search results matching tag: Tale

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.004 seconds

    Videos (865)     Sift Talk (20)     Blogs (76)     Comments (1000)   

SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE DUCK TALES

Creepy New DuckTales Intro

Yes - Close to the Edge (Live)

What is NOT Random?

Sagemind says...

A person of faith argues with semantics and rhetoric. and without any proof or substance.

I have no issues agreeing to disagree, as I won't strip someone of their faith or beliefs in what ever they believe. Just, please keep it out of my backyard where we deal in realities, and tangent proof.

I agree to a person's right to their belief, but never presume I'll stand aside when your fairy tales get in the way with reality.

Just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean mean it was designed by an intelligent being.

How to Rescue Ducklings from a Drain Pipe

Man vs. Donkey

rich_magnet says...

Calling this EIA is a bit incorrect. These are different species and any inter-specific breeding that may have happened after the video cut out would not lead to viable offspring. Also, two males, so again no viable offspring. Also a cautionary tale about trying to take a dump in the donkey pasture.

Kids Throw Sodium into Lake

Babymech says...

Sometimes i somewhat wish I were born in 1970 or so, and these kids would actually have to try to tell me this tale instead of carrying three cameras each.

Neil deGrasse Tyson schooling ignorant climate fools

Buttle says...

You can demonstrate the effect of carbon dioxide on climate as easily as dropping a ball from your hand? People know that balls will drop because the see it for themselves, not because a former physicist and his dog say so.

In actual fact, the earth has not warmed in nearly 20 years, and the climate models do not help to explain this. They are useless for explaining or predicting changes on the scale of decades, and it's crazy to expect them to somehow predict changes much further in the future.

Warmism, from the start, has been based on obfuscation, concealment of data, dodgy statistics, and overcomplicated computer models that add very little to insight into the real physical phenomena.

Remember the hockey stick? That went the way of Carl Sagan's nuclear winter, which ought to provide a cautionary tale for Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Your child's future will have many problems, one of them being depletion of the fossil fuel supplies that we have come to rely upon for sustenance. Climate will change, as it always has, and some of that change will be caused by CO2.
Climate science could be helpful; it's a pity that it has been distorted into a completely political exercise, and a shame for science generally, which stands to lose a great deal of public trust.

robbersdog49 said:

I think the parallel with gravity is that although the exact cause is debatable, the effect isn't.

If gravity were to be discussed like climate change is then we'd have people arguing about whether or not a ball will fall downwards if dropped, not about whether a graviton is the cause. The right would be arguing that the 'scientists' only observe the ball going down because they're throwing it down.

We're living under a cliff and rocks are starting to fall down on us with alarming regularity, far more often than they used to. We should be building shelters to hide from them or moving away, or strengthening the cliff to stop more rocks from falling but we aren't because we don't know if the graviton exists or not.

I just don't understand the controversy. The earth is warming, and it's going to have a catastrophic effect on a lot of the life on the planet, including us. We could potentially do something about it, or at the very least try to do something about it. But instead there's all this fighting and bitterness.

I'd resign myself to the fact that the human race are a bunch of fucking idiots and we'll get what we deserve but six months ago my wife gave birth to our first child. Every time I look at him I think about the world we're going to leave for him and his kids and realise what a bunch of arseholes we're being. I would love to know what catastrophic things the deniers think will happen if we do try to do something about climate change. What could be worse?

Mount St. Helens: Evidence for a young creation

newtboy says...

Just fail dude.
I never claimed to be an expert in geology, just to have enough knowledge to understand the science involved, unlike you.
EDIT: but your millionaire uncles HAVE talked about money with you, right...so you understand, say, interest?
Uniformitarianism as stated was proven false in the early 1800's. Many factors are involved in the time frame for feature formations, they are not uniform.
Yes, you are consistently anti-science here. You completely ignore the scientific method when making obviously false claims like 'that proves it was caused by a giant flood'.
Oh dude, no where in your fairy tale book does it ever say the earth is 6000 years old, you've been duped by idiots with agendas. Give it up, even your religious 'leaders' have realized the insanity of that stance and the requirement to suspend reality for it to be correct. Try listening to them.
There is absolutely zero evidence for a 'world wide flood' unless you can create some out of thin air with your level of faith in ridiculousness. There is not a single whit of actual evidence, which would take the form of a single, homogeneous layer of sediment world wide at the same geologic age. Doesn't exist. Sorry, you're just plain wrong about what you claim.
The 'evidence' in this video is evidence that landslides happen fast, not that layered non-volcanic sediments can be put down in tens of thousands of distinct and differing layers in an instant, then massive erosion can happen also in an instant, as you claim it does. True enough, erosion can happen fast, but doesn't often, and sedimentary layering simply can't...neither can fossilization. (oops, forgot, the devil put those stone bones there to fool me...but since I AM the devil, I'm not fooled)
Your claim that there is a homogeneous sediment layer all over the world is a complete fabrication. It does not exist. If it did, that would be HUGE scientific discovery heard on every network and science program for years to come, not one only heard about in church and/or afterwards in the lobby.
Once again...fail....as I suspect you did in your science classes.

EDIT:...and I love that your 'proof' video includes Uluru, the oldest large rock in the known world, which is proven by numerous differing methods to be well over 550 Million years old (that's how long ago it was rotated, it existed well before then) I guess the devil/gawd made that too, in order to confuse scientists? I'm not going to watch more time wasting ridiculous unscientific propaganda by the scientifically challenged, so it goes unwatched.
and good job with the cut and paste in order to quote me and answer me without me noticing,...sorry, didn't work.
SECOND EDIT: Do you not notice that on one side you claim uniformitarianism is wrong, but you also insist it's held as a major tenant of modern geology? If it's that obvious to you, an admitted lay person, don't you think it might be more obvious to professionals?

shinyblurry said:

..I can claim to know far more than you seem to because I went to college and graduated with a degree in science, have a NASA geologist uncle,..

What area of science do you have a degree in? Does having a scientific degree make you an expert in geology? I have a few uncles who are millionaires but that doesn't mean I am good with money or know anything about business.

...Uniformitarianism as described is NOT the cornerstone of geology, that's ridiculous. Geologic forces are not uniform...

Uniformitarianism is the belief that the geological forces at work in present time are the same as those which happened in the past. This is what is meant by the phrase "the present is the key to the past". It is not a belief that all geologic forces are uniform. Again, this theory is the cornerstone of modern geology and also many other sciences. Geologists mix in some catastrophism with their uniformitarianism so they don't really call it uniformitarianism anymore but that is the foundation of geology today.

..and as an anti-science guy..

I am not anti-science; I am a firm believer in the scientific method. What you're calling science cannot be tested with the scientific method, and it is therefore not scientific and requires faith to believe it. I don't have the kind of faith to believe what you believe.

..I would guess you believe the earth is about 6000 years old, right?..

Give or take a few thousand years. I believe we live on a young Earth in a young Universe.

..There is NO evidence of a world wide flood. NONE WHATSOEVER. Either show exactly where the (as yet undiscovered) layer of homogeneous sediment is in the strata world wide or stop lying. You can't, because it didn't happen..

Do you realize there aren't two sets of evidence, one for creation and the other for naturalism? We are looking at the same evidence and coming to different conclusions. There is volumes of evidence for a worldwide flood, in fact the evidence is irrefutable, but if you come to the data with uniformitarian assumptions you will misinterpret it.

A secular geologist looks at the grand canyon and sees millions of years because of his uniformitarian assumptions about the processes that formed it, and his belief in deep time. Because of the assumptions he is bringing to the table, he fails to see how it could have been rapidly formed and deposited, and the evidence in this video proves that it could have been.

You can find the same sediment (from the same place) deposited the same way, all over the world. The explanation that it was a process that took hundreds of millions of years or longer doesn't match the data. There are plenty of lectures which explain what this looks like, and as a scientist you should be able to understand exactly what they're talking about:

Mount St. Helens: Evidence for a young creation

shatterdrose says...

Stating explicitly that you are only seeing what you want to see is exactly why we can't give you any credence. When I wear beer goggles, I see exactly what I want to see as well, only difference being, I sober up after a while.

Just because some book says one thing, doesn't mean someone else's book doesn't have other magical stories that discredit yours. You picked the one you want to believe in, and you'll find any imaginary evidence to back up your stance. Reality won't change that. And this video won't make the rest of us believe in fairy tales.

Kirikou and the Sorceress

Mormons Declare War on Masturbation

Mormons Declare War on Masturbation

Full Throttle: Opening Cutscene

BigAlski says...

I remember playing this game. I also remember a story an old dude I helped through "Meals on Wheels" told me about a biker he saw break a pickup's headlight from his motorcycle with a chain belt. I thought "that's pretty badass". hehe. A good tale of vengeance

Trying To Decide Where To Eat - Tales Of Mere Existence



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