search results matching tag: Shake
» channel: weather
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.01 seconds
Videos (527) | Sift Talk (17) | Blogs (33) | Comments (1000) |
Videos (527) | Sift Talk (17) | Blogs (33) | Comments (1000) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
DHS - Russia Did NOT "Attack" Elections --
Go sit in the corner until the bell rings and think about what you've done.
Then you wonder how Trump got elected.
*walks away shaking head*
I didn't watch the video. I accidentally up voted using a stupid jacked up iPad I never use. My bad
Nut Milking EXPOSED!
@smr
Well, there was a fight over the definition of butter too, but not what you described.
I think the biggest difference is the possibility that the public could confuse one product for another.
The public uses nut milk as a substitute for animal milk, you put it on cereal, in shakes, dunk cookies in it, etc. It's a white liquid that differs in taste, but is made to be close to animal milk.
The fight over "butter" as a definition happened between butter and margerine. The butter people, at one point even lobbied for a law making it so magerine could not be sold in the color yellow. It makes sense to some degree. They are similar products. They are used in almost identical application.
It's probably the case that nothing like that happened with peanut butter because it's not close enough to regular butter to be confused as churned milk fat.
One could argue that people may put peanut butter on toast with jelly with their breakfast, possibly; but they'd know what product they are using. No one would try to put a dollop of apple or peanut butter in a pan to fry up some eggs. They are night and day different products and it's not as though one would be confused about what you were getting into with the purchase of apple butter instead of butter.
Whereas milk vs almond milk seem similar enough, and butter and margerine are similar enough and both used the same; the FDA then decided that a distinction should be made.
A-10 Thunderbolt II Brrrrrtt Compilation
That's the pilot trying to keep their colon's clenched as they fire. The shaking is so massive sometimes they squeeze out some fear farts. =)
Cool, but what's the "BRRRRT" noise about?
Trump Holds Rally Amid Aftermath of Family Separation Policy
@bobknight33
Hey, as long as we're trading drinking insults, you must be drinking the shit shakes.
No, but really, it doesn't matter who's drinking what excriment, you're still wrong.
Why? You may ask. Well, the "collusion" line is all STRAIGHT PROPAGANDA FROM TRUMP AND RUSSIAN MEDIA OUTLETS
How so? Simple. Trump isn't under investigation for collusion, dumbass.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download
SUV Repeatedly Rams Car In Sacramento
I expected him to shake his fist at the airplanes like King Kong.
Introducing the Xbox Adaptive Controller
step 1) "We need a feel good medical promo for our new controller!"
Step 2) Sends footage taken to game trailer editors.
Step 3) faked camera shake added!
Mission accomplished
"Number 13" Sci-Fi Short Film - DUST Exclusive Premiere
Just..so..bad. Why is it so hard to write a good script? A story board? A director who has seen a movie or two? Lets CinimaSins this bitch;
1. opening shot is two shots at very wrong focal lengths, or that hole is actually very small.
2. One would think pre rendered special effects would not have issues with limited fill rates, but this comet clearly looks like its using a smoke trail from a video game on minimum graphic settings. You can count the number of particles on one hand.
3. For a desert nomad in a sand storm, she has an amazingly clean face, also, hoods that pull forward?
4. nomad is pointing at the clear as day impact landing of meteor as if it NEEDED to be pointed out.
5. a fairly large amount of simulated camera shake despite flames being so thin they don't smoke.
6. A horribly done transition shot where the boy is surrounded by smoke, fire, and lava, all except in the direction the camera is pointing.
7. Large tank army that no one notices until it passes them.
8. Physics, or lack of. the entire scene. Those 2 bypeds look like they were motioned captured by a two year old playing with his toys.
9. The expression on the boys face of surprise makes no sense for a robot of some sort who has crashed to the surface of a planet of which he had full intention of kicking ass in. The scowl afterwards makes it even more awkward.
10. what then proceeds is what can best be described as live gameplay from a random indie game from the steam store that utilizes a mostly black color pallet to hide the fact that nothing is texture mapped, low polygon models, and something that only slightly passes as a physics engine.
John Oliver - Trump vs. The World
Site was down so giving this video a fair shake at the front page *quality
John Oliver - Parkland School Shooting
Site was down so giving this video a fair shake at the front page *quality
Aliens Movie - "Get Away from her, you bitch!"
My dad took me, I was just 16. The perfect age for this one.
It took some convincing, the first one literally scared him out of his seat and had him hiding behind the one in front. This one made him jump, but he didn't leave the theater shaking in fear.
So, did I. My friend and I were way underaged for this R rated movie. We were like less than ten. Haha. I remember not caring for this movie until I got older though.
The Truth About The Tesla Semi-Truck
The video is right that pretty much the number one most important question is the weight of the truck (basically tare weight, which is actually the tractor plus empty trailer). When I watched the announcement, I thought Musk was slightly cagey about that, but I thought that he said that it would be in the ballpark of a normal ICE semi. Guess I should watch again.
I think Musk made some semi-optimistic predictions about battery tech improvement and economy of scale. Frankly, I think he's earned the right to be semi-bold with his predictions, given his and Tesla's track record (paying off govt. loan very early, single handedly pushing forward battery tech and production, etc. etc.). His optimistic predictions have a tendency of panning out.
The average American is never going to switch to an electric car purely or even largely for "green conscious" reasons. The switch will happen when the electric car is better than the ICE alternatives in concrete metrics like performance, reliability, and operating cost. Musk is pushing that date forward at an incredible pace. Arguably it is already true for many use-cases at the high price-point range of the Model S, but that price point limits the scope of the impact quite a bit. He knows that to really shake things up, he's got to get that price point down, and he knows that to do that he's got to improve the economy of scale on battery tech. Which he's doing by expanding it into adjacent markets like home batteries, etc.
I think he deserves a lot of credit for "walking the walk" when it comes to working hard to protect/improve the environment, as opposed to Al Gore et al. "talking the talk".
Like a Deer in the Headlights
I do like that move at 0:40 where it spins around and falls over twice. You just feel sorry for it, I can imagine a wolf seeing that and just shaking it's head and walking away.
Donna Brazile: HRC controlled DNC and rigged the primary
I'm not at all convinced of that (Clinton's political career being over).
It would be the sane response. And yet, clearly the DNC (and US politics in general) aren't reined in by trivialities like sanity. I think that unless the fickle public gets really riled up over this, the DNC would swing just as hard for Clinton or some other corporate-friendly type over anybody like Sanders or Warren in 2020.
Sanders being an Independent in the Senate was held against him hard by party bigwigs. Somewhat understandably. That being said, Sanders' brand of "Independent" was/is a fantastic guide to what the Democrat party should be working to become.
Politics is all bullshit, all the time. As a result, a huge percentage of voters are quite disenfranchised and don't really see any candidate as being on their side. Sanders turned that on its head. And old, rather-eccentric, Jewish dude got people excited (me too!). Massive gold-plated opportunity, with giant fucking neon signs pointing at it saying "pounce on this NOW", and the DNC took a big shit on it instead because they can't fathom a world without being 99.9% funded by massive corporations in return for congressmen, vetoes, and judges being bought and paid for.
I think that's what the guy is talking about with regards to "taking over the party". The "Justice Democrats" thing is about progressive candidates funded by actual goddamn people instead of laundered corporate money. I'm not real optimistic about their chances of really shaking up the status quo, but by god I sure hope they do.
{snip}
Clinton's political career is over, I hope all Clintons...
{snip}
A feminist comes to terms with the Men's Rights movement
This woman billing herself as the "feminist that gave MRAs a fair shake" is disingenuous. Her "Red Pill" documentary was funded by some of the most vile MRAs like Paul Elam and Mike Cernovich, she portrayed them sullen figures put upon by everyone while completely ignoring things like outright advocating rape / violence against women, and immediately adopted their talking points at the end and since the documentary.
"Feminist converted by MRAs" was a marketing shtick.
Vox explains bump stocks
I don't believe for one second that you could keep up that rate for a full minute, much less over 10. If you take the time it takes to aim a 300 yard shot accurately, you're talking 10-12 shots per minute.
Shooting with your finger at maximum speed is always far less accurate and slower than full auto with the same gun. You have to prove it to me that I'm wrong, because that's simple logic. Full auto is a more stable rate, so easier to adapt to, and doesn't require you to vibrate one hand, shaking the gun, dividing your attention, and tiring you out.
It's silly to imply the full auto functionality didn't exponentially raise the number both wounded and killed. Without the crowd, it might have made less difference. With the crowd, absolutely not imo.
I shoot regularly (often multiple times per week). My lazy firing rate has splits (time between shots) of approximately 0.2 seconds. I can do that for a long time (many minutes before I slow done). That is a rate of 300 rounds per minute. My fast splits are approximately 0.12 seconds. I can't do that for very long (probably one magazine). That is a rate of 600 rounds per minute.
An AR-15 on full auto fires at approximately 600 rounds per minute - twice what I can do on semi-auto. Using a competitive shooter as an example, and taking into account magazine changes (which with training are done much quicker than any of the operators in AR-15 to failure tests I've seen), and assuming lazy splits of 0.30 seconds, a competitive shooter can probably fire at a faster rate per minute than a novice can on full auto (i.e. well more than the approximately 150 rounds per minute a novice shooter achieves when taking into account magazine changes).
The thing is, it is well known in military and firearm enthusiast circles that the massive reduction in accuracy when shooting on full auto does not give the perceived payoff. You have much less control when firing a fully automatic firearm. You hit your target less often. Semi auto plus aiming = hits on target. At the range he was shooting (300 to 350 meters), the same lunatic deciding to aim his firearm would have resulted in less wounding and more fatalities.
Any ex-military here? Chime in.