The care is owned and driven by Takeshi Kimura, a wealthy property developer who also owns a Ferrari F50, Enzo, 458 Speciale, McLaren P1, Porsche 911 GT3RS, and a Lamborghini Huracan Super Trofeo (at least according to the internet), so I'm fairly confident it's not a kit car. The F40 suspension is height-adjustable, so they probably set it as high as possible for the snow sequences.

The absolutely mind blowing thing about that segment is the end.

The Atom they had there was around £30k.

The ONLY car that was faster than it was a £500,000 Ferrari Enzo (and there's only about 400 of them ever made).

It was faster than cars 10 times it's price.

Okay Enzo. I've already been thru this with Newtboy.

I don't want to have another pointless back and forth.

I'm not trying to start a flame war.

So please explain what you're citing as "the truth" in that seemingly bias "rational"wiki page.

[I say that because "hate-train" doesn't seem like very objective or academic terminology]

Please explain away this instance of Sarkeesian's theft and misappropriation of a female artist's work.

http://cowkitty.net/post/78808973663/you-stole-my-artwork-an-open-letter-to-anita

And this instance of fabricated gameplay footage from Hitman: Absolution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuRSaLZidWI&t=149

The footage she uses in her FemFreq video implies that the ENTIRE point of this section of the game is to brutalize women.

When, in fact, the game penalizes players for killing ANY civilians.

Every other legitimate walk-through of this game & mission clearly shows the player completely avoiding the exotic dancers.

Please do your best to avoid semantics and objectively justify this behavior. Thanks

It's funny when you really think about it. Ferrari's "entry-level", the 458, and it's various packages, are so high performing they match the Enzo and LaFerrari (stupid name). It doesn't make sense to produce the $1 million plus cars

Its Enzo!! This guy has raised this tiger since birth, he lives in south africa (I think at the zoo the tiger lives at??)

>> ^PalmliX:

Hey thanks for your response Enzo!
If I had a Teddy Bear, then wouldn't I be justified in believing it's real because I could sense it with all 5 of my senses? As would anyone else I handed it to?
Or are you suggesting that I couldn't detect this bear with any of my senses, but I still believed it was real? Then I think most people would probably call me mentally ill. Myself included.
I also find the idea of ganging up with other people who share a belief (even if it's completely in contrast to your own) against those without any belief, a little scary.
Is it is far better to have ANY belief, no matter how ridiculous, unfounded, or even dangerous, than no belief? And should we really team up with other believers and "go against" those who make no such claims? Personally I would call this type of behavior mob/herd mentality or gang warfare, tribalism. An us or them mentality. I find this idea in a modern society a little frightening.
Your closing question "The non-believer is the real threat, ask yourself why." It's a difficult question to answer for a "non-believer" such as myself. Non-believer in the sense that so far, no one person's claim about the existence of an invisible Teddy Bear... has convinced me enough to worry and loose sleep at night.
I don't see how someone who doesn't believe in some variation of an unprovable belief is more of a threat than someone who does. Wouldn't it just be one less thing to fight about? i.e. if no one believed in Teddy Bears then there wouldn't be an issue in the first place? Because no one would even be talking about it?
I'm interested to hear your answer!
- Adam

The teddy bear belief I put represents the belief in the supernatural. There are people who simply don't believe in supernatural things at all. No ghosts, no spirit world, no voodoo, mind reading, water divining, astrology, and yes, even gods. This is the one step you need to consider.

When you say "I don't see how someone who doesn't believe in some variation of an unprovable belief is more of a threat than someone who does.", you're admitting that the belief in question doesn't exist. It's unprovable because it's a product of the mind and is limited to the mind, otherwise there would be a way for science to detect it. It can be incredibly real for the believer, but it doesn't exist in the real world, (therefore unprovable), and doesn't effect anyone who doesn't believe it. The non-believer is the only threat because the belief is dependent on more minds that believe, that's the only way the belief can propagate. This is why religion pushes faith and belief above all else.

The benefits of not believing in the supernatural are endless. For me personally, it's that the phrase "Why me?" has lost all meaning. Just consider how much anxiety and guilt you have for things like, "am i on the right path?", "am I being punished for something?", "what's god trying to tell me?", "is that a sign or just coincidence?". All that goes away. It's liberating like you wouldn't believe.

Hey thanks for your response Enzo!

If I had a Teddy Bear, then wouldn't I be justified in believing it's real because I could sense it with all 5 of my senses? As would anyone else I handed it to?

Or are you suggesting that I couldn't detect this bear with any of my senses, but I still believed it was real? Then I think most people would probably call me mentally ill. Myself included.

I also find the idea of ganging up with other people who share a belief (even if it's completely in contrast to your own) against those without any belief, a little scary.

Is it is far better to have ANY belief, no matter how ridiculous, unfounded, or even dangerous, than no belief? And should we really team up with other believers and "go against" those who make no such claims? Personally I would call this type of behavior mob/herd mentality or gang warfare, tribalism. An us or them mentality. I find this idea in a modern society a little frightening.

Your closing question "The non-believer is the real threat, ask yourself why." It's a difficult question to answer for a "non-believer" such as myself. Non-believer in the sense that so far, no one person's claim about the existence of an invisible Teddy Bear... has convinced me enough to worry and loose sleep at night.

I don't see how someone who doesn't believe in some variation of an unprovable belief is more of a threat than someone who does. Wouldn't it just be one less thing to fight about? i.e. if no one believed in Teddy Bears then there wouldn't be an issue in the first place? Because no one would even be talking about it?

I'm interested to hear your answer!

- Adam
>> ^Enzoblue:

>> ^PalmliX:


It's like if you have a teddy bear. You believe that it's real and helps/comforts you in life. Other people have different teddy bears and you laugh at them because they believe their teddy bears are real and you know they aren't. Or you have people with the same teddy bear you have, but they treat it in ways you feel is wrong and not what your teddy bear would like, using it as a pillow maybe.
Then someone comes along without any teddy bear at all and tells you that you don't need one.
Suddenly the people with other teddy bears or teddy bear ways don't seem so bad. At least they have a teddy bear. You would even gang up with the false teddy bear people to go against this guy.
The non-believer is the real threat, ask yourself why.

Enzo, I'll distract her. You get the door.

I agree Enzo. We've passed a threshold of intelligence, one which means we could now find ways to communicate with the 1% higher species.

Enzo, funny you should mention that. He is on a recent podcast with Marc Maron in which he talks about how his show got shafted, basically because of his big mouth and attitude. Worth a listen if you're a fan:

http://wtfpod.libsyn.com/episode-188-christopher-titus
>> ^Enzoblue:

Funny I have the dvd's of his TV series 1 & 2 here in my desk, 4 episodes before it got shelved. Anyone want?

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

so you don't agree with racism.
But sometimes, poor quality music videos you happen to dislike make you racist? o_O?


no, i happened to find that comment funny. obviously (at least to me), enzo was joking. the idea that that video could make someone racist is humorous, considering the video's content.

anyway, i took your response as towards my comment, not my upvote for enzo. how my comment could be construed as racism, i do not know. you would have to make assumptions about my character to come to that conclusion. rap culture certainly isn't just a "black" thing. if you want to call me culturally biased or a bigot, that's fine, but you're going to have to join the club, because by your reasoning most people would be considered bigots. i wonder if you would be defending this position if i had made a similar comment about country music (and i absolutely do have similar feelings towards country music).

No, I got that part. I'm just wondering how does one distinguish a "stereotypical" black man from one who simply likes hip hop styles?


>> ^xxovercastxx:
>> ^longde:
I'm curious as to how you know these people's life stories, so much so that you are sure they've never achieved anything of which to be proud? Could it be that you are making a shallow judgment about theim based on their appearance and musical choices? I have to say that I find your blatant snap-prejudice more detestable than some alleged poser's stance.
>> ^Enzoblue:
>> ^longde:
Yeah, how dare those 's have some pride and hold their heads high. Why the nerve? Don't they know their place, dammit!?!?
....Obama's the worst one, I tells ya....>> ^Enzoblue:
I think what this guy is truly objecting to, (if he had the IQ to work it out in his head), is the black man's sense of entitlement which can be over-bearing in some. I read recently about the difference between self-esteem and self-image. Self-esteem coming from good deeds that make positive changes in your world, (that a stereotypical ghetto black man doesn't have), vs self-image that the stereotypical black man is over-flowing with.
You do see this boisterous in your face self-image a lot, just walking down the street with their heads held high, daring anyone to challenge them. The mistake, however, is to lump all blacks in this category and assume that all blacks with their heads held high are doing so to compensate for low self-image, which this guy is doing.


Having pride and holding your head high when you've done nothing to be proud of except perfecting the appearance of being an original gangsta or playa or whatever is detestable. That's what I'm saying. Self-esteem comes from within and can only be obtained by good deeds and caring and empathy. Self-image is a facade, (what you think other people think of you), and is easily faked.


I think you missed the part where Enzo said "stereotypical black man".

>> ^longde:

I'm curious as to how you know these people's life stories, so much so that you are sure they've never achieved anything of which to be proud? Could it be that you are making a shallow judgment about theim based on their appearance and musical choices? I have to say that I find your blatant snap-prejudice more detestable than some alleged poser's stance.
>> ^Enzoblue:
>> ^longde:
Yeah, how dare those 's have some pride and hold their heads high. Why the nerve? Don't they know their place, dammit!?!?
....Obama's the worst one, I tells ya....>> ^Enzoblue:
I think what this guy is truly objecting to, (if he had the IQ to work it out in his head), is the black man's sense of entitlement which can be over-bearing in some. I read recently about the difference between self-esteem and self-image. Self-esteem coming from good deeds that make positive changes in your world, (that a stereotypical ghetto black man doesn't have), vs self-image that the stereotypical black man is over-flowing with.
You do see this boisterous in your face self-image a lot, just walking down the street with their heads held high, daring anyone to challenge them. The mistake, however, is to lump all blacks in this category and assume that all blacks with their heads held high are doing so to compensate for low self-image, which this guy is doing.


Having pride and holding your head high when you've done nothing to be proud of except perfecting the appearance of being an original gangsta or playa or whatever is detestable. That's what I'm saying. Self-esteem comes from within and can only be obtained by good deeds and caring and empathy. Self-image is a facade, (what you think other people think of you), and is easily faked.



I think you missed the part where Enzo said "stereotypical black man".

i think fusionaut and enzo are saying the teacher lost control of the class, and I'm agreeing. Doesn't look like a rookie teacher, I bet there's a story behind this.

nervous breakdown my ass. teacher destroys ten cents of paper in last ditch effort to control class. Students laugh at teacher as he goes down in flames.

Vol, I get what Enzo is saying in principle. News outlets have no qualms about distorting their content until it completely fabricates the entirety of what the offical stated. In other words, more truth would be available to the public if the media was not taping in most events.

I agree the media outlets should be allowed at these events, however, I think me and Enzo both agree about the harm these fuck-tard outlets cause.

Oh, and no one notes how nice the cops are in this video. "I have no opinion one way or another."