hamsteralliance said:

JIM GAFFIGAN IS THE BEST!

bobknight33 said:

All TV is fake.

Why should one deviate from ones moral code to accommodate another?

Yet another incident for the liberals to show how too faced they are.

The liberals spout that they are an open tend and accept all views. Unless they disagree with them.

This is pretty funny for a lot of reasons, the biggest being all the people involved are so obviously not cat owners nor have they even bothered to understand cat behaviour.

First of all, the snarky comments at the end of the video, actually, it's not about wanting to believe my cat needs me, I'm very well aware it doesn't need me, that has no correlation to loving me. I appreciate that's just the person writing this script but it puts an underlining tone that cat owners are delusional and sets people up to believe the experiment was a "success", even with the little bite about it not being conclusive.

Not all cats are the same, the beauty of them is precisely their individuality! Breed also plays a very large factor and so does upbringing, not to mention social behaviour of the animal in question. Let's ignore that cats are evolutionarily independent and dogs/babies are not.

Why would a cat care if its owner left momentarily? It is not built to care about such a frivolous event, it takes notes of it (which btw, no other animal was capable of and the narrator incorrectly says the cat is distracted while it distinctly watching the owner leave) and carries on, the situation pans out.

Likewise when the owner comes back, the cat again takes note of this and because it was rather brief, it resumes carrying on its business. This wasn't some "OH MY GOD WHAT DO I DO WITH MY LIFE!??!?!" drastic event. Quite frankly, the cat has the most intelligent behaviour.

The reason it check outs the stranger is because it's an *unknown*, cats don't immediately trust *anything* until they've inspected it. If they had replaced that stranger with a paper bag, the reaction would have been the same. It's not that it is ignoring its owner, it's that it knows its owner is safe. It is inspecting a potential threat.

Cats are simply not basic enough to compare in this experiment and their evolutionary traits are directly opposed to these rather bias tests of affection.

eric3579 said:

For those like me who was kinda confused about what this was about:

(from YouTube)
In this video, two boys simplify the debate to a true value statement. They both received $10.00 from their grandfather. One bought an F-35, the other got 3 F-18's with everything needed to maintain it, and keep them flying.

This contentious debate in geopolitical circles is focused around joint strike fighter choices. Does a country procure the F-35 or the F-18 Super Hornet? The F-35 is an impressive new fighter, designed to meet the needs of all branches of the military. The challenge is in order to meet everyone's needs, you have to make compromises. For example, once loaded with weapons, the F-35 begins to lose it's stealth abilities. Is it really invisible to radar and how much foil area did they have to give up to maneuverability?

In the end we realize... it's really not that complicated.

SFOGuy said:

My understanding is that a correct autorotation is NOT accompanied by a hard landing. However, it IS very difficult to pull off (hard---what a pun!),

Payback said:

...and yet I don't give a flying fuck what you say,

Lann said:

This isn't 9gag. No one finds that funny here.

eric3579 said:

How about more information and less douche attitude. If you know so much, or anything at all, why don't you fill us in. At least you might be adding something interesting to the conversation. Comments like yours add nothing to the discussion and make you look kinda like an ass that would be better suited commenting over at YouTube. Just My Opinion.