From Media Bias website: " Science Based Medicine debunks one by one, many of Dr. Gregers claims. They also claim that NutritionFacts cherry picks information that will always favor veganism. NutritionFacts.org does provide some valuable information and certainly a diet high in fruits and vegetables is preferred, but Dr. Gregers claims are extreme."

Not a consumer of alcohol myself, but this seems about right...

The foolproof way to find the exit in a maze is to keep your finger on the left wall and keep going. You will eventually reach the exit.

If Jack Torrance had this valuable information he could have caught that little brat kid.

Mmmm.... bait....bait.....why do some people love baiting other people....oh, wait....i think it has something to do with the other kind of 'bating...also, I've been coming to this website everyday since wimp.com used to be just a grey page and yourdailymedia was still a thing sooooo for those who have obtained some sort of valuable information by hovering over my name you can go bake yourself a pie. And perhaps explain to a poor mute fool like me how to add a url to a post without it being dedacted like an idiot.

If you don't you're missing valuable information/laughs. The related video may be -
the trailer linking to the full version
the original mix of the posted song
another video in the series of videos edited for time
another video by the same person

@Lawdeedaw,
Just a few points now that I have the time...

1) Not that it's a big deal, but I'm definitely male (or at least so my wife believes). I know the avatar is a bit misleading, but I liked the image.

2) I wondered after I posted if I had missed your point, but then again, I'm -still- not really sure what your point is. Outliers simply don't demonstrate that statistics are skewed. Showing errors in the studies do that. Outliers just prove what anyone with any knowledge of statistics already knows; statistics are not true of all of the population. They don't claim to be, they simply allow us to look at trends and general cases. If they were always true, we wouldn't need a statistical analysis, we'd simply state the fact.

3) The value of statistics aren't necessarily measured by how much new information they reveal. The
fact that things haven't changed is still valuable information. Just like a thermometer won't change anyone's opinion on whether the room is too hot or too cold...it just gives you an objective measurement. Opinions and perspectives are subjective; which is a horse of a completely different color.

While there's no doubt as to what the verdict of his trial would have been, I would have preferred to see him spend the remainder of his life in prison, humiliated and defeated, possibly a source of valuable information.

Nobody was ever interested in bringing Osama to justice, though. This has always been about revenge.

No sir, I don't need to rationalize my tendency to turn on the asshole when its turned lose on me and I am not selling anything-AGAIN-Perception-My delivery reflects a frustration, true, but what is the one law of love as you see it? Is it based on ones ability to or willingness to suffer a particular subject or dialog until it satisfies a personal fancy?
I don't need to watch a video when I understand the mechanics of the delivery and the reasons why some chose to express a mundane and simplified world view by letting some talking head they identify with through years of detrimental and unhealthy programming do it for them. The constant posting of news clips and editorials that tend to all say the same goddamn thing, is a redundant, unrealistic, uninspiring, and uncreative way of expressing one's point.
I DON'T NEED TO BE CONSTANTLY HIT OVER THE HEAD WITH A POINT TO GET THE GYST! This describes the loop that some are in. A loop is a rut, a loop is a broken record, a loop takes you back to the same place over and over, and its a form of exhibitionism I detest. You see nothing but the "ravings of a retarded douchebag, because that is HOW YOU CHOSE TO REACT. I respond to bullshit as I see it with a similar methodology. My story does not change. Like a pitcher who has a particular set of strengths and styles of delivery, he rolls with what is handed him. Some batters are very predictable and can't adapt. I am lazy when it comes to trying to teach someone who is unresponsive sometimes, but I never tire in reminding the same over and over, with a view to finding some mutual understanding.

Don't waste your brainpower on anything that does not suit your desire-RM represents in her livelihood for
me, someone who has sold her soul to the machine I despise. I could give a rat's as about her preferences, her sexuality, or her politics. She's a goddamn diversion, a puppet in the hands of a cancerous distraction for a nation of weak-willed, automatons. Again, MW, I don't need to be beat over the head with why FOX is a piece of shit news organization, and the same goes for MSNBC over any other. Major media, news, politics, are a broken, twisted mound of garbage, that shows no sign of doing anything but turning slaves into prisoners, into chum.

You don't like the user???.. I can live with that. Lazy would be to run and hide behind acerbic one-liners directed at a user and not the content of a user's posts. Admittedly, I have been guilty of the same, and probably will slip again. Ignore is the same beast as denial or self-indulgent public masturbation for me.

Douchbag? Check a mirror when letting fly with convenient labels.
In reply to this comment by MaxWilder:
I don't buy that bullshit for a second. You are simply rationalizing you assholery. If you were really trying to follow the "one law of love" you would be trying to share the truth of the world as you see it, and you can't do that with curses and unintelligible gobbledegook. You would have watched the video, and made clearly related points about why Rachel is no more newsworthy than the filth that Fox News spews. I might agree or disagree, but that conversation would be one motivated by respect for the humanity of your fellow sifters. As it stands, I see nothing but the ravings of a retarded douchebag, and that's sad because obviously that's not who you really are. It's just what we see when you are being lazy. And I don't want to waste my brainpower on it.


In reply to this comment by choggie:
I offer a rebuttal in the form of a response to your allegations and observations on this post. I am through with trying to enlighten folks through the limitations of the written word.
Those who have figured me out on this site are allies, those who refuse to try to understand continue to, to their detriment and frustration. The same people who would see me gone forever are the same who find it most comfortable in a room full of people who process and dispense information in a similar manner.

I could use charts and graphs and examples but why bother? What will it profit me to change anyone's mind about a particular issue....My issue is about PROCESS and the filters otherwise reasonable people use because of the way they have been programmed.
You may believe me, that in the real world, I am an incredible humanitarian and lover of diversity. I love "humans", just hate the way most are "being"....the majority are incredibly gullible, controlled, meat robots with no stake in or say over their environment or their livelihoods, evidenced here on VS, by save but a very few. The few that won't write, well, I appreciate them all the more when they do.

I thank you for the constructive critique, and you are right. I do tend to overstate my opinion in way too many or too few course words. My opinion on the matter of Rachel Maddow regardless of the particular spew she is engaged in??? She represents a most reprehensible outlet for information/diversion/control. I pity the masses for settling for such bullshit cloaked as valuable information. I pity her for selling out to the Machina Babylonica.

There is only one law that mankind need follow. That of Love. Love under will. The others are there to keep monkeys` from throwing shit out of trees.

In reply to this comment by MaxWilder:
Ya know, choggie, if you bothered to take two seconds to state your opinion in a clear and concise manner, people might be enlightened. But no, you wander through these virtual rooms, wild-haired and smelling of shite, mumbling and rambling incoherent obscenities. We see in the post above that you can write meaningful sentences if you choose to, which makes the other garbage all the more despicable.

If you are not here to share your opinions with people, (and your opinion about the usefulness of non-news distractions is completely valid) then why the fuck are you here? Are you just venting? Or are the rest of us supposed to wade through your typewritten spew in search of your true meaning?

I don't buy that bullshit for a second. You are simply rationalizing you assholery. If you were really trying to follow the "one law of love" you would be trying to share the truth of the world as you see it, and you can't do that with curses and unintelligible gobbledegook. You would have watched the video, and made clearly related points about why Rachel is no more newsworthy than the filth that Fox News spews. I might agree or disagree, but that conversation would be one motivated by respect for the humanity of your fellow sifters. As it stands, I see nothing but the ravings of a retarded douchebag, and that's sad because obviously that's not who you really are. It's just what we see when you are being lazy. And I don't want to waste my brainpower on it.


In reply to this comment by choggie:
I offer a rebuttal in the form of a response to your allegations and observations on this post. I am through with trying to enlighten folks through the limitations of the written word.
Those who have figured me out on this site are allies, those who refuse to try to understand continue to, to their detriment and frustration. The same people who would see me gone forever are the same who find it most comfortable in a room full of people who process and dispense information in a similar manner.

I could use charts and graphs and examples but why bother? What will it profit me to change anyone's mind about a particular issue....My issue is about PROCESS and the filters otherwise reasonable people use because of the way they have been programmed.
You may believe me, that in the real world, I am an incredible humanitarian and lover of diversity. I love "humans", just hate the way most are "being"....the majority are incredibly gullible, controlled, meat robots with no stake in or say over their environment or their livelihoods, evidenced here on VS, by save but a very few. The few that won't write, well, I appreciate them all the more when they do.

I thank you for the constructive critique, and you are right. I do tend to overstate my opinion in way too many or too few course words. My opinion on the matter of Rachel Maddow regardless of the particular spew she is engaged in??? She represents a most reprehensible outlet for information/diversion/control. I pity the masses for settling for such bullshit cloaked as valuable information. I pity her for selling out to the Machina Babylonica.

There is only one law that mankind need follow. That of Love. Love under will. The others are there to keep monkeys` from throwing shit out of trees.

In reply to this comment by MaxWilder:
Ya know, choggie, if you bothered to take two seconds to state your opinion in a clear and concise manner, people might be enlightened. But no, you wander through these virtual rooms, wild-haired and smelling of shite, mumbling and rambling incoherent obscenities. We see in the post above that you can write meaningful sentences if you choose to, which makes the other garbage all the more despicable.

If you are not here to share your opinions with people, (and your opinion about the usefulness of non-news distractions is completely valid) then why the fuck are you here? Are you just venting? Or are the rest of us supposed to wade through your typewritten spew in search of your true meaning?

I offer a rebuttal in the form of a response to your allegations and observations on this post. I am through with trying to enlighten folks through the limitations of the written word.
Those who have figured me out on this site are allies, those who refuse to try to understand continue to, to their detriment and frustration. The same people who would see me gone forever are the same who find it most comfortable in a room full of people who process and dispense information in a similar manner.

I could use charts and graphs and examples but why bother? What will it profit me to change anyone's mind about a particular issue....My issue is about PROCESS and the filters otherwise reasonable people use because of the way they have been programmed.
You may believe me, that in the real world, I am an incredible humanitarian and lover of diversity. I love "humans", just hate the way most are "being"....the majority are incredibly gullible, controlled, meat robots with no stake in or say over their environment or their livelihoods, evidenced here on VS, by save but a very few. The few that won't write, well, I appreciate them all the more when they do.

I thank you for the constructive critique, and you are right. I do tend to overstate my opinion in way too many or too few course words. My opinion on the matter of Rachel Maddow regardless of the particular spew she is engaged in??? She represents a most reprehensible outlet for information/diversion/control. I pity the masses for settling for such bullshit cloaked as valuable information. I pity her for selling out to the Machina Babylonica.

There is only one law that mankind need follow. That of Love. Love under will. The others are there to keep monkeys` from throwing shit out of trees.

In reply to this comment by MaxWilder:
Ya know, choggie, if you bothered to take two seconds to state your opinion in a clear and concise manner, people might be enlightened. But no, you wander through these virtual rooms, wild-haired and smelling of shite, mumbling and rambling incoherent obscenities. We see in the post above that you can write meaningful sentences if you choose to, which makes the other garbage all the more despicable.

If you are not here to share your opinions with people, (and your opinion about the usefulness of non-news distractions is completely valid) then why the fuck are you here? Are you just venting? Or are the rest of us supposed to wade through your typewritten spew in search of your true meaning?

In reply to this comment by TheFreak:
Always take the time to investigate sources.

"The Acton Institute is an ecumenical think-tank dedicated to the study of free-market economics informed by religious faith and moral absolutes."
Who funded the Acton Institute?
The Bradley Foundation: $225,000 (laissez-faire capitalist organization)
Philip Morris: $10,000
ExxonMobil: $30,000

No thank you Acton Institute. You're assertions are rejected. Not because your points are short sighted, naive and laughable and you show an obvious agenda towards promoting corporate power through manipulation of religion...no wait, that is the reason.

while i agree knowing and vetting a source is valuable. information should not be dismissed out of hand based soley on that factor.
is it your contention that what america has now is a free market?
that what has transpired in the past few years could not remotely be considered a flirtation with plutocracy?
while i am not a purest when it comes to capiltalism,what we have now has become an abomination.

Yes. There is some valuable information in here...

FOR ME TO POOP ON!!!

>> ^quantumushroom: Sorry. I respectfully disagree. Can't hide a proposed moral stance behind secrets of national security.

So you are arguing that all scientific studies about truth telling under duress, and false confessions have been cooked by the Democrats?

Science is no longer apolitical, if it ever was. Lies about secondhand smoke killing 50,000 people per year and gloBULL warming scares have proved this well enough.

Obama can solidify your hypothesis about torture never providing valuable information by releasing all pertinent Gitmo waterboarding data. He hasn't. WHY? He only has a 1 in 3 chance of being proven wrong.

I don't really care if the CIA thinks that torture is effective ( they seem to be taking the opposite position, but that is equally irrelevant ). I am asking for evidence that torture, studied under scientific controls, as a system of extracting usable information, works on humans. The evidence I have seen strongly suggests it does not.

Well, as I've said many times, and probably will again, these captured folks are not enemy soldiers and therefore deserve no military/legal protection, possibly with the exception of those not caught outright fighting against US troops on the battlefield. I'd rather the ones still out there not be reassured that they won't be tortured if captured.

If you seriously believe torture "doesn't work" then you might find yourself agreeable to the idea that we not go through the trouble of bringing these clowns to "jail" for 3 hots and a cot, and instead simply kill the bastards where we find them, as brutally as possible. That might deter a few of the next "martyrs".

such the old argument, is it moral to use research that was acquired in possibly cruel or inhumane ways to the benefit of others later?

one would argue that the damage is done, the information is now available and it would be a) a waste not to use valuable information to save lives, no matter how it was originally obtained and b) gives value to the person/animal so that their suffering was not in vain.

the other side is that to use information obtained illegally or through cruel/"evil" practices means the user of said information would "taint" his own work, that any subsequent work using this information is only condoning the actions previously taken.

and this plants us smack dab right into the argument about waterboarding oddly enough.

there are many shades of course, almost nothing is ever as black and white as that. personally im of a bit of both. the information is here, if we can save lives or improve them with what we now know, then so much the better. it IS however humanity's responsibility to prevent anything like this from happening, or if it is happening, to stop it. even if it's on the verge of making a phenomenal breakthrough, the moral cost is simply to high.

It amazes me how much valuable information lounges in an archive only to be found later.

It also worries me that even though we make copies, how much we did not manage to save of our past, and how much of what we produce now will survive 100 years from now.

She gets face time because she fills seats, so to say. When she's on your show, something absolutely bat shit crazy will come out of her mouth. What person/group will she wish dead/piss upon next? Tune-in to find out. News networks are not news networks, they're there for the ad revenue, not valuable information.

>> ^rougy:
Why do peopel give that skanky old whore any face time at all?
She is genuinely evil, and I'm going to party on the day she dies.