search results matching tag: incomprehension

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (21)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (1)     Comments (145)   

Peter Gabriel - Shaking The Tree (live)

eric3579 says...

Souma Yergon, Sou Nou Yergon
We are shakin' the tree
Souma Yergon, Sou Nou Yergon
We are shakin' the tree

Waiting your time, dreaming of a better life
Waiting your time, you're more than just a wife
You don't have to do what your mother has done
She has done, this is your life, this new life has begun

It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day

Souma Yergon, Sou Nou Yergon
We are shakin' the tree
Souma Yergon, Sou Nou Yergon
We are shakin' the tree

Turning the tide, you are on the incoming wave
Turning the tide, you know you are nobody's slave
Find your sisters or brothers who can hear all the truth in what you say
They can support you when you're on your way

It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day

Souma Yergon, Sou Nou Yergon
We are shakin' the tree
Souma Yergon, Sou Nou Yergon
We are shakin' the tree

Changing your ways, changing those surrounding you
Changing your ways, more than any man can do
Open your heart, show him the anger and pain, so you heal
Maybe he's looking for his womanly side, let him feel

You had to be so strong
And you do nothing wrong, nothing wrong at all
We're gonna break it down
We're gonna shake it down, shake it all around

[Incomprehensible]
No no no no no no
No no no no no no
No no no no no no

It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day

It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day

It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day
It's your day, a woman's day

You had to be so strong
You do nothing wrong, nothing wrong at all
We're gonna break it down
We're gonna shake it down, shake it all around

Martin Freeman in New Series 'Fargo'

ChaosEngine says...

A republican? Are you joking? @chingalera may be many things...
- funny (occasionally)
- insane (probably)
- drunk (almost certainly)
- incomprehensible (definitely)

but if he's a republican, he's unlike any I've ever met.

Volump said:

Chingerla is once again wrong.

But of course someone who's as staunch a republican has absolutely no grasp of aesthetics. Par for the course.

This looks great. Great cast, great story, and it's highly possible this is adaptable.

The original film was superb. I doubt the series will be a disappointment.

The Wire creator David Simon on "America as a Horror Show"

radx says...

No idea how much he is worth. But The Wire in general, and David Simon in particular, were involved in the financing of food banks and rehab centers in Balitimore. They couldn't skim it off their budget, unlike other individuals do for personal purposes, but they continuously ran charity after charity, on top of the money the production poured into the local economy.

If I remember correctly, they also left sizable accounts and donations during and after their runs, so I'd be willing to give him a pass where hypocrisy is concerned.

His point about a lack of guilt, the shamelessness on part of two mentioned individuals, still stands though.

During the first part, Simon specifically mentions that any additional income of his, particularly in form of tax brakes, does the economy no good. "You can only have so many yachts" is a rather fitting hyperbole in this case. So if a privileged individual actively weakens society to further increase his own wealth -- which is already at harmful levels, economically speaking --, the lack of guilt and shame becomes incomprehensible to many people, myself included.

And if a privileged individual then tops it off by likening his treatment to that of Jews in '30s/'40s Germany... well, sociopathic is one way to describe it. We all live in our own bubbles, but their perception of reality truly is disconnected to such a degree that almost makes me pity them. Almost.

Trancecoach said:

How much would you say this David Simon (The Wire creator) is worth?
The Corner, The Wire, Treme, his books, his talks (to say nothing of his previous career as a journalist).. I wonder if he runs any drug rehabs in Baltimore.

Picking up a Hammer on the Moon

Chairman_woo says...

That's almost exactly what I just said 17-18kg in earth terms. Do you think laid on your back you could easily throw a 17kg object 1.5-2m upwards?

He's not doing a push up he's trying to jump upright. Launching nearly 20kg of weight far enough to get to your feet would take some doing that way I'd say. Just lifting 20kg with the arms alone is an effort never mind throwing it which is effectively what's happening here.

This is part of the reason I defaulted to thinking in terms of rocketry as it's not as simple as just someone trying to lift something, they are trying to propel themselves 1-2m upwards with only a thrust from the arms. Much better to wiggle around/push up to get to your knees so one could bring one's legs muscles to bear (made very difficult by hard to bend suit).

Frankly I think it would be a total pain in the arse getting back upright. If it weren't for the suit you could easily push up to your knees and then straighten your legs but the inflation is going to make that very hard work (but doable after a struggle to one knee as other video footage proves).

The alternative however which sparked this whole argument i.e. lay on your front and push off with your arms. That I think would be considerably harder than you are making out. Throwing a 17kg weight with only your arms over 1m in height is not what I'd call effortless.

My old CRT monitor probably weighs about 20kg, it'd take everything I had to throw that over 1m up into the air. Without the power of your thigh muscles and the rigidity of your spine 20kg is quite a lot really.

How high can you "jump" with only your arms? (like those super push-ups where you clap your hands in between to show off) maybe a foot or two if your really really strong? So with the extra weight of a suit and reduced gravity multiplying the result by 6 under lunar gravity, 6feet is probably just about attainable for someone in peak physical shape. But it's defiantly not what I'd call easy!


Re: conspiracies The only one I really take at all seriously any more is the idea that 2001 (esp the book) was perhaps (very) loosely based on actual events. I have time for it simply because of Arthur C. Clarke himself who was going to give an interview (which he rarely does) on Project Camelot of all things but died about 2 weeks before it happened. If you know anything about project camelot you'll know whatever he had to say was going to be mental but then again he was very old and eccentric and plenty other people involved in the space program have "jumped the shark" so to speak. (Edgar Mitchell talks about aliens on a regualr basis, Buzz Aldrin has spoken about monoliths on Phobos, pilots being followed by "Foofighters" in WW2 etc. etc.)

But it's basically wishful thinking on my part, the story and implications are remarkably plausible for what they are but that is all they are. Combined with the whole Jack Parsons/Alastair Crowley connection to the JPL my creative juices start flowing. However the obvious counter argument i.e. that the world is largely run by genuine lunatics is never far from my mind either (look at the whole "men who stare at goats" thing).

I'll listen to anyone and some I'm even prepared to believe on their own terms but I have to defer to actual evidence where it exists (or does not exist). Consequently while I'll listen to someone like John Leer talking about stuff that would seem outlandish even in a science fiction story, people why claim the moon landing was a hoax tend to get the cold shoulder as it's pretty demonstrably not true/hard to believe.

I realise that's kind of backwards but willing suspension of disbelief is a lot easier when there's really no tangible evidence either way. (why I suspect huge incomprehensible delusions like those espoused by many religions get so much traction. It's easier to believe the big lie than the small one)

Jolly entertaining though regardless

MichaelL said:

No need to go through the whole Newtons things... easier to keep it all in kg since that's how we think anyway. So on the moon, astronaut + suit = 100/6 = 17 kg. Only about 40 lbs... So an astronaut should have no problem doing a pushup there.

As I said, probably more to due with the awkward, pressurized suits.

However, the jumping part... well, that's a puzzle to me why they aren't able to jump higher since I don't see any mechanical disadvantage. It's one of the arguments for the 'fake moon landing' thing.

However, if the moon surface were 'spongy' then it would be like trying to jump out of a barrel of mud.

Re: conspiracy thing... Alternative 3 claims that Apollo astronauts went to the moon, but discovered the bases that had already been there and were threatened/sworn to silence. Curiously, Neil Armstrong became a public recluse after his career as an astronaut, rarely giving interviews or talking about his experience.

However, if you believe the 'we never went to the moon at all' version, the claim is that NASA hired Stanley Kubrick to film the fake moon landing thing based on his realistic looking 2001.

How German Sounds Compared to Other Languages

JustSaying says...

I always considered german to be the language of anger.
I have to protest the outfit of the german speaker, though. That is clearly bavarian. Bavarian dialect doesn't sound angry, it sounds incomprehensible.

Norm MacDonald on Hitler

artician (Member Profile)

enoch says...

i have been loving your commentary pertaining to the NSA data collection.
i have been fumbling for the right words to express how i see and feel about this whole situation and i fear my ideas are just falling into a giant vat of incomprehensibility.

you and a few others are speaking so much clearer than i.
good work my friend.

The Bible is Not the Word of God

Olbogmek says...

Your problem is that you confuse the world with what people do. The things people do are the shields against the forces that surround us; what we do as people gives us comfort and makes us feel safe; what people do is rightfully very important, but only as a shield. We never learn that the things we do as people are only shields and we let them dominate and topple our lives. In fact I could say that for mankind, what people do is greater and more important than the world itself.

The world is all that is encased here; life, death, people, the allies, and everything else that surrounds us. The world is incomprehensible. We won't ever understand it; we won't ever unravel its secrets. Thus we must treat it as it is, a sheer mystery!

An average man doesn't do this, though. The world is never a mystery for him, and when he arrives at old age he is convinced he has nothing more to live for. An old man has not exhausted the world. He has exhausted only what people do. But in his stupid confusion he believes that the world has no more mysteries for him. What a wretched price to pay for our shields!

A warrior is aware of this confusion and learns to treat things properly. The things that people do cannot under any conditions be more important than the world. And thus a warrior treats the world as an endless mystery and what people do as an endless folly.

- castaneda

bashar-the simple physics of shifting

shagen454 says...

It is a shame that people refuse to believe there is a next level to what a person can experience. I am intrigued by mundane reality as well as scientific exploration, innovation and theory. But, it is not nearly as fascinating compared to the reality a person can experience for real, inside of their own heads.

I would say that my imagination is fairly basic yet what my friends and I have beholden is absolutely inhuman and incomprehensible; uplifting, life changing.

NASA | Fiery Looping Rain on the Sun

A10anis says...

Witnessing the, literally, incomprehensible scale and power of the sun - a relatively small object in the universe - puts its own scale on our puny existence. Not only are we an insignificant distraction to earth, the earth is an insignificant distraction to the sun, and the sun is an insignificant distraction to the universe. And yet, still, there are the deluded who maintain that; "It was all created just for us."

THE UNBELIEVERS - Richard Dawkins & Lawrence Krauss

shagen454 says...

There is a huge difference between DMT and other psychedelics. Just do a little research. If you take it all the way it is just as far as a person can go. Whether it is real or not is obviously subjective. Not sure what the question is but that it is definitely beneficial, for some. Even if one gets a terrifying traumatic one, like I have. But, to do that I think a person has to know how to use them to his or her advantage, they can be used as tools. The perceptions on DMT are not like the reality enhancing ones on normal doses of psychedelics. It completely changes normal reality into a new reality, incomprehensible and beyond normal human imagination and when I say that I am using human words and being very humble since most people will never see... well until they die, possibly.

xxovercastxx said:

@shagen454 @chingalera

I have always wondered why so many people who've used psychedelic drugs think the hallucinations are somehow more real than their normal perceptions.

I can appreciate that hallucinations can give you ideas you'd never otherwise think of. I can see where an artist might benefit from something like that. Even dreams can do this on occasion.

When it comes to understanding reality, it seems to me that our senses are already so inadequate. How can causing them to malfunction be helpful to perception?

This is an honest inquiry. Apologies if I seem mocking or rude.

Puppy Determined To Get On Treadmill

A10anis says...

There are many organisations which have conflicting views, (my Tamaskan is 5 years old, male, un-neutered, and non violent) you happen to support the one that supports your extremely slim argument. I support the testimonies of people who deal, on a daily basis, with the terrible effects these breeds can have. Why do you think so many countries ban fighting dogs? Don't you think they have studied all the literature? Your 3 year old is very advanced for his age knowing how to control a fighting breed, how did you get the dog to respect a 3 year olds authority? I suspect, as you did for yourself, with force. You are certainly not a responsible person taking such a risk with your child in allowing the child to take a bone off such an animal. You cannot be 100% sure it will not react, yet you are incomprehensibly willing to take that risk. Regardless of the breed, no one in their right mind would risk their child in such a cavalier fashion. I could point you in the direction of myriad reports and videos on the dangers of fighting breeds but, obviously, it would be a waste of time. I wish you good luck with your child, and sincerely hope you do not live to regret your words.

Asmo said:

Oh ya poor dear, dealing with all the tedium... Well how about the tedium of reading a report from the ASPCA recommending against breed specific bans...

http://www.aspca.org/about-us/policy-positions/breed-specific-legislation-1.aspx

See, I've yet to see any hard scientific data proving that nature > nurture in terms of dogs, and it seems like the ASPCA (who you'd think would know a thing or two) agree with me... The biggest factor they estimate? Male dogs that aren't neutered (not breed specific), which is a nurture issue.

Oh yeah, my dog has been around my 3 year old son since he was an infant and has never even been vaguely aggressive. My son can also order the dog off a bone and she'll obey because (surprise surprise) I've trained her that he sits higher in the hierarchy. You know, the sort of thing a responsible dog owner does.

It speaks volumes, though, that a person so concerned with banning supposed vicious breeds can't spend their time contributing to the discussion without attacking other posters who disagree with them. And while animals might turn on people, they are animals without the benefit of higher sentience. What's your excuse?

HSBC Aids 9/11 Assailants, Gets Out of Jail Free -- TYT

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Just Wrong!

shinyblurry says...

Bollocks.

Not once has a scientist made a discovery and gone "shit the bible was right about this the whole time".

If there are theologians on the top of that mountain,
1. they got there on the backs of scientists
2. they refuse to believe they're not still in a field
3. they're so blinded by their faith that they're missing the awesome view all around them


The conception of being able to uncover the laws governing the Universe by investigating secondary causes is an idea advanced by Christian scientists. It was the belief that God created a lawfully ordered Universe that we could investigate with our reason which led to what is called the scientific method today. Every discovery we've ever made confirms the regularity of the Cosmos and the intelligibility (which is evidence for intelligent causation)

“The only incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible.”

ChaosEngine said:

Bollocks.

Most Hilarious Chilli Challenge I've Ever Seen!

gorillaman says...

>> ^bareboards2:

Sorry my response was so pissy..... I am just frustrated that after forty years of talking about this, I am still hearing the EXACT SAME RESPONSES from folks who don't take the time to actually think about the topic. It all just parroted back, the same old same old.
I sound like a broken record because I hear a broken record. For forty years.
Anyway, had you gone back and listened to the beginning of the clip where they call themselves "real men" or something like that, my comment might have made more sense. Can you imagine three young women saying "if I do this amazing act of bravery, then I'll prove myself as a real woman"? We just don't talk like that in our culture. And that makes me sad. And had done for FORTY YEARS.
If it is still going in ten years, I shall be even more sad.


I have some exciting new thoughts for you to try out, but let's start with the mundane specific case of the gentlemen in the video. It seems obvious that they're contrasting 'men' with 'boys' rather than 'men' with 'women/girls'. That's the old rite of passage being invoked, nothing to do with sex at all. Being British, they also can't help talking with a certain degree of irony that some might miss. These points are only worth making because they highlight your paranoia and oversensitivity.

Sex is ultimately irrelevant; at a 50/50 split it's too shallow a distinction to be meaningful in most cases. Gender is a personal construct, which scarcely signifies outside the individual who inhabits it. If someone, for whatever reason incomprehensible to us, chooses to incorporate their ability to tolerate capsaicin into their gender identity then it's really none of our business. We've certainly no cause to be threatened by it on a personal or cultural level.

I don't consider myself to have a gender. The rational thing to do is treat people as individuals. When you talk about the cultural implications of calling someone a girl, that means as much to me as a teenagers complaining about discrimination against vampires.

It's possible to think very seriously about a topic and decide it doesn't matter. It's just as important to point out what doesn't matter as what does. Then we can stop wasting our energy, forty years worth in your case, on trifles - and concentrate on what's actually worth thinking about. Feminists seem to only think about things that don't matter, which is why everyone hates them. Every human being on earth, and I mean that literally, agrees that the various sexes and genders don't need to be assigned different rights, or at least that we're not sophisticated enough to be able to tease out and codify the very subtle differences between those groups, individuals, and any individual at different moments in their life. That's where the issue ends. There is nothing else to talk about, but when you've squandered so much time on and identified yourself so strongly with such a simple little idea you have to invent a lot of nonsense non-issues to rant on about just to make it all seem worthwhile.

Stop being a feminist; start being a rational person who naturally agrees with the single sensible point feminists have to make and go and do something useful with your time.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists