in real time. Over 200,000 lost inlast 3 days and rapidly falling and its going faster.

The goal is zero subs course Encyclopedia Dramatica anons found proof they used "purchased subs" from an Indian company that sells likes, shares, subs. They've forwarded this to YouTube, Anon is definitely about to own their channel or get it banned :-P

http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/thefinebros/realtime

So far

Teens react to encyclopedias

What is this thing and what's it doing?

eric3579 says...

UPDATE below also see new video description and original video

The caption is in Thai and describes the creature as a Nemertea, or a ribbon worm, which shoots a proboscis (elongated nose) out of a hole above its mouth to capture prey.

Presumably, that is what is going on here.

When not stretched out like an alien life form, the proboscis normally sits in “a fluid-filled chamber above the gut,” according to Encyclopedia Britannica.

And here’s a description of how it works from NCSU:

"When the animal senses a prey organism nearby, a circular muscle layer around the proboscis sheath rapidly and vigorously contracts. This contraction forces the fluid from the proboscis sheath into the proboscis and, in the process, literally turns it inside out, blowing it out of the proboscis sheath. The proboscis will rapidly (within a second or so) wrap itself around the prey, which is then drawn to the mouth and eaten."

from http://thedailywh.at/2015/05/nope-day-internet-disgusted-mystified-ribbon-worm/

school of life-what comes after religion?

newtboy says...

Hey! No fair rewriting it after I upvote you!

Your imagination steers you wrong again, many people identify themselves as atheist....
Demographics of atheism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A 2012 poll on the demographics of atheism by Gallup International, featuring over 50,000 respondents worldwide, recorded that 13% of those interviewed said they were "convinced atheists".
A 2007 Barna group poll found that about 20 million people say they are atheist, have no religious faith, or are agnostic, with 5 million of that number claiming to be atheists. The study also found that "[t]hey tend to be more educated, more affluent and more likely to be male and unmarried than those with active faith" and that "only 6 percent of people over 60 have no faith in God, and one in four adults ages 18 to 22 describe themselves as having no faith."
'Good' is good because harming others for personal gain is antithetical to civil society, while helping others selflessly is of great benefit to society.

Give me back my vote!

lantern53 said:

No.




lol

I would imagine that the reason so few criminals self-identify as 'atheist' is because very few people identify as atheists. So I don't get how atheists can get credit for being moral. Did Ted Bundy identify himself as a Christian? I doubt it. Anyone with common sense would believe that Bundy was godless. And, he had no concept of what was 'good'.

Atheism still can't explain why 'good' is good.



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