Upvote for "Diddly-dee, potatoes!"

>> ^spoco2:
>> ^CaptainPlanet420:
Ya there's no God. The angry/naive/atheist/liberal Videosift intelligentsia came about by itself.

Wah? I mean... WAH? I don't even know what you're talking about.
Firstly, this says there PROBABLY is no god, we can't say for certain, but there's a distinct lack of evidence for one.
And if we don't believe in a god, then how is a comment like 'X just appeared by itself' does diddly... we don't believe it just appeared, that's the creationists viewpoint 'God just made things, they just 'appeared''. We think that things slowly occurred and you can trace everything back to very simple origins if you look hard enough.
Man what a stupid comment.


Can't say for sure - that would be agnostic.

Atheist = there is no god (a = no, theist = belief in deity). Atheism is a positive assertion of the non-existence of god. Some people think it is the simple denial of theism - without qualifying how one denies it. If you reject belief in god then you must believe some alternative - either that there is no god, or that the existence of god cannot be known (agnostic). Take your pick.

As for those who have never been acquainted with theism, then they are neither theists or atheists. They neither believe in god, nor do they not believe in god (yes, George H. Smith got this wrong). If you were to ask them "do you believe in god?" they could neither affirm nor deny - they have as much belief as they have non-belief (i.e. zero), but, after asking the question they soon have the notion of theism/atheism in their head since you then need to define theism/atheism for them to be able to understand the question.

In other words, if you were to call them atheist (as George H. Smith and others do), you can equally call them aatheist (a-atheist) since they have no concept of the non-existence of god either. Oh scary - all children are born "aatheist" since they have no concept of the non-existence of theism or god.

At the end of the day this ad is a waste of time because shameless self promotion of atheism is doing what atheists don't like - advertising ones views with only the thought of changing others views and not just leaving them alone. The minority bites back. When atheists are a majority the tolerance for religion will ebb and they will persecute religious people for any pain that religion may have caused them. Such is the way of man. It is starting right now. Listen to Dawkins talking about religious people as if they are all the same - I can't believe they knighted a guy who stereotypes religious people into one group of behaviour. (sarcasm) Oh yes those religious people - all the same - no brains any of them - all of them believe in a literal bible - all of them are Christians (because that is the only religion right?) - none of them are scientists - all of religion is useless shit (sarcasm).

(I also can't believe he said that if something were to create a flat fish it would be with two eyes on top of its head by design and that if it happened by chance it would evolve two eyes on top of its head by distorting one eye around - wtf? if he were to create fish wouldn't he create a dynamic system (evolution)? of course he would - so why would whoever he is referring to in this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bldN-lbyqsE video create it statically? - you wouldn't of course - you'd create a dynamic world - but he wants to shovel shit on religion - and no I don't believe in biblical creation and yes I do believe in provable evolution - only the aspects we can prove - if we can't prove it is just hypothesis thank you very much).

PS. I have not said whether I am atheist or theist so do not assume either way.

>> ^spoco2:
>> ^CaptainPlanet420:
Ya there's no God. The angry/naive/atheist/liberal Videosift intelligentsia came about by itself.

Wah? I mean... WAH? I don't even know what you're talking about.
Firstly, this says there PROBABLY is no god, we can't say for certain, but there's a distinct lack of evidence for one.
And if we don't believe in a god, then how is a comment like 'X just appeared by itself' does diddly... we don't believe it just appeared, that's the creationists viewpoint 'God just made things, they just 'appeared''. We think that things slowly occurred and you can trace everything back to very simple origins if you look hard enough.
Man what a stupid comment.


You read my mind.

>> ^CaptainPlanet420:
Ya there's no God. The angry/naive/atheist/liberal Videosift intelligentsia came about by itself.


Wah? I mean... WAH? I don't even know what you're talking about.

Firstly, this says there PROBABLY is no god, we can't say for certain, but there's a distinct lack of evidence for one.

And if we don't believe in a god, then how is a comment like 'X just appeared by itself' does diddly... we don't believe it just appeared, that's the creationists viewpoint 'God just made things, they just 'appeared''. We think that things slowly occurred and you can trace everything back to very simple origins if you look hard enough.

Man what a stupid comment.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
This video says just let everyone be for god's sake.
No - this video says, "My parents, Sanjay, and pretty much everyone but ME is a stupid, intolerant jackass. And also I am a genius because I was able to build a definitive shelf from the manual that no one else could. Oh - and I'm going to pretend I'm the only understanding person I ever met that says we should be OK with all shelves." It is a pandering, arrogant little video that says very little except how petty and self-aggrandizing the person who made it is. Then it tries to slap a little lipstick on the pig by doing what most intolerant people do and sugar-coat the bias by giving a cute little message at the end.
Know what? How about the author dumps the pettiness, the bias, and the self-aggrandizement altogether? What does it add to the message? Nothing. Jack-diddly-squat. You can chop out the first 7:30 seconds of this vid and just go with the last 30 seconds and get everything of value. The entire first 7:30 is arrogant, self-congratulatory garbage that takes a semi-decent message and craps all over it with a mountain of the author's blatant anti-parent's religion baggage.


The point was showing that different people were picking and choosing the parts of the manual they wanted because they liked the way it went together. The real shelf couldn't support its own weight (without the manuals to hold it up) and even had the letters to spell out "All Bulls**t" if you cared to look.

Overall, I think it was a pretty well made video.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
This video says just let everyone be for god's sake.
No - this video says, "My parents, Sanjay, and pretty much everyone but ME is a stupid, intolerant jackass. And also I am a genius because I was able to build a definitive shelf from the manual that no one else could. Oh - and I'm going to pretend I'm the only understanding person I ever met that says we should be OK with all shelves." It is a pandering, arrogant little video that says very little except how petty and self-aggrandizing the person who made it is. Then it tries to slap a little lipstick on the pig by doing what most intolerant people do and sugar-coat the bias by giving a cute little message at the end.
Know what? How about the author dumps the pettiness, the bias, and the self-aggrandizement altogether? What does it add to the message? Nothing. Jack-diddly-squat. You can chop out the first 7:30 seconds of this vid and just go with the last 30 seconds and get everything of value. The entire first 7:30 is arrogant, self-congratulatory garbage that takes a semi-decent message and craps all over it with a mountain of the author's blatant anti-parent's religion baggage.


Actually, it never represented his friend Sanjay as being intolerant. At that point, HE was the one being intolerant, trying to force off his own religious beliefs onto his friend, who understandably got upset when somebody tried to tell him how wrong his beliefs were. His uncle wasn't shows as intolerant either. This video isn't saying necessarily that religion is wrong, but it IS saying that being close-minded and hateful because of religion is wrong.

This video says just let everyone be for god's sake.

No - this video says, "My parents, Sanjay, and pretty much everyone but ME is a stupid, intolerant jackass. And also I am a genius because I was able to build a definitive shelf from the manual that no one else could. Oh - and I'm going to pretend I'm the only understanding person I ever met that says we should be OK with all shelves." It is a pandering, arrogant little video that says very little except how petty and self-aggrandizing the person who made it is. Then it tries to slap a little lipstick on the pig by doing what most intolerant people do and sugar-coat the bias by giving a cute little message at the end.

Know what? How about the author dumps the pettiness, the bias, and the self-aggrandizement altogether? What does it add to the message? Nothing. Jack-diddly-squat. You can chop out the first 7:30 seconds of this vid and just go with the last 30 seconds and get everything of value. The entire first 7:30 is arrogant, self-congratulatory garbage that takes a semi-decent message and craps all over it with a mountain of the author's blatant anti-parent's religion baggage.

I can't get your embed to do diddly... maybe switch to the youtube version to avoid issues?

But funny... funny stuff (I saw it on youtube)

Yes, very nice... but... it's a concept.

How many concepts like this do we actually see materialize anywhere near the form we see them in at the car shows. (yes, some, you don't need to point them out to me)

I'm far more interested in zero emission cars when they become production... THEN they interest me. Especially if they are a price I can afford.

Our family runs on one car at the moment (2 adults, 3 kids)... we do so partly because of cost, but partly because we don't want to contribute any more pollution. Now we are getting near the time a second car will be almost a necessity, and we are so wishing that there could be some affordable zero, or close to zero, emission car for us to buy in a couple of years here in Australia.

What are our hopes?

Next to damn diddly that's what.

She's a mur-diddly-urdler!

doing diddly DEADski

By the way, Olbermann is not a Democrat, so stop creating this false dichotomy. Oh yeah, they're EXACTLY the same... except that O'LIELLY YELLS and cuts off anyone that doesn't agree with him, and Fox has already been outed for the fraud of so-called "fair and balanced" NEWS (gag) that they are. Your comparisons don't amount to diddly. Excuse me while I continue to roll my eyes at your ridiculous comment.

I guess you could say that Fox is actually a joke, and that is similar to the comedy of Bill Maher, albeit unintentional. Ugh.


>> ^wjolson:
New Rule: If your not a democrat, you're a retard.
Sometimes this show and Olbermann are the exact same as Fox News and Bill O'reilly. Well other than the fact that New Rules is more of a comedy show and Olbermann is just a huge turd (who pays people to laugh at his jokes but doesnt mike them properly: what kind of sloppy stage hands would laugh that loud at lame jokes) and both Fox and Bill take themselfs seriously.
Seriously, is anyone else getting tired of this "you are stupiderer" sort of banter in the media today, coming from both the donkey and the elephant? It feels abit like being shoved in two directs by two differently dressed clowns.

persephone, the fact that you believe that these lactose tablets are doing anything is all well and good bar these few things:
* They are doing NOTHING other than any placebo effect, they truly do contain NOTHING at all that could possibly help.
* You are paying for sugar/lactose tablets, you are being conned
* I agree with the over prescription of antibiotics, and I have THREE kids. Two of which we try to never use them on. One we do because he has a series of congenital heart defects which makes the chances of him getting an infection in his heart quite high. For the two kids of ours who don't have this problem we quiet happily give them nothing but panadol or the like for whatever pain they may have, and that's it, let them ride it out and become stronger for it. We would NEVER use homeopathy to treat our heart kid, because if we did, and the infection spread to his heart because, well, the homeopathy does diddly squat, we'd never forgive ourselves.

The few times we do give our kids pain relief, it works a charm because they hardly ever have it.

Stop being part of the problem and spreading the misinformation about homeopathy.

Now, in regards to your Arnica, if you're using it as an external ointment with an actual amount in it, then yes
"There is some positive evidence that arnica has some anti-inflammatory activity when applied externally."

HOWEVER in all other cases:

"A recent review of all placebo-controlled studies related to the clinical efficacy of oral arnica found that the homeopathic remedy is no more efficacious than placebo."

And:

"A placebo-controlled study examining the possible ameliorative effect of oral arnica on the tissue trauma following removal of impacted wisdom teeth found more pain and swelling in the arnica-treated group than in the placebo group. "

Quotes from here

Basically it's bunk... for bumps and scratches use a tea tree ointment, it's in no way homeopathy (it has actual, measurable concentrations), it is a wonderful antiseptic, and reduces swelling etc. and is still nice and natural if that's what you're after.

Try and think a little scientifically when using these things, think about whether there's anything else that you're doing at the same time that may actually be doing the good, and also about your mental state where you 'believe' that it's going to work.

And also stop assuming those who don't believe in homeopathy haven't tried it and haven't sat up at night with a collicy baby, or heaven forbid, one with a nasal gastric tube and acid reflux. Because, you know, some of us have.

I've listened to it a hundred times, and I've found two mistakes. One is around the 5:00 mark. I can't remember where the other one is. On YouTube, the commentary agrees that her strumming technique needed improvement, but that in later recordings as an adult (this was about ten years ago) her technique was much improved. I know diddly about classical guitar, so I can't comment.

Anliz and Krupo- none of this goodwill you are exhibiting means diddly without someone acting as the anti-ant.