search results matching tag: tribe

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (137)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (13)     Comments (512)   

Gratefulmom (Member Profile)

MASSIVE Yellow Jacket wasp nest in Florida

Native American Bummer | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee

PlayhousePals says...

*quality Sam!
My grandparents moved to Suquamish, WA after grandpa retired from Sears. I still remember the Salmon Days festival every summer ... good times. Good people [though I was allegedly acquainted with a few of the bad boys of the tribe ... rebel that I was]

Dear Future Generations: Sorry

Mordhaus says...

The mean estimate of the number of ALL North American tribes was around 8 million (8.5 if you consider the small amount in Canada). Want to know the population of LA? If you guess around 4 million, you are correct.

The population of the state of California is close to 40 million. About 1/3 to 1/2 of that number lives in what should be desert. Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico have about 20 million people, most of whom live in desert like conditions. You can't support that number of people in a desert region on existing resources.

As far as food waste and obesity, you are talking about a small handful of developed, affluent nations. The rest of the world is starving. Even if we magically moved that food waste daily to people in need around the world, we would still have people who didn't get enough. We are at our limit on supplying food for the population, as it continues to grow, even the food waste issue will need to be solved if we plan to keep people just in those first world nations fed.

Trawling today is different. It used to be about doing as little work as you needed to for the most return. Now it is about getting your quota before the season ends, because we are desperately trying to keep the marine population sustainable. Even so, we are running out of some types of fish. Wild catch salmon is going to be gone in a few years, it will mostly be farm raised, which will also impact the environment. Cod is harder to come by as well because it is being over fished.

I have to admit, I don't know where you are going with the nuclear issue and weapons. The amount of nuclear waste from decommissioned weapons is minimal. The amount from power, medical, and research is far greater. All three are fueled by a need to either provide power to a large population, keeping people alive, or researching future power/medical uses.

Am I relieved when friends or family members die? No, but those people are already here. They are already factored into the system, so to speak. What we need to do to fix our current looming nightmare is to prevent or persuade people to stop having kids. Population is not a data-in only situation, it's data-out also. People die, if you don't replace them then there are more resources available. My wife and I chose not to have kids, not because we wouldn't love them, but because it was the responsible thing to do. As @newtboy mentioned, we won't necessarily fix all the issues by reducing population growth, but it would be a huge help. It might also give us time to work out other solutions, because we are looking down the barrel of a loaded gun.

diego said:

you have people living in artificial environments that use tons of power because they want to, because they like it, not because they REQUIRE it. native americans lived in southwest USA for a thousand years just fine without the need of AC or diverting rivers.

go read up on the absurd agricultural subsidies tied to the colorado river- that isnt a problem created because farmers need to produce food to feed the world, its a problem created because politicians want money making businesses to tax, and because people are willing to spend money to eat what they like instead of what there is, a lot of money is made.

same with trawling- nothing to do with feeding all those people, everything to do with money. trawling has been going on for over a hundred years, well before the world population was even a 3rd of what it is currently- fishermen trawl because they want to be efficient because that makes them more money, not because they are concerned about how they are going to feed undernourished people.

the problem isnt getting people to eat insects. the problem is getting the developed world to stop eating so much, especially so much meat. there is an obesity epidemic around the world, over 3000 tons of food are discarded every day, and you want to tell me the problem is not enough food?

and lets not be disingenuous about nuclear waste, nuclear technology was invented as a weapon, not an energy source. you're telling me that if tomorrow a terrible plague wiped out 90% of the earths population, that nuclear armed states would give up their nuclear weapons? bs.

the video is on point. the environmental crisis is caused by greed, not because there are too many people on the planet. and if you feel so strongly that there are too many people on the planet, I assume you are relieved when your family members die? Unless you are willing to volunteer yourself and your family to die for the greater good, overpopulation is a facile bogey man to mask what you really want to say- lets get rid of all those "other" people so *I* dont have to change my own lifestyle.

Classic DOS games roundup, circa 1995

shagen454 says...

I was 13/14, games back then were magical. Anytime I was on a plane or in the car I was reading PC Gamer or CGM drooling over the demos (or shareware!), ads, previews and reviews. Remember those days? When information on gaming was largely through print?! I still remember those Dark Forces previews, I could have shot a load. PC gaming at that point really was fucking cutting edge.

1997 & 1998 also hold a special flame in gaming for me - 1997: Ultima Online (actually learned HTML and had a website for UO cuz I was a NERD), Fallout, GTA, Age of Empires, Dungeon Keeper, Quake II, Myth (incredible multiplayer component probably even still).

1998: Starcraft, Half-Life, Baldur's Gate, Thief, Grim Fandango, Fallout 2, Tribes, THIEF, Unreal, Commandos.... so many innovative games back then. Now we just build on them over and over and over again

Oregon Occupiers Rummage Through Paiute Artifacts

newtboy says...

No. Not even a little.
They are being stored BY THE TRIBE at this locked, until now secure location. These morons have no right to rifle through their private tribal papers and artifacts because they don't know the tribe is involved and they assume the evil government must be doing it wrong. The tribe is outraged, their opinion is the only one that counts...after all, this is THEIR ancestral land, not the ranchers, and it's THEIR history and PRIVATE papers being pawed through and likely stolen. The terrorists have already been caught stealing things from the park, it's no stretch at all to assume they'll be stealing many artifacts they find 'interesting' or 'improperly stored'....if the natives want them back, they can go ask Bundy for them, right?

Mammaltron said:

As idiotic as these protesters are, the "rummaging" and "rifling" slant on this story is trying pretty hard.

Aside from their ill-conceived, unjustified armed occupation, don't the idiots have at least a tiny point about the poor preservation of those artifacts?

Oregon Occupiers Rummage Through Paiute Artifacts

RFlagg says...

The Radicalized Christian Terrorist illegally occupying a federal wildlife refuge


Fixed that for the Guardian... perhaps they can throw in "allegedly" before the word "illegally" if they wanted to play it overly safe, but let's stop mistreating the word militiamen as this is not what they are. They are using the threat of armed violence to achieve a political goal. That is terrorism. They say they are doing it in the name of God. That makes it Radicalized Christian terrorism.

These guys said they would leave if asked by the local community, they were asked, they've been asked by the tribe, the community, their church, and everyone else. Yet they are still there... They were prepared for the long haul... though apparently they needed to ask for essential supplies, so perhaps they are confused on what being "prepared for the long haul" means.

Start Getting Used To Saying President Trump

dannym3141 says...

What confuses me is that most Americans *love* their armed forces with utmost (almost too much) pride, yet so many think that socialism is a dirty word.

The American armed forces are paid for by the taxpayer. We can't defend ourselves on an individual level as well as we can, through tax contributions, employ a permanent army to do it for us.

To me it feels like the essence of a country is socialist - our 'tribe' decided at some point to work together. Instead of us all individually walking every day to get fresh drinking water or water for washing, we chip in and buy essential infrastructure like water treatment plants and pipes, the electrical grid or sewage system. Instead of having to defend our properties and possessions all the time from intruders, we chip in and pay the police to keep order for us. Instead of individually teaching our children, we all chip in and employ experts to do the best job possible.

Whilst some of those things are available to be purchased privately if you so wish, you can't have your country without socialism.

For me, the worst sin is being against free universal health care. However well prepared or covered you think you are, all it takes is a twist of fate and you'd be in the same situation as so many others - incapable of making the money you need to buy the cure. Or caring full time for a dependent person, unable to work to pay the medical costs. That's why everyone should chip in - because any one of us, through no fault of our own, in an instant, could need access to more than we could get by ourselves.

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver - Migrants and Refugees

vil says...

3 things, I may have mixed them a bit.

1 - past experience specifically with muslim migrants (some may have been refugees) in Europe - overall not great, mostly they consider our social system and political correctness as signs of weakness. They consider themselves superior, the first generation may be grateful for a better life than back home but the second and third generations feel superior to non-muslims (especially jews and atheists, but also christians) and entitled to benefits while hating the secular state. Will the current and future waves accomodate better? This has nothing to do with our imperative to help those in need, it is a practical problem. Also not racist - although I do admit racism and xenophobia are a major problem in many parts of Europe and trouble me very much in my own country. More so than the Vietnamese or Ukrainians or people from the Balkans "these people" organize in clans and tribes and will try to impose their view of the world on us, who organise in tiny families and on facebook. Albanian thugs are well organised but they dont hold the view that everyone else should be an Albanian thug too.

2 - current wave of migrants and refugees - lets assume we are talking only about real Syrians boarding boats in Turkey trying to reach Greek islands and not people from all over north africa trying to reach Italy or anyone else trying to reach the EU (possibly pretending to be Syrian). So we have this exemplary Syrian family which has run away from a war to Turkey. They are safe there, only they have to either stay for a couple of years in a refugee camp before they can try to find work or they have to survive in a grey economy sort of like Mexicans in the USA. They know that if they dont apply for asylum in Turkey and manage to set foot on EU soil they can ask for asylum there and be treated better than in Turkey. So these boat people are actually not running from war to asylum but rather from one asylum to another. They make sure not to stop in Greece or Croatia or Austria or Hungary but head for Germany or Sweden. Mostly I believe they have no idea of political geography but they have mobile phones and friends who have already made the journey and know how to milk the local system. So for purposes of compassion they are refugees and totally need our help but from a clinically economic (yes, materialistic) point of view they are very much migrants. Migrants we feel obliged to help because they are sort of refugees too.

3 - the mass and speed of the exodus means we are stretched to accomodate them and they will later start to passionately hate us because Europe will not be the heaven they expected it to be.
A few thousand refugees every year are no big deal even for a small EU state. Hundreds of thousands will be very difficult to take care of in the entire union. Inviting more is just irresponsible.

The good news is that the real Syrian refugees who make it to Europe will probably be the more resourceful, better educated part of the current wave of incoming people and will be able to take care of themselves fairly quickly by my estimate. Also they are mostly variants of Shia - the less orthodox branch of muslims. I am worried more about future waves than the current one.

Maybe we have messed up a bit but we need to learn from our mistakes, and even Germany is now guarding its borders. It would be better if we were able to guard the Shengen perimeter.
Then if we wanted to save more refugees we could send trains or planes to pick them up in Turkey or Jemen. You know, set up an EU consulate there so they could directly apply for asylum in the EU country of their picking. But we have to make a conscious decision first - how many people from the desolate and failing parts of the world do we want to save over a given time period so that we dont fail ourselves. Are we failing? Ask the jewish families who used to live in Malmo until recently.

newtboy said:

Please explain to me how you know that these people fleeing near certain death in an incredibly destructive and deadly civil war are 'mostly migrants' rather than refugees. I've heard that line before, but never a word to back it up.

The Revenant - Teaser Trailer

Mordhaus says...

Basically he got tore up by a grizzly, managed to climb on it's back and start knifing it to death, and then fell to the ground when his companions finished it with rifles. The leader figured he was dead soon, so he told the other two guys to bury him when he died and catch up after.

The history is a bit muddled on whether they got scared by Indians or just stole his stuff and left, but either way they took all of his gear and hoofed it. When they caught up, they told the leader that he had died.

So Hugh came to, with no gear, covered in a fresh bear skin they had taken off the bear. He was suffering from a broken leg, the cuts on his back exposing bare ribs, and all his wounds festering. He was 200 miles from the nearest fort, with nothing to help him and surrounded by hostile Indians.

He crawled, surviving on roots, berries, and remains of animal kills. His back became gangrenous, so he lay on a rotten log and let maggots eat the dead and rotten tissue away. Later he was found by a friendly tribe that sewed the bear skin to his back to cover his exposed ribs and gave him some supplies. When he finally reached the Cheyenne river, he fashioned a crude raft and floated down the river to the fort.

Everyone thought he had died, but he recovered fully. Later he decided he would avenge himself on the two that left him behind, but he spared one because he was too young and one because he had joined the army and was kind of untouchable. The young guy was Jim Bridger, who became a famous mountain man himself as he got older.

StukaFox said:

What's the real story?

pierrre (Member Profile)

Roman Army Structure

Real Time with Bill Maher: Christianity Under Attack?

RFlagg says...

OMFG... really bob... really... It's people like you that made me ashamed of being a Christian when I was a Christian. Completely believing anything they are told or read from someone with supposed authority without actual critical thought of the original source themselves.

I've hear that Jefferson never meant to exclude religion from politics and believed and repeated it myself for years. Then you know what I did? I actually read the letter that Jefferson wrote. I could have my son, who's going into 6th grade read it and he'd tell you the same thing I'm about to tell you. It's about keeping religion from unduly influencing politics. Especially when you read it in context with the letter that the church sent him that he was responding to, and it becomes more apparent if you read his drafts which were much more to the point.

Yes the phrase "wall of separation" does come from the letter and not the Constitution, but the 1st Amendment includes an establishment clause that prevents the government from favoring one religion over the others. Remember the pilgrims came here to escape a Christian nation that favored one form of Christianity over all others. Admittedly they were more about the fact they couldn't persecute others the way they thought they God wanted them to, but it was the government's church that prevented them from doing so. You can't even be King or Queen of England unless you belong to the Church of England, and if you were Catholic at some point in your past, you are disqualified, even to this day. Yeah, the Church of England no longer has as much influence over the laws as it did when the pilgrims and other early settlers escaped England to come here,

And if the only reason Christians are good is because of fear of punishment or hope for reward, then they are horrible people. Millions of people are good because they are good people without their faith dictating to them to be so. Most people of other faiths are good without the racist brutal Abramic God of the Bible. Most atheists are good without any god. Most pagans are good with their various gods. This insane all morality comes from God alone didn't make sense even when I was at my most evangelical, Fox News watching/defending mode. There were too many people in the world who's good without God and even in those days the concept that somebody would be good only because the Bible tells them so, or they are afraid of God's wrath if they don't is backwards. And as I read the Bible more and more, it became apparent that the far rights obsession with people's sin over love was misplaced (though the far right's sickening defense of Dugger shows a great deal of hypocrisy since if Dugger was on the Left, they'd be all about his sin rather than showing any sort of love, it's when others sin differently than they do they get upset, like at the gays). It was reading the Bible that moved me to the left as the clear Christian way, since the right defends and loves the people Jesus condemned and shames the people that Jesus defended and told us to love and help. It eventually got to the point I couldn't hold onto faith when over half the Christians of this Nation just blindly follow what they are told in church and on Fox News over the truth that Jesus and the Bible was teaching and thinking they were doing the Christian thing at the same time. I then began to do a critical analysts further and eventually became an atheist, because they are all equally bad/good. There is nothing new or original in the Abramic faiths that wasn't there before or since either in the same region or elsewhere... all those other elsewhere's where Jehovah somehow couldn't make himself known, as if he was just a figment of one small regional tribe or worse a racist jerk not worthy of following.

Anyhow, the best way to maintain Christianity is to keep it out of politics. Because what happens if you set things up to let religion influence politics and the Muslims gain power? Then you'll be crying how religion shouldn't influence politics. Or perhaps not that extreme, perhaps some form of Christianity that other Christian's don't agree with gains power and influence? Perhaps the Morman's or the Catholics or the Jehovah Witness? At what point does religious influence stop? When laws are passed that any church that doesn't practice or allow the speaking in tongues is outlawed? The 1st Amendment is designed to keep religion out of politics in order to protect religion.

Let's break that last sentience out again. The 1st Amendment's establishment clause is designed to keep religion out of politics in order to protect religion. The whole point is to keep one form of one faith from dominating all other forms of the same or other faiths. It protects those other forms Christianity and other faiths.

Finally there is no war on Christianity. I admitted that long before my fall from faith. I was there with it all, with how it was targeted, but the reality is there is no war on Christianity here... all that's happening is specific forms of Christianity are loosing their influence on other Christians and society as a whole, and they are very vocal about how it's persecution, because like the pilgrims, they are no longer allowed to persecute others the way they want to. Maybe if the people screaming about how Christianity is being persecuted while they try to deny equal rights to others because they sin differently than us, would actually show the love of Christ and behave the way He actually would have in modern society rather than trying to show how Christian they are, then perhaps Christianity wouldn't be losing the numbers they are. I know I, and many other atheists, likely wouldn't have had at crisis of faith if it wasn't for the far right. I never would have explored the logical and theological problems with Christianity and the Abramic faiths... I'd probably eventually found a more Quaker, left leaning (most the Quaker "Friends" related churches in this area are the far evangelical right Fox News types) type church that seems to be more in line with the Bible and teachings of Jesus, but the far right pushed me into a far more critical mode than I would likely ever have gone to on my own. So keep it up those on the far right, you are the ones destroying and making a war on Christianity. You push more and more people away, and more and more people stop seeing any difference between the far right and radical Islam.

Gorgeous portraits of the world's vanishing people

How Systemic Racism Works

newtboy says...

If you watched the entire Morgan Freeman-Through the wormhole episode, you would have seen that simply spending 1 on 1 time with those of other races/tribes can erase much of the subconscious racism and make them seem like one of 'your' tribe. He did not say we MUST be racist/bigoted (he did say that we ARE whether we know it or not) or that it's still a survival mechanism, it has not been since we lived in isolated tribal groups.
Removing that obstacle to civilized behavior does NOTHING to stop, or hinder evolution, it might even accelerate it (by fostering better gene mixing)...the medical system takes care of hindering evolution for humans quite well by removing 'survival of the fittest' from the equation.

shang said:

I'm prejudice but that's because its human nature. I find black women disgusting ugly. But that's just me, I can't see them any other way. Its ugly. I don't like dark tanned women either.

Moron political correctness sjw mongs need to quit labeling preference as racism. I personally find idea of 2 guys rutting gross, heck even Jim carrey puked in his movie after seeing it. Many find it gross, but that's just personal preference.

I won't tell others how to live, but I want to live my way and no sjw PC retard will get me to do otherwise.

Political correctness sjw, want to force everyone into collectivism. That is the sheep herd mentality, unable to think for yourself, everyone copies same morals and ethics and tolerates all.

That is not human

Individualism is human, individual choices, prejudices, morals, ethics and do not tolerate those that try to brainwash you into collectivism.

Even Morgan Freeman recently stated humans are bigoted and must be so its our nature and has allowed our survival and evolution and progress. If we eliminate bigots and force collectivism human progress stops. Evolution ends, no more survival of the fittest, but Mike Judge's idiocracy comes true in a collective political correct society.

Political correct and sjw should be banned and instantly removed for being antihuman, anti freedom and anti individualist. Sjw and PC are true hate groups more lethal and crazier than any fundamental religion.

They are the real terrorists



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