search results matching tag: perpetual

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (118)     Sift Talk (11)     Blogs (10)     Comments (1000)   

collegehumor-kinda racist? try diet racism!

bcglorf says...

Further to my post above, the back and forth, left vs right, petty bickering all serves to perpetuate the existing problems.

For instance, here in Canada statistics do clearly show that aboriginals are over-represented in crime statistics. Simply observing that statistic though already marks me as a racist in most circles and conversation/debate is supposed to shut down and your not supposed to talk about it.

The trouble is that the disproportionate crime rate isn't because skin colour influences the probability you'll become a criminal. Things like poverty and environment though absolutely do. The reality in Canada is that Aboriginal reserves have conditions that are much worse then comparable municipalities. The system of segregation of Aboriginal people on reserves has created a disparity and this disparity is at the root of the problem.

As I stated though, people aren't even supposed to discuss the issue because it's racist to say most of what I just did. The worst part is that refusing to talk about the problem, let alone working on resolving it, is allowing the continuation of a systematic disadvantaging of Canadians based upon their race.

Man Arrested & Punched for Sitting on Mom's Front Porch

newtboy says...

Playing meek does not protect you from any abuse you've mentioned, including being shot to death. It doesn't keep one from being arrested, beaten, humiliated, having false charges levied, etc. It only perpetuates the idea that the police are 'just doing their job's' when they abuse citizens. Fight back. This guy played meek until an asshat illegally grabbed his phone, then attacked him, and remained meek afterwards. He could have destroyed that cop if he fought back....but would have probably been shot if he had exercised his right to self defense.

If you are black and armed and you get stopped, shoot first. Being armed is now considered a legitimate reason for police to kill you. You don't have to be threatening, pointing that gun, or doing anything wrong at all, just having it is 'reason' enough for them to shoot you dead today. Prison is better than dead, imo.

Cops have squandered the good will and trust granted them by the public. They no longer get the benefit of a doubt.

It's 25 times more likely a cop will murder you than the odds you might murder them, they are all armed and dangerous, and turnabout is fair play. In my opinion, citizens have more right to shoot cops in self defence than vice versa.

bareboards2 said:

I agree with just about everything you said. Except...

This isn't a perfect world. You described this imperfect world. This guy should wait until all the corrections are made? Or does it make more sense to seethe silently and await for the humiliation to end NOW?

The situation with police departments getting training (and support for mentally ill people BEFORE they flip out) does need to be fixed.

Until it is, play meek. Unless you want to be arrested. Hit in the eye. Humiliated on your front lawn. What do you gain from fighting a losing battle IN THIS MOMENT?

Are You Ready To Be Outpaced By Machines? Quantum Computing

Payback says...

The more I listen to quantum mechanics the more it sounds like religious nuts. "Oh, we don't know what the qubit is, so that means it's everything, and like 4 or 5 parallel universes too!" it's perpetual motion machines all over again.

Brian Cox refutes claims of climate change denier on Q&A

alcom says...

alcom says...
@kingmob The right-wing conspiracy of convenience says that the data has been adjusted to heighten the urgency and panic and perpetuate their scientific fraud. This is a misunderstanding of flux adjustments that used to be made to climate models in the 90's and early in the 00's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_circulation_model#Flux_buffering

Recent improvements in modelling equations mean that they no longer rely on flux adjustments, but hearing that they had to made adjustments at all sounds sketch.

Because the "hockey-stick" model was an overshoot based on the peak in 1998, deniers tend to either:

a) Argue that the "warming hiatus" between 1998 and 2013 disproves AGW theory. This fallacy disproved itself in the last 2+ years as global surface and ocean temperatures have exceeded the 1998 record year on year.
or:
b) Attempt to discredit scientists arguing that their own funding depends on the alarming data that they publish. Far-right conservatives continue to demonize scientists as a cabal of billionaires working in concert to sway public opinion. If that was true, then the whole hiatus period sure didn't help their cause, but the graph hasn't moved.

This is sound science, and denialism is collapsing under the weight of its own bullshit. At the time of posting, NOAA said that July 2016 also marked the 15th consecutive warmest month on record for the globe. That is the longest stretch of months in a row that a global temperature record has been set in their dataset.

kingmob said:

and people like this are in charge of things...
NASA is corrupting the data.

Ummm MOTIVE?

kingmob (Member Profile)

alcom says...

@kingmob The right-wing conspiracy of convenience says that the data has been adjusted to heighten the urgency and panic and perpetuate their scientific fraud. This is a misunderstanding of flux adjustments that used to be made to climate models in the 90's and early in the 00's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_circulation_model#Flux_buffering

Recent improvements in modelling equations mean that they no longer rely on flux adjustments, but hearing that they had to made adjustments at all sounds sketch.

Because the "hockey-stick" model was an overshoot based on the peak in 1998, deniers tend to either:

a) Argue that the "warming hiatus" between 1998 and 2013 disproves AGW theory. This fallacy disproved itself in the last 2+ years as global surface and ocean temperatures have exceeded the 1998 record year on year.
or:
b) Attempt to discredit scientists arguing that their own funding depends on the alarming data that they publish. Far-right conservatives continue to demonize scientists as a cabal of billionaires working in concert to sway public opinion. If that was true, then the whole hiatus period sure didn't help their cause, but the graph hasn't moved.

This is sound science, and denialism is collapsing under the weight of its own bullshit. At the time of posting, NOAA said that July 2016 also marked the 15th consecutive warmest month on record for the globe. That is the longest stretch of months in a row that a global temperature record has been set in their dataset.

kingmob said:

and people like this are in charge of things...
NASA is corrupting the data.

Ummm MOTIVE?

Turn On, Tune In, Feel Good | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee

bareboards2 says...

You're right. I don't remember every conversation I have ever had.

Besides, people can change their mind.

So I go by what they say.

All the various Christian sects go back to the same book. Well, the Mormons have their extra bit, but they read the bible too.

There are plenty of Muslims who interpret their holy book in different ways.

I stand by my downvote as perpetuating harmful stereotypes.

PS Plenty of smiting and capital punishment in the Bible. No different than the Quran.

Lawdeedaw said:

First, I always point out Christianity's faults, specifically Westborough and Mormon secs...it's like you listened to me for years, then decided to belligerently use something I said over and over again against me just because it felt good? I get that you can't remember everything we talk about, but the gist should be gotten at least.

Second, just like the Bible, the book itself is homophobic. Are there fantastic Muslims? Sure. Just like I am sure there are good Scientologists, which I am sure you must defend. But their religion is against psychology medication, period. Does that mean all practice it? No? Well shit, then their doctrine gets a free pass!

I spoke only of their book--not of them. You then support that book, so not sure if that qualifies as supporting Muslims in general (Hint, since I NEVER once said anything about Muslims themselves, you didn't actually defend them. That means you supported the literal doctrine of the Koran.)

So yeah...care to explain how your Progressive beliefs jive with the Koran?

Turn On, Tune In, Feel Good | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee

bareboards2 says...

I downvoted your comment because it was ignorant of the variety of beliefs held by a variety of Muslims, and it perpetuates that ignorance.

As they say about spotting possible terrorist activity -- If you see something, say something.

Or even better, Jon Stewart's applying it to bullshit, same thing. If you see something, say something.

Just following some very good advice from a variety of sources across the political landscape.

After all, we have Westboro Baptist Church. Who says that they represent Christianity? Nobody. NOBODY.

Lawdeedaw said:

Since when do you value Islamic teachings, lol. I would think with equality in your character my comment would be right up your alley. But it seems not...

I'm Not Scared of Donald Trump

Baristan says...

Perpetually being punched in the face is not a solution.

Buying into the false dilemma keeps us in a two party system.

Break my arm. Even the "worst case scenario", Trump winning due to a third party, would be good motivation for Democrats to support a new election system.

Neither party will allow a non "first past the post" system while they have no third party competition. The first and only time I've heard politicians consider adopting an alternative voting systems was when Ross Perot polled high enough to tank the Republican candidate if he ran.

Why the White Man Gotta Be King of the Jungle?

TheFreak says...

Not a monkey joke, that wouldn't get a laugh from anyone. there is a racial stereotype that black people don't swim. Perpetuated even by black comedians. It's not considered the most offensive stereotype. More playful than serious, like, "white people put mayonnaise on everything."

And if you watched the old black and white Tarzan films, he had only two modes of locomotion, 'swing on vine' and 'swim'.

scheherazade said:

I believe it's a 'monkey' joke.

Because some primate species (barring exceptional individuals) won't go into the water.

-scheherazade

male atheists have questions for SJW's

Texas Representative Warns of Gay Space Colony

nanrod says...

If I was designing a space ark for the perpetuation of the human race and as much of Earth's biodiversity as possible, I would go with as large seed bank as possible, frozen embryos and sperm and wherever possible female animals only. And since it would not make sense to waste payload on unnecessary males the crew would need to be female. In terms of perpetuating humanity the most valuable resource would be wombs. And since the first generation colonists would be female then it would make sense for their mental health to recruit primarily lesbians.

The science is in: Exercise isnt the best way to lose weight

ChaosEngine says...

There are millions of people all over the world who do this very thing all the time. It's a myth perpetuated by TV shows like "the biggest loser".

What's the purpose of the video? Generating ad revenue for Vox. They're a business after all. But secondary to that, I think the purpose of the video is simply to educate people about the importance of nutrition in weight loss. You would be amazed at the number of people who don't understand it.

I don't think you could really call it clickbait (other than the fact that everything is clickbait, so the term becomes meaningless). In fact, it's almost the opposite of clickbait... the main point is given away in the title. It's not like it was called "you won't believe this one amazing weight loss method" or some shit.

TheFreak said:

I don't recall anyone claiming the path to losing weight is exercise alone. This video is based on a straw man argument.

Bill Maher: Who Needs Guns?

scheherazade says...

You should read the prince. Look at what people did throughout history, and look at what we and other nations do today.

At some point, you have to realize that nothing has changed. Technology has moved on, but we're still the same monkeys that were around before, and we're still behaving the same way.

Nations don't last. You can be on top for a couple centuries, but afterwards you fall down the totem pole. Most places on earth spend most of their time getting crapped on. It's a special time when they get to crap on others.

Regardless, the 2nd amendment was made with the awareness of the human condition. The perpetual dissatisfaction that drives people to strife. Peace is not everlasting. Even if you behave well, there's always a group that comes along to bring trouble.

A gun behind every blade of grass is the best possible method for national security there is. A nation with a broke government in turmoil will not have an organized military. But an armed people still represent a massive discouragement to any candidate occupier.

The west has had a good run for the past few decades. But it's never lasted before, and it won't last this time. It may not be in our lifetime, but things will eventually go belly up.

Then again, it could be in our lifetime. Europe is getting rapidly nationalistic under immigration pressures. US/Europe are poking Russia in the eye with missile installations and military exercises (maybe to rile them up and get people focused more on Russia and less on the immigrant crisis - common enemies are the best unifiers). You never know. Historically, when things go to hell, they were ~always fine not so long prior.

You don't have to worry about these things. They'll happen when they happen. History doesn't care either way.

2nd amendment can look like an anachronism during a period of quiet. But eventually it will make perfect sense again.

-scheherazade

EMPIRE said:

Look... let's all agree on this...

The american founding fathers did some really great stuff. Wonderful.

But they're fucking human, and the 2nd amendment was unbelievably short-sighted.

The constitution is not something to mess with willy-nilly, but it CAN and it SHOULD be updated from time to time.

Traffic cops get new tech to seize money off your credit car

artician says...

Yeah, because it's already geared to induce panic and overreaction. Look at that graphic! It's ridiculous and hyperbolic. Just because I agree with it doesn't mean I can upvote such a video in good conscience. It's just perpetuating this model of reactionary media for wider exposure; there's no knowledge here, they're just telling people what to think. It doesn't matter if it's right if it's part of the problem that got us here in the first place.

Gratefulmom said:

Really?

Rashida Jones coaches Stephen on how to be a Feminist

newtboy says...

No, if you believe in and work for gender equality FOR WOMEN, you're a feminist.
Those who believe in gender equality for all are called egalitarians.

Why 'feminism' is historically 'feminism' is because it works to secure the rights of women. Period. The feminist movement has never, as far as I know, worked against unequal rights for women when the inequality benefits women...or said another way, worked for equality FOR men.

It was not ONLY women at the start, only mostly women, and you disrespect and dismiss the contributions of all those men who worked against their own self interests to secure equal rights for you. How rude and ungrateful....I bet you would be upset if women's contributions to men's issues were dismissed like that.
No, men have not done the bulk of the work, but they have been invaluable in getting action many, many times. Calling it feminism and acting like it's only by women totally 'disacknowledges' all those self sacrificing men....which is why I have a problem. If we and our votes, money, and efforts don't count and are completely unapreciated, then buh-bye.
Again, no one is even suggesting renaming the entire movement, I suggested that people WHO THINK LIKE ME might start or join another that's more inclusive from the start. If you don't think like me, it's not about you, and even if you do, it's not a command, it's barely a suggestion.

If you focus solely on those with the MOST disadvantages, you only swing the pendulum of unfairness the other direction in a never ending struggle back and forth. Only by focusing on equality for all can you come to the right solutions to inequalities.

(Expletive deleted)! Men and whites ABSOLUTELY need equal rights. Yes, in MOST cases men and whites have advantages, not all by far like you said, still today a crackhead mother is more likely to get full custody than a fully employed stand up father...that is not the ONLY case where women are given advantages men aren't....another off the top of my head, domestic violence, men will ALWAYS be the one thought to be the aggressor without clear evidence to the contrary, but that's simply false, and leaves many abused men victimized twice. Same for sexual abuse/rape. Men get zero support if they've been raped, only ridicule and disbelief. Take each situation individually, or you'll continue to make that insulting, repulsive, self serving mistake that perpetuates inequality and pits men against women.

Equal child custody rights....yes, good example....how has the feminist movement worked to secure that....for men? If the imbalance is in their favor, that's FINE with feminists. I disagree strongly, and I won't be considering myself one anymore.

FlowersInHisHair said:

Don't overreact. If you believe in gender equality, you are a feminist.

As has been pointed out, and as you acknowledge, you were not there at the start of feminism. Why feminism is feminism is because the fight for gender equality was not initiated by men, nor has the bulk of the work been done by men. Calling it anything but feminism disacknowledges that women are the prime movers here. The fight for gender equality is the fight, spearheaded by women, to bring women's rights up to meet men's existing privilege level. It's feminism. You get credit for being part of the movement, but that's not enough reason to rename that movement, and I can't understand that argument.

Equality for all is the goal, yes. But to do this, women and non-whites are the ones who need the "boost". So that's why the movements are called "feminism", and "Black Lives Matter". Men and whites don't need "equal rights"; they already have more rights than non-white and women, aside from a few issues such as equal child custody rights, which will equalise when gender rights reach balance.



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