Hrm. I'm not priv'd to "notdead" this, but it looks like this was a transient issue with YouTube\my connection.

No kidding you are on it, my inbox is on fire. I think they are all fixed now. Thanks
In reply to this comment by ReverendTed:
I'm on it! (Oddly, while I've seen quite a few with an old player style, there are a whole bunch that appear to have the proper player, but they throw a "Player Initialization Failed" error. I hope those are actually dead...)
In reply to this comment by Zifnab:
Go ahead and call dead on them and they can be fixed. The Escapist has changed their embed format a couple of times which has caused problems with old ones.
In reply to this comment by ReverendTed:
I'm getting a lot of errors watching old Zero Punctuation embeds, but I'm not sure that I want to call "dead" on them in case it's a transient issue on Escapist's end.

I'm on it! (Oddly, while I've seen quite a few with an old player style, there are a whole bunch that appear to have the proper player, but they throw a "Player Initialization Failed" error. I hope those are actually dead...)
In reply to this comment by Zifnab:
Go ahead and call dead on them and they can be fixed. The Escapist has changed their embed format a couple of times which has caused problems with old ones.
In reply to this comment by ReverendTed:
I'm getting a lot of errors watching old Zero Punctuation embeds, but I'm not sure that I want to call "dead" on them in case it's a transient issue on Escapist's end.

Go ahead and call dead on them and they can be fixed. The Escapist has changed their embed format a couple of times which has caused problems with old ones.
In reply to this comment by ReverendTed:
I'm getting a lot of errors watching old Zero Punctuation embeds, but I'm not sure that I want to call "dead" on them in case it's a transient issue on Escapist's end.

I'm getting a lot of errors watching old Zero Punctuation embeds, but I'm not sure that I want to call "dead" on them in case it's a transient issue on Escapist's end.

As I said, the quote is my own, from another video on the subject.

As for the toxicity of ammonia, here is a link to the Health Effects portion of the CDC's Toxicological Profile for Ammonia.

Lots to read, but basically it shows that, except in huge doses of concentrated ammonia, ammonia is readily converted by the liver into urea (hence the ammonia smell of urine). Ingesting ammonia in quantities that are harmful (though still not fatal) causes burns, and ulceration of the mouth. Obviously if there was that much in the food, there would be a problem.

The report points out, "In a study of volunteers, ingestion of a single ammonium chloride tablet (approximately 15 mg NH4+/kg/day) led to a small transient increase (33% above fasting levels) in arterial blood concentrations of ammonium ion in 11 out of 20 subjects (Conn 1972); no change was noted in the remaining nine subjects in this group.[...]These data indicate that ingested ammonia is readily absorbed from the digestive tract and that the liver plays a large role in removing it from the blood (Conn 1972).



Basically, the FDA allows the use of ammonia to sterilize food products because, 1. the quantities needed to harm a human would cause said humans not to eat the products and 2. being naturally occurring, and necessary for life (for the provision of nitrogen for amino acid synthesis), the ingestion of ammonia in these quantities has no long-term health effects.

I'm not trying to argue that eating that pink goo is good for you - but the obsession with the ammonia is the wrong approach to attacking it. Phosphorus, sodium, potassium, magnesium, etc. are also poisonous in the right quantities, and they are also all necessary for human life.

If there is any common thread to my rants here on the sift, it's that people attacking the wrong subject, regardless of their intentions, makes them look stupid and reduces their credibility to those of us who care to know the truth. I completely agree with Maher's point that the republicans just attack anything the liberals support, but when he makes that point using misleading/wrong information, he's just as bad as them.>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Skeeve:
While I don't disagree with Maher's point, I'm getting really sick of people screaming about the ammonia used to treat the pink goo that is turned into chicken nuggets. As I said regarding another video:
"ammonia is a natural chemical that is necessary for human life. The amount of ammonia one would have to ingest to be harmful to a human is huge, and actually ingesting that much would be unthinkable because of the horrendous taste it would impart to the food."

This is like seeing someone sprinkle some sodium-free salt on their food and saying, "OMG that's potassium chloride! That's the lethal chemical in a lethal injection! That's going to kill you!!"
People just don't seem to care that a lot of chemicals that are popularly considered "toxic" are necessary for life or require unfathomably large doses to be harmful.

Where the hell is that quote from and is there any truth to it is what needs to be asked. To me that sounds like something a PR person would say, like in that video about Global Warming where they made the point that "CO2 is natural".
You've got more to answer for Skeeve and if you don't I'm bidding you a hearty GOOD DAY To You Sir!

The thing about death is that there aren't any second chances, and the thing about life is that there aren't any guarantees. Once it's over, it's over, and it could be over at any time. This could be your last day on Earth. Every day is a gift, and yes it is yours to waste if you wish, and also yours to regret.

People make bargins because God has set eternity in every mans heart. In the end, when you are facing the cliff edge, you realize what is at stake. It's easy to distract yourself with things, but all of these things are transient. You are born with nothing and people seek to leave the Earth the same way, but there is something more after this. This is the proving ground for eternity, and God has a free ticket with your name on it. My will, my way doesn't get you there. Bargins don't either. You can't earn something that is given as a gift; it is something you have to receive. You can't be good enough, because we all fall short of the Gods standard, which is perfection. There is someone who did live up to His standard though, and His name is Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He already paid the price of admission for you; for this He gave His very life. He substitued His perfection for our imperfection, and tasted death for everyone. This requires faith. If you don't believe that, how will you receive the gift He has for you? That's why He said:

Hebrews 11:6

And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

You can't be rewarded by someone you don't believe exists. But this isn't blind faith. That's why He said to seek Him out. Finding Him is very easy; you can do it by sending Him an invitation. If you can pray this sincerely, "Jesus, if you're real, I want to know about it. If you want to give me eternal life, let me know, and I will turn from my ways and give my life to you. If it's true, come into my life and change me.", if you can open your heart and mind enough to say those words and mean them, He will answer you.

Death is a veil, and that veil was rent when Jesus rose from the dead. It is a power that has been broken, and a mystery revealed. It is a problem that has been solved, once for all time, and that time is always now. Don't gamble that you'll have the oppotunity later, because death comes without warning. Seek out the living God, Jesus Christ, who defeated death and is the only way to eternal life.

@chilaxe I love when people who disagree with me offer up no proof of their position and continue to maintain that I am the one who is making assumptions.

But I digress, ask and you shall receive.

http://www.livescience.com/3199-smarter-men-sperm.html

To be fair though, I should mention that this source was probably the most compelling for me because I found many sources with different study results and wholly different implications that spanned a wide range. The most compelling writing for me was especially the following excerpt (again from this source):

"As reproductive decline likes root, fertility differentials by schooling initially tend to widen, because of the staggered process of change. Childbearing declines first among the best educated and last amongst the least well educated. In the later phase of fertility transition, these differential begin to narrow until convergence is reached at the end of transition. Thus the pronounced links between schooling and fertility are a transient phenomenon, arising and then disappearing over the course of a few decades."

In conclusion, I'd say we're both right in a way. I feel like the staggering of progress (or change as they put it) is an adequate explanation for the decline in fertility for the population as a whole. But feel free to refute me (with evidence please).

I'm no marine biologist but that shark doesn't appear to be a full grown adult. In some ways that's even more disturbing as it may well indicate a breeding population, rather than just a transient visitor.

(Taken from Liveleak)
Serene Branson - did she suffer a stroke?

"Well, a very heavy burtation tonight," she said, smiling broadly. But her smile More.. disappeared as her speech devolved into a series of incomprehensible utterances.

To be clear, it's not immediately known what happened to Branson and calls to the station where she works went unanswered at presstime. But a neurologist who watched Branson's episode offered several possible explanations as to what happened to her.

"Stroke is the number one possibility," Dr. John Krakauer, associate professor of neurology and neuroscience at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in Baltimore, told CBS News. Other possibilities, he said, include a transient ischemic attack - a sort of "mini-stroke" that produces no lasting problems - a migraine headache, or a seizure.

The video is *dead already. Serene Branson, though, is apparently fine. According to this report, she did not suffer a stroke, and was never taken to a hospital. She was examined by paramedics at the scene.

If I had to guess, I'd say she had a TIA - transient ischemic attack. It's like a stroke, but does not cause any permanent damage.

Not to mention it is also blatantly hypocritical of you to pretend to want smaller government and yet allow your country lie to you while leading you into costly wars that result in countless lost lives.

Then again you've just said yourself that you're more interested in partisanship and I assume then will just follow whichever way the Republican tide swings.

Bush in 2000? Non-interventionist foreign policy and lower government spending? Sounds great!

Bush in 2004? Why, he lodged our budget off track and caused the debt to rise from 3.3 trillion to 4 trillion and engaged the country in 2 wars that will achieve nothing against terrorism because a transient terrorist network will just relocate! Like to Yemen and Somalia. Let's re-elect him.

Republican Congress in 2010? Why, Bush and mostly the same congressmen who voted for his policies managed to raise the deficit to 5.1 trillion by the end of the second term while delivered lower growth than Clinton! If there's anyone who can recover the economy and put the budget back on track, it's them! Tax cuts clearly and demonstrably led to this deficit, so why not try them again?

When will you wake up and realise that the set of partisan polices you subscribe to are ever changing and entirely inconsistent?

um, it's extremely nerdy and requires at least a minor understanding of recording techniques.

let's see.

dynamics is the difference between the quietest sounds and the loudest by amplitude. recordings with a lot of dynamics generally sound more natural and detailed because it leaves the transients more or less intact.

compression in audio is the reduction of those dynamics which generally has the effect of making the recording sound louder by RMS amplitude or the recording which is at the cost of the transient details.

the "loudness war" is basically the conflict between sound engineers that try to make a recording sound good and producers and labels demanding that the recording sounds loud so that it stands out from other recordings. this is done by compressing the recording and limiting it's dynamic range. to give you an idea of how much recordings are compressed vinyl records have a dynamics range of about 50dB (i believe) and CDs have a dynamics range of 90dB. pop recordings and especially pop rock recordings have a dynamic range of 3dB. jazz and classical records will generally use most of the available dynamic range and will be compressed very little if at all.

the ideal for most music is a well compressed recording that still retains the transient detail. something that is very difficult to do well.

the loudness war started approximately in the early 90s (i believe) and mainstream recordings have gotten more and more compressed to try and stand out from their contemporaries by sounding louder. what you're actually hearing in this video is the difference between a CD recording (with a dynamic range of 90dB, and probably using about 2-4dB) and a DVD quality recording (with a dynamic range of 144dB and probably using about 6-12dB).

i'm a little rusty, but i think that's fairly accurate. if you're interested in further reading i just found out that wiki has a good page on the loudness war. and interestingly enough the album this song is from is listed as an album that has been criticized for sounding like crap for the sake of sounding loud which basically makes this example completely useless and confusing for anyone who's not already familiar with the loudness war. to really understand the differences you need to listen to something that was recorded before the loudness war and a remastered version after.

here's a decent example of what the difference is. you can see how much info is missing by the graphical representation of the sound too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v6ML2DsBfA

I'm freezing myself in a cryonic pod, wake me up when I can exist transiently in the interwebs.

There's a whole fetish subgenre centered around injecting your scrotum and penis with fluids in order to fill them up. I've mostly heard of people using saline solution, but apparently this guy wanted something more permanent. As I understand it, the people who do this get enough kicks out of it they don't really care that it means they can't have sex. Of course with saline it's a more transient transformation, but it seems to be something people get quite addicted to. Go figure.