Wow, I was in hysterics at the kiss part, this chair hasn't seen such squirming in years!

What I hope Ridley realizes is that the uniqueness of the original was it's silence. Those moments where the crew were just hanging out in character, or searching around the ship for a cat, or hiding in cold quiet fear, with nothing but maybe the slight hum of the ship. It was nerve wrackingly silent at times and made you squirm.

that's what she said>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^kymbos:
Yikes!
"There's a lot of squirming in the audience". Yeah, because you asked a blind guy if he watches things!

Ya, I didn't see that one coming!

>> ^kymbos:

Yikes!
"There's a lot of squirming in the audience". Yeah, because you asked a blind guy if he watches things!


Ya, I didn't see that one coming!

Yikes!

"There's a lot of squirming in the audience". Yeah, because you asked a blind guy if he watches things!

Wow, look at Ron squirm.

i agree with everything you just said, but i think you might be over estimating how much of it is science.
it's a great deal business. at least in the US. where medicine is mostly for profit. for huge huge profits.
medical RESEARCH is in fact, science. and i have faith in it. the dispensing of medicine is however, a business.

i'm saying this as someone who has degrees in health science fields. spent 8 years as a health care professional. spent 1/3 of that time doing administrative work. and now owns a business as a CAM practitioner.... which btw, is also a good bit business.

i'd also like to stick up for alternative medicine here.
a good deal of it is bullshit. any results are simply the placebo effect. but i don't think we should discount the placebo effect. it's an amazing mechanism. if you feel less depressed because someone hit you with a tuning fork and you didn't have to take any pills or go to a counselor, then okay. that's awesome. i still think you probably need counseling, but whatever. i also think you should take a good hard look at your diet and how much exercise you're doing. but how much does it cost in the US to go to a counselor, go to a doctor, get your anti-depressants and have a nutritionist and a phsyical trainer help you learn how to excercise and eat right? it's probably cheaper to pay someone $80 to hit you with that tuning fork and convince yourself it's going to work.

I make a decent living practicing complementary health care. but i don't tell anyone they need to be hit with a tuning fork or have someone throw energy beams out of their hands at them. i tell people they need to stretch, and i teach them how. i tell people they need to sleep properly, and i help them do it. i tell people they need to find an effective way to deal with stress, and i give them that. i tell people they need to find a form of exercise that's right for their bodies and lifestyles, and i help them find it. a lot of people just need someone to trust and someone to talk to. and that's why they call me a "therapist". i never tell people to go against their doctor's orders. i never tell anyone to stop taking their medicine or not to be vaccinated. and that's why what i do is COMPLEMENTARY.

we're too quick to dismiss a different approach when it comes to health care.
the same people are also very quick to be able to recognize the problems with our for profit health care systems when it comes to political discussions. the profit motive hasn't just tainted medicine in terms of disparity. it's tainted it in terms of effectiveness. this is where a holistic approach is good. it's not effect to only treat the symptom. if someone is overweight, has high blood pressure, their stress is out of control and they have diabetes. prescribing them pills, while necessary in the short term, is not at all where the "care" should end. i know doctors will also tell their patients to eat right and exercise but they do not teach them how to do it. because for profit health care doesn't think that is profitable. a for profit system does not want you healthy.

soooo... the market has opened up. if the way we practice medicine and viewed health in this country was working, people wouldn't pay to get hit with tuning forks. oh and half of this is a problem with our education system.
>> ^dag:

^Yes, how dare anyone question the all-knowing oracles of medical knowledge.
I think the reason that many geeky type people always toe the main-stream medical line is because they conflate medicine with science (which we all love). Yes, it's almost the same, but if I had to draw it as a venn diagram, there would be a crescent of over-hang. Medicine to me is 80% science and then the rest is filled in with dogma, patriarchy and business ($$).
That crescent of non-science is the part that makes me squirm. I don't think it's that wrong to question medical programs like vaccinations- with the idea that it may be being pushed non-scientifically by the medical industrial complex. (big pharma).
Bill Maher is not a kook.

I understand the urge to exaggerate the facts when making one's point, but I don't feel we watched the same video, messenger. The stumble on the way out was precisely the result of the smaller lad squirming. Hardly thrown the the ground. I never saw him get hit a single time. I did see him get thrown off the train when he failed to take the hint and tried to get back onto the train.

Social pressure was clearly not working. When you are holding up several hundred people time is of the essence. Especially as you are holding up the next train to come up that same set of tracks, and the next, etc.

Does he deserve to get thrown off the train? Perhaps. I would say probably, but of course none of us know all the facts. Do all the people on the train deserve to be delayed for 5 minutes, the train miss it's slot on the tracks, and then wait another 5 or 10 minutes for the next train to go by before they can continue on their way? Definitely not. Is avoiding bruising his ego worth say 500 minutes of the other commuters' time? I hardly think so.

People have become completely terrified of the concept of even marginal violence. This was much less violent than any of a number of sports I've played, and he had every opportunity to 'opt out' and refused to take them.

I'd be squirming like that too if I had a whisk shoved up my ass.

>> ^notarobot:

I think he's applying the Socratic method of asking questions he already knows the answer to in order to get those answers from the guy squirming at the podium. >> ^GeeSussFreeK:
I love how confused the reporter is, I am also as confused.



I think your right on many of the questions towards the end, but the Socratic method still allows you to be stupefied by the answer...even if it is known

I think he's applying the Socratic method of asking questions he already knows the answer to in order to get those answers from the guy squirming at the podium. >> ^GeeSussFreeK:

I love how confused the reporter is, I am also as confused.

Although I love seeing Bachmann squirm, I don't perceive Jay being a champion here.

Don't for a second think he said what he said without running it thru some kind of demographic/ratings analysis. It was totally softball, which makes CrazyEyes2011™ look even more pathetic by comparison.
Cue "conservative" backlash against the Tonight Show and a written statement from NBC apologizing like the dickless, sycophantic bastards all major network execs are.

That's something that I read from both Jon Stewart and Ron Paul -- they say what they mean and they mean what they say. That is a big part of why I like both of them, but I can also see how some people would argue that it makes Paul less "electable" than a standard greasy candidate.

The conventional candidates are pro-apple pie and mom, but anti-crime. They squirm when prompted to provide an opinion on anything remotely controversial, and have to run it through their internal focus-group filter first (my campaign manager told me that 18% of my potential voters won't like it if I mention anything anti-war!, etc.). On the other hand, Stewart and Paul are both going to just say what they think is right, focus groups be damned.

Wow, some very bad reads of Feynman here.

He just has a naturally smiling disposition that's about making a connection with the interviewer; but he's being gravely serious. He's even smiling when he mentions losing his wife for crying out loud. He's positively squirming about the moral implication of his involvement with the project; and even spells it out how he felt about it.

Wherever I see it, I always find the inability to empathise quite worrying.