search results matching tag: tall

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (335)     Sift Talk (13)     Blogs (13)     Comments (841)   

newtboy (Member Profile)

bobknight33 says...

More fake or 1/2 truth stories -- Tall tells -- Just what your dumb ass feeds on.




AT least Joe Biden daughter wrote in her diary that Dad regularly showered with her. That more direct evidence than you dribble you peddle.

newtboy said:

Two days after being directly personally implicated in multiple cases of child rape through the Epstein documents, at least one dropped because Trump’s terrorists (like you) threatened the 13 year old victim and her family with torture and death and the now young woman wasn’t prepared to be responsible for her family’s injury or death so she walked away from her case, Trump on stage decided it was a good time to start commenting on his audiences “good looking children”.

Imagine if Biden said that the string of nonsensical accusations you would be making about Biden who has never been credibly accused of any abuse, contrary to Mr 26 (now 27 including the 13 year old) who has been accused by nearly every woman he’s known and has been repeatedly recorded bragging about his sexual abuse of multiple 14 year old girls (why he bought miss teen America).

Tom Laughton - Wonder 2

newtboy says...

Awesome! I wanna see.

Just like this, or the single piece version? This, as far as I can tell, is just a realistic 3d render of something he hasn’t made (yet). I like the double helix effect.

That must have cost them quite a pretty penny. The artist has the shape copywritten and trademarked I believe, both the physical and digital versions, and he sells the regular 30cm tall tabletop version for $1900.00!

I hope your neighbor didn’t copy his design without paying him a royalty, that could get really expensive.

ant said:

My neighbor has one of these as a fountain.

Texas's new 31 billion dollar seawall to be constructed

newtboy says...

So…a state that denies climate change wants twenty billion of federal tax money (60 billion+ before its finished) to protect the tax exempt industry most responsible for climate change from the destruction is brings that they deny is real….all on taxpayer money, not a bit industry funded.

I grew up in Houston/Galveston. This is stupidity. There’s no way in hell they’ll ever stop hurricane flooding. The barriers would need to be 30 ft tall, not 5. They would also need to redirect numerous rivers that outflow through the coast, and find a way to remove unfathomable amounts of flood waters coming from land. I was there for Alicia, a relatively small hurricane in the 80’s, and all of Houston was 5 ft under water, with the bayous 40ft above their channels. That water flows into the Galveston area….behind these barriers.

This is a massive boondoggle that will never be built for dozens of reasons, but will still make numerous politicians and their families disgustingly rich, and may eventually partially protect some high value real estate, but never the entire coast. That’s today’s Texas. It bears noting, Texas is nearly $50 billion in debt with a crumbling electric grid, failing water system, no social services, and likely still $10 billion away from finishing their useless failed border fence….but plan to spend at least another $10 billion of state funds on this. How, exactly?

Failed Assassination Of Pelosi/Husband Attacked In Home

newtboy says...

Immediately explained because there is no question whatsoever that’s what it was.

You have all this fake information…but from where? I know you won’t answer because it’s embarrassing….because the answer is Twitter.
None of it resembles the official reports from police, not one detail is close to correct. It’s pure unadulterated lies you bought hook line and sinker because you want to, or that you made up yourself, not because you have a scintilla of evidence, and it’s all 100% opposed by the reality that an armed MAGgot drove to Pelosi’s house with weapons and zip ties, broke in, and beat an 82 year old man he pulled out of bed with the hammer in front of police, fully dressed, screaming “where’s Nancy”.

I think you people took the fact that he’s a nudist and pretended he was nude at the failed assassination….no, that’s almost rational, I now see Musk just made it up, tweeted it out to millions, then quietly retracted it once he planted the seed of insanity in your fertile skulls, and it grew like a weed in the manure you keep there. Every accusation you make is an admission.

Depapi is pure, undeniably MAGA. You have no evidence otherwise. Police have tons to back that up.
He is far right politically, not all over the place. There were no guards, no dogs, no cameras, no alarm, no third person, no tall wall, no attacker in his underwear. Every bit of that is made up by far right liars like yourself to try to hide from the fact that he’s absolutely one of you, just like you, a splitting image of yourself, believing every crazy conspiracy theory you believe. No evidence he’s a “doper” although that would mean nothing, most republicans are dopers, rush Limbaugh was the biggest heroin addict in recent history, Trump likes speed.
Mr Pelosi called him “friend” to calm him down, not because he was his friend you tool.
Was a failed political assasination by the far right, with prodding from politicians for years up to the “fire Pelosi with a rifle” add on the day before the failed assassination.
Funny, every place your alternative facts were put up is down, not those my info came from. Derp

You just don’t like who you are and seeing yourself in the mirror disgusts you, so you came up with a story from your own life when your gay lover beat you up. It’s so incredibly stupid, and shows you are not a bit serious, just ranting and blaming anyone but terrorist maggots.

Only the completely insane like you believe everything in the universe is on their side at all times…. all truth, all facts, all ideas, all goodness, even god….but somehow you just keep losing constantly, bigly. Maybe it’s just you!

But to recap, you don’t get to ask questions until you answer one….and you can’t.

bobknight33 said:

This bizarre story was immediately explained in the liberal media as being MAGA attack:

Bla bla bla- I can’t answer questions, and don’t listen to answers, now let me waste your time with more nonsense I made up because

blackfox42 (Member Profile)

Trailer 2 | Pinocchio | Disney+

Nicole Smith-Ludvik & Emirates have done it again!

vil says...

At this point I believe Videosift is pranking me. Nicole Smith has somehow risen from the dead, morphed into a tall airline hostess on top of the Burj whatever and of all improbable things possible has adopted my venerable family surname? WTaF? Actually her late ex-husband appears to not be related to our line of Ludviks AFAIK.

Around Cape Horn (1929)

fuzzyundies says...

I've actually sailed around Cape Horn on a tall ship, and am a full member of the International Association of Cape Horners (IACH). She was SV Tenacious, and it was Auckland, NZ to Port Stanley, Falkland Islands. Thankfully, we timed it well and got VERY lucky with the weather and had a clear rounding. We did have a force 11 (just short of a category 1 hurricane) one memorable night somewhere east of Point Nemo, but for the most part it was a pretty smooth passage. Of course I got the tattoo (full rigged ship) on my right upper arm.

I Changed Astronomy Forever. He Won the Nobel Prize for It.

dahauns says...

@vil: Well, it's actually Bell herself that has a similar opinion:

https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/astr2030_12/sn/Bell.html

It has been suggested that I should have had a part in the Nobel Prize awarded to Tony Hewish for the discovery of pulsars. There are several comments that I would like to make on this: First, demarcation disputes between supervisor and student are always difficult, probably impossible to resolve. Secondly, it is the supervisor who has the final responsibility for the success or failure of the project. We hear of cases where a supervisor blames his student for a failure, but we know that it is largely the fault of the supervisor. It seems only fair to me that he should benefit from the successes, too. Thirdly, I believe it would demean Nobel Prizes if they were awarded to research students, except in very exceptional cases, and I do not believe this is one of them. Finally, I am not myself upset about it – after all, I am in good company, am I not!


And that doesn't mean she was ignorant to the issue - she *did* tear the sexist media a new one, with gleeful wit:


When the paper was published the press descended, and when they discovered a woman was involved they descended even faster. I had my photograph taken standing on a bank, sitting on a bank, standing on a bank examining bogus records, sitting on a bank examining bogus records: one of them even had me running down the bank waving my arms in the air. Look happy dear, you've just made a Discovery! (Archimedes doesn't know what he missed!) Meanwhile the journalists were asking relevant questions like was I taller than or not quite as tall as Princess Margaret (we have quaint units of measurement in Britain) and how many boyfriends did I have at a time?

Indoor Tornado

psycop says...

The creator put some answers in the comments:

How the heck did i make it?

The living room of my father's place had a very strong ceiling fan, which could go in reverse. Instead of blowing air down, it would pull the air up. That would create an updraft strong enough to sustain the vortex. Next, I had a box fan and a blanket set up to redirect the air flow so it rotated around the center of the room. You can see it as the dark blue object in the back right. After the fans were turned on, I laid out an old dark red bed sheet with a small PVC pipe underneath it connected to a fog machine. The bed sheet allowed the fog to gently seep through and get pulled into the vortex, as opposed to being blasted out of the pipe. And then it was all a matter of letting the ceiling fan's updraft and the box fan's rotation mix into a 10 ft tall indoor tornado!!

Viral How Much Did Your Divorce Cost

newtboy says...

Try it. If she takes the kid and bolts, it's legal. Even if you manage to get a court order before she leaves state, chances are you won't get equal custody unless she's a documented certifiable nutjob. I say this because you live in a fault state which are invariably the same states backwards enough to automatically give women custody and force fathers to prove the mother is unstable and dangerous, and even then you'll share with her as primary without documented abuse.

So you've been together 20 years and share nothing. What a way to live.

Shared assets when not married aren't divided by the courts. If you want their help, gotta be married or sign an ownership contract with every purchase.

I can find no instance where I said my brother "won". He got custody, that's different from "winning". Be real. If you're going to quote me, please don't make up the quotes. Spending over $100000 on a two week marriage isn't winning by my definition.

That link is off topic. Find a study of similar jobs with similar hours worked and compare salaries, not a study that says average women work X ammount less so overall earning should be X amount less but instead it's X-1 less, so women are overpaid. That's not what their study showed, they're extrapolating there, and ignoring that the lower hours are usually not their choice, but their superiors orders to avoid paying overtime and full benefits to women. Also, they said Married men managers without kids also earn more for each hour at work: they earn $38.40 per hour while married women without kids earn only $28.70. That means that for each hour spent at their jobs, male married managers without kids earn about 34% more than women. 34% more for each hour. Did you read it? Mic drop.

See, more insulting dismissiveness...those women couldn't possibly be more competent or harder workers, they must be succeeding because of preferential treatment. In case you missed it, that's incredibly misogynistic.

What?! Prove it.....with data not an anecdote.

So....You wouldn't marry a crazy person only because of what divorce would cost. Yeah....right.

" I wouldn't even consider marrying anyone that has any adverse indicators" sounds like personal issues to me, they aren't good enough to marry....because of divorce....Again ignoring the prenup that dictates divorce splits.

Lol. Such utter bullshit. Maybe if they have an impairment and no lawyer, and can prove it in court, not because they say so.

Ashley Maddison.

Wedding rings are aphrodisiacs. It's why I don't wear one, hit on repeatedly wearing it, never once without it. My experience differs from your assumptions and statistics, same with my friends. I'm 5'9", so not tall cute and photogenic....but two out of three ain't bad.

Bob said it, you agreed with him and more.

An uncodified partnership is one of convenience or even imaginary. Nothing to stop either of you walking tomorrow if you meet your new soul mate. That's not a stable partnership. It may be exactly what you want. It seems you made up your mind that marriage=bad for men long ago, in which case you should not partake. I hope your path leads to at least half the happiness mine has.

Newt

Viral How Much Did Your Divorce Cost

scheherazade says...

"What on earth are you talking about?"
-newt

The rules for property and income when one or both parties decide they no longer want to be in the relationship.




"not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives"
-newt

Incorrect. If you are on birth certificate, you have the same rights and obligations.
The only pitfalls are that :
- Child support is calculated from the income of the parent with less custody (rather than from the true cost of raising a child).
- Women almost always get custody if the choice is between two parents (like when they live far apart and child can only be at one or the other).



"and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first"
-newt

Negative. Co-parenting does not conflate property.

Shared assets when not married are divided either by percentage of purchase price contribution, or by percentage stated in a contract.




"My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas"
-newt

"My brother won."
-newt

Won by your own definition. Hence I congratulate.




"You assume women take off time to raise the kids"
-newt

No assumptions. Although afaik they still do it more often.




"You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. "
-newt

Top result from a zero effort google of "men working hours vs women working hours"

https://towardsdatascience.com/is-the-difference-in-work-hours-the-real-reason-for-the-gender-wage-gap-interactive-infographic-6051dff3a041




"Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that"
-newt

I admit that women [as a group] under 35 out earn men under 35 because of preferential admittance (such as to higher education) and preferential hiring (such as to managerial positions).

I did not say that women earn more in the same position for the same hours worked. Young men are simply getting shut out of opportunities, so their incomes are lower. As by design.

It does however highlight how affirmative action is being poorly controlled.
The target statistic is based on overall population at all ages.
The adjustment is skewed to younger ages (school admission is typically for younger people).
So the system is trying to balance out incomes of older men by trimming up incomes of younger women, with no accounting for the effects on younger men or consequences of older men retiring.
The situation is doomed to overshoot with time.

A natural result is the popularity of people like Jordan Peterson, with messages like : "Young men, nobody will help you, stop waiting for someone to help you, stop lamenting your situation, you gotta pull yourself up by your boot straps. Start by cleaning your room, then go make something of yourself".






"Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk[etc]" -scheherazade "
-newt

Straw man argument.

You know I stated that those marriageability criteria exist specifically due to risk of consequences of divorce.

I never stated that I have personal issues with those attributes.
I have dated women on that list. I didn't /marry/ them.

My only criteria for a relationship that I am happy being in is :
- We are mutually attracted
- We like each other
- We are nice to each other
I don't care what your religion is, your politics, your family status, whatever. It's all just noise to me.





" And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are?"
-newt

Prenups can be negated by these simple words :

"I did not understand what I was signing"
or
"My lawyer was not present".

Poof. Prenup thrown out.




"their husbands are more likely to break their vows first"
-newt

A woman to cheat needs a willing man (easy)
A man to cheat needs a willing woman (hard)

Times have changed. Online dating made chatting someone up in person and make an impression uncommon, and even considered creepy/unusual. Now people are picked on their online profile based on looks/height/social-media-game.

Dating apps and sites publish their statistics. Nowadays, around 20% of men match with around 80% of women.
Most men aren't having sex. Most men can't find a match to cheat with if they wanted to.

The tall cute photogenic guys are cleaning up.
The 20% of men that match the bulk of women are going through women like a mill. They will smash whatever bored housewife crosses their path.

A 2 second google result :
https://usustatesman.com/economics-of-dating-2-the-brutal-reality-of-dating-apps/




"Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches"
-newt

Agreed.

Fortunately, I never say that about women.






" you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks"
-newt

False equivalence.

Cohabitation and Partnership are mutually independent.
Meaning both can exist at the same time.


-scheherazade

newtboy said:

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you believe the government dictates your vows? What "rules"? You just cannot grasp the concept of no fault divorce or prenuptial, can you?

I guess you never planned on kids or shared assets. If you do, not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives, and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first. Uncle Sam is in your relationship, married or not....without a marriage contract, he makes ALL the rules and you have no say.

My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas that in my state would have cost under $10K and you congratulate him? You are one strange person.

Again, your perception, not based in fact since the 60's. You assume women take off time to raise the kids and take care of parents and assume fathers don't take paternity leave or have obligations outside work. How 50's. You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. It certainly hasn't been my experience, I've seen women in the workplace working harder and longer for less pay, sacrificing just like their male counterparts if not more, putting off having families until it's too late while men can have kids long after normal retirement age, putting themselves in dangerous situations where those with power over them have opportunities to abuse that power and abuse those women in ways that rarely happen to men. These aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that, meaning soon women in most catagories will out earn men and have more to lose, you admit you're wrong in your position now, right? Of course not, I expect you will still start from a point that hasn't been correct since the era and sexual revolution, early 70's at latest.

No, many of the studies I've seen compared people in the same exact positions in the same industries, even same companies, and women consistently get paid less for the exact same job and hours, and women rarely work less today, and just as often out work their male counterparts knowing they are often token hires not valued by the bosses so have less job security. If I recall correctly, 80% of job losses due to Covid were women, and the men are getting rehired faster. I think you are thinking of some studies from the 80's that made those assumptions and accusations. Comparing apples to apples, women still get shortchanged and as often as not overworked.

Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk
Tends to have short relationships? Too much risk
Likes attention? Too much risk
Single mother (non-widow)? Too much risk
Any mental issues (depression, bipolar, narcissist, anxiety, etc)? Too much risk
Older (why you still single...)? Too much risk
Likes to party? Too much risk
Drinks? Too much risk"

And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are? Specify what you expect and agree, and you walk with exactly what you agreed to, no government rules or split involved. Geez. You speak as if you had never heard of them.

Most divorces may be initiated by the woman (if that's true, I expect it's just another assumption) because their husbands are more likely to break their vows first, but are not willing to pay to end the marriage, including penalties for breaking the marriage contract, and we're too dumb to get a prenuptial (or got one that spells out harsh penalties for cheating). Yes, I am assuming men cheat on their spouses more often than the reverse, because men are wired that way.

You are not more likely than not to face a divorce, because it's unlikely any woman meeting your criteria would give you a second thought, and you need to get married to get divorced.

I bet if you show your significant other this thread your 20 year relationship will be in big trouble, or at best enter a long dry dark spell. Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches that take more than they deserve or even could give back and destroy you whenever they think it serves them. It's probably a good thing you aren't married.

Laws and family court aren't as you describe. Maybe when you enter the 21st century you'll recognize that. The rules of your marriage can be whatever you agree to, including the specifics of the split if it ends.

It's a sad thing you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks.....almost always unless one or both of you are total douchebags.

Congress Under Armed Attack Live Stream

newtboy says...

Parlor has been closed, no longer hosted by Amazon and finding it hard to find another host, and pulled from multiple app stores, because the Trump crowd was using it to plan a repeat attack on the 17th.
I wish they would let them plan it, set up the capitol with multiple levels of real unclimbable barricades, not just 3' tall aluminum railings, and use deadly force on everyone who shows up. This country would be better off without them.

Republicans in 2018 Post-Midterm Elections

bobknight33 says...

Why should Trump concede? Biden has not officially won.

Media does not officially call the election.
Let it play out out.


? you want all votes counted. Even illegal votes?

Trump will have to turn around 5 states.
Tall order, Sit back and let it play out.

newtboy said:

In reality, there's no other choice since there's zero chance the current president will concede or cooperate with a smooth transition.

Once there's no chance remaining votes uncounted or contested could sway the election, a point we are well past, any challenges are academic and couldn't change results, so there's no reason to refuse to acknowledge that fact, especially when it's spurring right wing terrorists to act and dividing the nation, another point we past days ago. The obstinance is harmful to the nation and our institutions, like Trump is trying to burn the government down on his way out the door. No democrat has ever done this in similar circumstances. There's a theory that he's only doing it to bilk his followers out of more money towards his "legal defense fund" that really goes to pay off campaign debt and directly into his pockets with a small portion paying lawyers like Giuliani to lose cases. He's millions in debt there too, and it becomes his personal debt when he's out of office....with near a billion due next year, he needs every penny he can con them out of.

Normally the clear winner would be being brought up to speed on things like covid response and international relationships even if they weren't declared the official winner yet. (Edit: They would also have access to top secret intelligence all previous presidents (except Trump) use to vet their cabinet, being denied that information severely hampers Biden's ability to properly vet them, holding up his nominations. Thanks to Trump's disastrous covid response, Biden needs to be fully ready to change policies day one, it's life or death for 1000+ Americans every day he's delayed.) This time, with a petulant toddler throwing a tantrum for the next 2+ months, that might not help, because there's no telling what damage he might do before then. Biden is just making his own plans instead, preparing to start work day one no matter what dumpster fires Trump sets. That said, this obstinate denial of the results and sewing division, making up and repeating baseless charges to discredit the election (looking at you) have real world disastrous consequences and weakens the state of the union. It's clear the plan was to rely on the Trump appointed judges to rubber stamp the baseless claims and hand him a win. So far it hasn't worked, but it could. That's why we should care about the dozens of frivolous lawsuits, if his judges decide to be the lackeys he expects them to be, they could actually steal the election in court....but it would spark nationwide unrest if not insurgency.

The Walk.

newtboy says...

Any math teacher I've ever had would fail you for that. The only reason to remove units is to hide how ridiculous your measurements are....but fine, let's just use ratios...you still fall flat.

Then your trig and measurements suck, because your measurements put the stage floor at a minimum of 4.5' and the ramp a maximum length of 23.5', both of which are obviously excessively wrong.
The SS at the corners of the stage are waist high to the stage floor....are they 9' tall SS? When on stage, two stripes are waist high to Trump, is he 9' tall? I guess to save Trump, you say yes.
The stage segments are at least 10' long, using Trump as a 6'+ measuring stick....is Trump now only 3.5' tall? The ramp covers 3 segments (one slightly short with a podium) then continues for 5-8' beyond the stage (more if I use your breitbart photo)....sure, it's only 23'...that makes sense. *facepalm

Measuring on a curved screen is useless....which you have proven. Measuring based on a photo is also useless unless it's a top down long distance shot, as perspective skews the image. I guess all your college math classes omitted the concept of perspective? Just for giggles, I did it anyway, and still got a slope under 7 degrees, higher than reality thanks to skewed perspective.
It's clear you must insist your measurements are perfect but our eyes lie. Very Trumpian of you, congratulations, and bye. Enjoy your perfectly healthy, not obese and demented president and your near vertical ramps that are suddenly everywhere. Don't come to my house, my ramp is nearly 3 times the slope of the one you claim is 11 degrees, it should be impossible to climb (oddly it's not).



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