100% agree. Too much pussy footing around ( not accusing Tyson here just in general )
The bullshit fairy tales have got to go
and guess what ? There's no Father Christmas or tooth fairy either.
There is no equivalency in the different sides. One is just plain lies and bullshit. The other is objective truth.
I have never heard a religious person gently explain they a religious and like to tolerate science, they just start screaming 'Praise Jeebus'
For fucks sake, even religious morons use a cell phone, hospital, electricity, cars etc etc So Fucking Dumb

I've seen that once. Might have been after one of the irish scandals, a guy holding a sign with a little kid and an old clergyman with a robe-tent approaching with his hands out like mr burns and a big grin. The thing is when it comes to paedophilia, you can't think it of anyone you think you know, so you discard images like that as silly fairy tales without thinking beyond the metaphor. You don't want to be wondering if the guy you just shook hands with gets drunk before sunday school and manipulates extra private tuition with the shy kid who doesn't have a dad and cries a lot.

Sorry to be so graphic there, but it is what it is in all its vileness, and everyone complicit ought to feel fucking ashamed of themselves. I'll stop before i derail, but the moral standards these people are hiding behind are very shady indeed, because somewhere in that chain of command someone knew and kept quiet about the institutional rape-centres the Catholics kept running for many decades. Unless they've leaned on their own faith-leaders to press for justice and HARD, their hands are dirty, and they are ridiculous to stand there shouting shame on someone else.

Man, i think i'm in love with this woman..

Well, the radius of the moon is about 1,080 miles, and the radius of the Sun is about 432,687 miles.
Do I need to say the rest of your grasp of the science involved is not firm?

Newtboy, please pull out a calculator and punch in 1080 x 400..the answer is 432000.

http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/review/dr-marc-earth/moon-general.html

"The Moon's size and distance contribute to a wonderful coincidence for those of us who live here on Earth. The Moon is about 400 times smaller than the Sun, but it also just happens to be about 400 times closer. The result is that from Earth, they appear to be the same size. And when its orbit around Earth takes the Moon directly between Earth and the Sun, the Moon blocks our view of the Sun in what we call a solar eclipse. This is just the same as when you use your thumb to block your view of something that is both much larger and much farther away."

See, my fairy tale tells me that giant bean stalks are real

I think you have a misunderstanding of what faith is. I have faith that the Sun will rise tomorrow because the evidence shows that it is more likely to happen than not. No one could prove that it would, but my faith is justified based on the evidence. In the same way, I have faith that Christianity is true based on the evidence of the life death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I believe the evidence is extraordinary and sufficient to place my faith in, and that the contrary case is insufficient. Have you ever studied the evidence for the resurrection? If you haven't then you have rejected it based on your preconceived notions and biases rather than because you believe the evidence is insufficient. There are plenty of things we take on faith and believe and are perfectly rational for doing so. Here is a highlight that talks about 5 different things we all take on faith:

Oh Shiny....SOOO much and so large a failure of fact here....
A quick science fact for YOU....(cut and pasted from Google)

How many of earth's moon would fit inside the sun if it were hollow?

Well, the radius of the moon is about 1,080 miles, and the radius of the Sun is about 432,687 miles. The moon and the sun are both spheres, and math tells us how to relate the volume inside a sphere to its radius. I don't know how much math you have done, so let me just tell you the answer and you can maybe ask your teacher for more information. The answer is that you could get about 64.3 million moons inside the Sun if it were hollow.
Do I need to say the rest of your grasp of the science involved is not firm?

I must also tell you, being able to say "we don't know exactly" about what happened BEFORE the big bang is no where near 'faith'...'faith' is making up some BS and claiming 'See, my fairy tale tells me that giant bean stalks are real, you're just deluding yourself that they're all tiny. Just because you (along with everyone else) has never SEEN a giant one means nothing, my book said they're real, so they're real'. Science says 'we've never seen a giant bean stalk, ever, and genetics and physics tell us they never can exist'. The 'faithful' then say 'science is wrong and delusional and ignores all our evidence of giant bean stalks...namely the stories in our book, and look, I found this large bean, it's proof that there are GIANT beans out there.'. If you don't 'believe' the book is 'true', it's useless as 'proof'. Just consider all the other 'holy' books you discount...that's how I see ALL holy books. I only took it one step farther than you, though, before you think differently.

I believe the problem is with the government's use of competitive judiciary : where each side debates their case, regardless of merit, and the expectation is that the 'right' argument will win simply because truth should naturally be able to present a stronger argument.

This assumption not only leads to some face-palm-worthy cases/charges, it also inevitably leads to people being convicted in situations where everyone involved knows with absolute certainty that the defender is innocent (often because quirks within the rules of the official process).

In this case, the "right" thing to do is : Apologize to the man, and refund him any costs that he's incurred so far due to this mess.

But "process" requires that the government push their argument to its absolute limit, even with zero merit, because the officially sanctioned way by which the situation is resolved is via argument in court (conveniently, the need to do this is also decided by people working in court - effectively excusing their professional existence and securing their very employment).

There is no 'admitting there was a mistake'. A mistake has to be proven in court. So even though everyone involved knows that the man is not at any fault, they will still force him to spend his time and money arguing a case, just to jump through hoops, and in the end it's _extremely_ unlikely that his personal costs will be refunded to him (lawyer fees, etc).

In the mean time, everyone on the government side is simply doing their 9-5. None of this is a burden to them, and it's in fact 'how they put food on the table'. If they aren't charging him, they're charging someone else. This is just another day at the office.

The guy getting screwed can't say 'no thanks, I'll not participate', because men with guns will show up and drag him away (police arrest for not going to court). It's effectively a predatory practice whereby the government fleeces people. Everyone involved knows it's meritless, but they simply force you to dance [else go to jail], and collect some fees in the process.

Because, really, what's at stake is not 'the truth' or 'justice'. It's simply "process". An excuse to inflate the number of court cases, to keep court spending high (to secure next year's budget - "use it or lose it" accounting), to keep collections high, and generally keep the high paid welfare cases (9/10 govt employees) employed.
TBH, for a country that supposedly "hates communism", actual communist countries haven't even managed to work it out this well. (I'm not talking fairy tale boogey man communism like you see in old propaganda. I mean the practical day to day actual workings. Vast government employment, bureaucracy, "process above all".)

-scheherazade

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by oritteropo.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/STUNNING-Cotton-Candy-Fairy-Floss-flower-making

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by eric3579. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

"Woo" is a pejorative term for any pseudoscientific nonsense.

It can include but is not limited to:
Homeopathy, chiropractics, reki, creationism, crystals, cupping, dietary supplements, chromotherapy, aromatherapy, acupuncture, astrology, reflexology, yetis, unicorns, fairies, Angels, prayer and pretty much everything Deepak Chopra says

Actually you said

Cannabis cures cancer. To HELL with western medicine.

Then you posted a bunch of anecdotes from a hemp oil salesman.

Then you talked about Dr Marcia Angell; I presume that's the same Marica Angell that said

It is time for the scientific community to stop giving alternative medicine a free ride... There cannot be two kinds of medicine — conventional and alternative. There is only medicine that has been adequately tested and medicine that has not, medicine that works and medicine that may or may not work. Once a treatment has been tested rigorously, it no longer matters whether it was considered alternative at the outset. If it is found to be reasonably safe and effective, it will be accepted.

and finally a bunch of studies that show that cannabis may affect cancer.

None of which implies that "cannabis cures cancer" (again, your own words).

Cannabinoids certainly have some interesting properties that might well lead to some breakthroughs, but right now, NOTHING cures cancer. As you said, it gets cut, burnt or poisoned (all of which is preferable to dying), or it just goes into remission.

As for your general distain for "western medicine" aka medicine, you continue on with your fairy dust and good wishes. Me, I'll be over here with the scientific method and the single most successful endeavour in the history of humanity.

Perhaps we should all treat him that way...if you say 'I believe in fairy tales, magic dudes, and talking snakes' we should simply walk away, because you're an idiot, and likely a dangerous angry zealous one.
It's hard to single out Steve for his 'opinion' since MOST 'christians' and other religious people actually think this way. Most of them don't have the strength of their convictions enough to follow through on this smarmy assholyness (pun intended) or even state it out loud, but it is not a minority thought.
What a douche...I nominate Steve for the next 'Biggest Douche in the Universe' for having the bad taste to say this hateful ignorant crap out loud on TV.

I'm just going to go through this point for point.

There is no gulf between the result, there is no gulf for the family of the victim. It doesn't matter if he's dead, there is no going back from that.

Argument from consequences. As sad as the result is, that isn't on the police.

If you have ever been choked you would know that you can't help yourself but resist. Your body spasm, it's trying to get air and you'll do everything you can to survive. What this tactic does is insure that a person will fight back so you can keep harming that person.

That is simply untrue, and I can tell you that from experience (10 years of martial arts and been in a few fights in my time). If you're getting choked, you stop resisting, because you've already lost and you're just making it worse.

The police are absolutely in the wrong, this man is not a danger to anyone, even himself. They either talk him down, or use non lethal means to bring him under control. If they can't do that they leave him be, and if they need to follow him until they get backup. There is no reason to immediately attack him, it just makes this worse.

Again, we have no idea why the police are arresting this guy, because the video doesn't provide any context.

So no it is not unreasonable to call it murder at all. It is by definition a Murder because it is the Unlawful Killing of a Human Being.

Two problems with that:
1: Unlawful. It wasn't unlawful, they were arresting him which they have a legal right to do.
2: You're deliberately leaving out a crucial part of the definition: with malice aforethought. Again, are you saying the cops deliberatly set out to kill him?

They may have the legal right under this Nations laws to murder people with impunity but the laws are wrong.

The use of deadly force by police is governed by laws, and any use of said force results in an investigation. In fact, deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others." ( Tennessee v. Garner)

I completely agree that there have been cases of unjustified killing by police where they have escaped sanction (Diallo is the one that springs to mind), but to say that they can "murder people with impunity" is hyperbole and nonsense.

What you are doing is defending them using their Laws. Why would anyone ever accept that? If I could make the laws for myself I would and then I would never be guilty.

Because it's not "their laws". The police enforce the law, they don't make it. The laws are made by elected representatives.

There are huge problems with the justice system in the US (see john Olivers video on prisons for a start) and part of that is the police, but what you're doing is not helping.

It's akin to arguing that we should take action on climate change (a very real problem), because if we don't fairies will go extinct.

A person of faith argues with semantics and rhetoric. and without any proof or substance.

I have no issues agreeing to disagree, as I won't strip someone of their faith or beliefs in what ever they believe. Just, please keep it out of my backyard where we deal in realities, and tangent proof.

I agree to a person's right to their belief, but never presume I'll stand aside when your fairy tales get in the way with reality.

Just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean mean it was designed by an intelligent being.

I stop to think about things all the time.

What he's representing and what it represents to the passerby are worlds apart. In this case, he's clearly in a neighborhood where the average citizen sees the police as a protection against a non-uniformed man with a gun, rather than an activist or educated individual upholding their rights.

Gather several hundred open-carriers and visit capitol hill, or go to the nearest politician-laden golf resort with your assault rifle. Don't march up and down neighborhoods (http://goo.gl/5lhLnG) looking for trouble.

From the mostly-benign situations such as this, to the people who've had their fill of shit and gun down a crowd of innocents: making openly aggressive statements in this way is addressing the wrong audience. This is not the way to make the point.

Lastly, even though I agree with you, you can't tell me I'm lumping someone into a perceived fairy land when you title videos "Student Prevails Over State Robot Thug".

I think Brand is in general, a reasonably funny guy who doesn't have a clue about politics, and should shut the fuck up about hand-wavy, airy-fairy notions of revolution without anything solid to back them up. I disagree with @Sagemind. Revolution is meaningless without a goal. That's why occupy failed (and if you think it didn't fail, please enlighten me as to what they actually achieved).

Destruction can be a wonderful catalyst for change. You can't make an omelette, etc. But if you don't actually make an omelette, all you're left with it is raw eggs and shell.

Now, all that said, Brand is completely in the right here. He actually knows what he's talking about when it comes to drugs and in particular rehabilitation from them. Current drug policy is an abject failure by every metric imaginable.

And Snow should know better. As hard as it is for those of you accustomed to the likes of Fox and MSNBC, he's actually a respected journalist.