The escalation continues…the piano donated by Elton John for PUBLIC USE is now cordoned off with two guards stopping anyone from playing it.
Please, people, start splashing red paint on this mall until they stop capitulating to China’s outrageous demands in England.
If they’re going to be willingly Chinese led, make them look the part (and stop shopping there until they get their shit together).

Yes but... Lituya was a splash across a small bay, ocean tsunamis are huge volumes of water, not sharp short waves...

That's all the details I had. Since it was supposed to burn I assume something like the former only multiple cuts. Obviously success was defined as no casualties and no property damage rather than no explosion.

The Polish MOD described it as deflagration and said: The object can be considered neutralised, it will not pose any more threat to the Szczecin-Swinoujscie shipping channel. https://twitter.com/Poland_MOD/status/1316282610071592960

If you look at this video covering the original attack, starting at around the 52s mark there is an explosion free splash which is probably this device https://youtu.be/vt4iqwkTJkQ

Your video, Theft Management with a Splash || ViralHog, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Did he just sneak in a life lesson at the end?

As someone who doesn't know how to swim very well (my feet and hips sink and I basically make big splashes across the water in an huge effort to avoid sinking) I'd be super panicked in this situation.

Nah, craigslist. Title: You'll make a splash with this vehicle!

A good party trick is to splash a few drops of acetone on polystyrene packaging - it instantly creates holes right the way trough like the Alien's blood.
Convince your guests that it's the strongest acid in nature and then stick your hand in it (even more effective if you are wearing nail varnish at the time).

WooWoo ... The Wa-splash Cannonball comin' through

Although I don't know the specifics here, and I understand that ignorance of the law is not a valid defense, it seems flat out insane to criminally prosecute the guy.

I give him the benefit of the doubt that they are telling the truth and this at least started by bailing rainwater out of a boat. That's a very normal activity, no reason to presume that any harm could come of it.

Then, first bucket gets tossed in and he sees that big splash. It's Florida, so there could be lots of potential explanations. It might be bigass catfish. It might be alligators. Could even be dolphins, depending on where they are in Florida. ...And, it might be manatees, although that probably wouldn't be the first thing I would think of.

So, big splash. I'd be surprised. My first reaction would be: "I wonder if it will happen again after another bucket." NOT "Oh dear, perhaps I am frightening some poor defenseless little creatures and should immediately cease what I'm doing." If I came the the conclusion that it was gators (which seems more likely/reasonable than manatees to me, although I don't live there), it would even stand to reason that frightening them off would be a good thing to do -- encourage them to move away from populated areas.

Given all that, it seems very unlikely to me that the dude had any malicious intent. If he knew they were manatees and knew that stressing them out like that could negatively impact their health, perhaps punishment would be in order. But if he thought they were anything else (fish / gators / whatever), or just plain didn't know, continuing to bail the boat in an attempt to get whatever they might be to swim away seems like a very reasonable thing to do.

Educating people that "hey, if you see something like this happening, it might be manatees and you should try to avoid stressing them out" seems like by far a better and more rational option than "throw the animal torturer in the slammer!"

I'd like to see the video where he's treading water off the Great Barrier Reef and splashing diced Chum around him.

Here's the study he's talking about in the video: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1311889?query=featured_home&#Results=&t=articleBackground

It looks like a legitimate study, but being correlational it should be taken with a grain of salt *snare drum, splash cymbal* As corrolation cannot show causation.

They seem to control for various factors like age, cholesterol level and previous hypertension too, so they don't appear to be fudging any results.

Perhaps I could argue they aren't measuring salt intake, but rather sodium excretion, and estimating intake based on urine samples. So there is potentially a huge difference in diet - a lot of the participants were from Asia, where they don't tend to use table salt (they use soy sauce instead) And even though it's still high in sodium, soy sauce could be going through a different process inside the body. (Similar to how sugar doesn't cause an insulin spike when it's in fruit form, but does when it's refined form). It's possible that the salt from soy could be passing through the body rather than settling in the blood stream. I'm just speculating. Or perhaps they are also eating other foods which are protective against moderate salt intake, allowing more of it to be excreted than absorbed.

Either way it's very interesting to me :-)

What I would like to see is a study on foods, rather than ingredients to get a better picture. Because humans don't usually eat individual minerals, and combinations of minerals seem to act differently in the body.


I guess what it's all saying though is if you are healthy, then 3-6g of salt is fine, but once you are at risk of CVD you need to back off in order to reverse the damage. But CVD is of course not the only disease people need to be careful about (although it is the #1 we should be worrying about), but salt also feeds various cancers etc.

You can't really say the driver started it for much the same reasons you can't be definite about their reasons for meandering in the road.

Buuuuuut....since we are all bein innanet jurors I surmise that the plebestrians had been obstructed traffic for some time. Mayhaps it was some sort of revenge play followin an earlier altercation or maybe there were just being dicks. We don't know. No witnesses have presented. I'd guess they turned back around because they had detoured to block the prolemobile.

Anyhoo. Fine for littering & obstruction of a highway for the wet muppets. Fine for use of a horn in anger or frustration and deliberate splashing of pedestrians for the dry muppets. JUSTICE SERVED. Let their stupidity go some way to filling a pothole somewhere.

True enough---may I step in with what I was taught? (and therefore am totally unqualified to teach but this is the internet so...)

From the beach, look for the breaking waves (the top of the wave is turning white and then crashing down in a curl and splashing into that confused white foam); waves break because the bottom is shallowing out and the bottom of the wave is "dragging" on the ocean/beach bottom (gross oversimplification; please don't shoot me with Nerf bullets).

Then, as you watch the "break", look for the last place it appears on the front of the wave (it will progress down the face of the wave, 99% of the time, moving left to right or right to left)--that's a clue about where the rip is.

Another clue is a place in the horizon/beach where the waves never breaks, or where two breaks converge on a section of different colored water, maybe sandy (flushing beach sediment) and darker (the water is deeper as a result)--that's a an interesting spot to watch for a while.

Examples of all this?

Look at the 26 second mark, between the two wide set white arrows to the left; imagine what that looks like from the beach---two sets of white wave fronts converging from left to right, and right to left---with green water and an unbreaking wave between them. You can imagine surfers launching from the left heading to the right, and launching from the right and heading to the left, outracing the white water behind them, right?

Another spot is the 48 second mark; the camera starts low, more from a normal person's eye level, then rises up to take the bird's eye view...
See it? The white breaking waves on either side of what becomes the highlit "rip"?

Finally, the 1:08 second mark---again, the white waves on either side of the non-breaking channel...that's the main rip---I dunno how you'd see the feeder...maybe use the Force?

Anyway, hope that helps.

You're right but the advantage Corbyn has is that we don't have a Trump character. Not only has Farage quit, Boris sunk his own career in a party of backstabbers, but we had our personality politics moment and I think people are past it.

The papers won't tell you that; our 8 billionaires will pull out every stop to convince the great unwashed that he's dangerous. The papers will tell you every day right up until a general election that he will lead Labour into electoral oblivion, even as thousands pack out halls in unprecedented showings of support in northern "racist" (according to MSM) towns. They'll tell you they won't win from UKIP and be out of power for 20 years.

I'm not saying he WILL win a GE because the playing field is not level, the game is not fair. Boundary changes will play right into Tory hands and the character assassinations will only increase, but if ANYONE has a chance of winning for Labour it's Corbyn. Owen Smith hasn't a hope in hell of getting MORE votes than Corbyn would, at an election.

The only way to win is by going with Corbyn but I fear that there are influential ex and current MPs who are sabotaging the campaign because this wave of populism and people power would not be beneficial to their future prosperity.

We are living in a post-truth world right now, with journalistic integrity at an all time low. A window was broken in the stairwell of a building where a Corbyn-Labour rival has an office, and it was splashed all over the news that it was a violent, thuggish Corbyn supporter just like they all are. There was no evidence and they even lied about the facts, which has been reported on twitter and by smaller news sources, but the damage is already done, throw enough shit and some of it will stick.

As Lyndon Johnson says - I know it didn't happen, but let's make the bastard deny it. Oh and apologies for shameless derailment.

On topic:
Is Schieffer making the usual mistake here? "It's not the left she needs to worry about, it's the middle." Taking the left for granted is what happened to Labour in the last 10-15 years and seen their support die pre-Corbyn. Dunno how it is in USA but over here the left have had to hold their noses and vote for a candidate who doesn't represent them at all and they're getting sick of it. So thanks to the internet when they finally see the cracks forming they recoil in horror at how they've been undermined from the inside from day one; why should they ever vote for that again?