>> ^heropsycho:

And, sadly, lots of practice. That's the scariest part is knowing he's probably done this a lot. Not kick ass, extremely dangerous.
>> ^BoneRemake:
This is kick ass if nothing less.
Skills and balls to that driver, you do not maneuver like that without knowing what you are doing.



Yes, the thoughts you laid out are fairly standard and would come to most people, Not I ; you infer quite a bit from this situation, you seem to build a back story and life for this truck, you do not know anything about the driver, you assume that it was done on roads that where filled with school bus' full of children, you assume that this guy works for someone else and is not driving his own rig/business. You assume so much about this and can not enjoy the video for what it actually is at its base point.

Relax guy !

And, sadly, lots of practice. That's the scariest part is knowing he's probably done this a lot. Not kick ass, extremely dangerous.

>> ^BoneRemake:

This is kick ass if nothing less.
Skills and balls to that driver, you do not maneuver like that without knowing what you are doing.

>> ^EMPIRE:

what a fucking idiot. And that's in Brazil by the way...


I think the Brazilians may be taking booty shaking to an entirely new level.

All the freedoms who enjoys? Who is free? You keep saying that everybody is free but we're far from it. The only other countries that we're more free than...are countries that are just slightly more religious than the US. That's right...the more religion, the less freedoms. Inverse relationship between religion and freedom. On the individual, on the community, in a country. Religion is ALWAYS a form of social control, it has never been used to "free" anybody.

You don't think you're free in America? Let me guess..you take issue with Americas drug laws, right? And you're quite incorrect about the inverse relationship between freedom and religion. The least free countries today are atheistic states and totalitarian regimes. The freest countries in the world all have a rich Christian heritage, though not all of them necessarily honor that heritage. You're also talking about religion as if they're all the same, which they clearly aren't. The Christian religion has brought freedom and liberty where ever it has gone, whereas religions like Islam are oppressive and grind their people into the dirt. The catholic church used Christianity to control people, this is true, but they clearly weren't following anything Jesus taught. There is nothing oppressive about Christianity..it teaches us to regard everyone as equal, to love our neighbors as ourselves, to hate no one, and to minister to the poor and helpless. If everyone followed that we would have an ideal world.

>> ^rottenseed

All the freedoms who enjoys? Who is free? You keep saying that everybody is free but we're far from it. The only other countries that we're more free than...are countries that are just slightly more religious than the US. That's right...the more religion, the less freedoms. Inverse relationship between religion and freedom. On the individual, on the community, in a country. Religion is ALWAYS a form of social control, it has never been used to "free" anybody.

>> ^shinyblurry:

Everyone who voted for this video and (mockingly) for the other one is a hypocrite. Bashing Christians in the name of tolerance? As far as his claims go, this country was founded by Christians, and it has always been Christian. All of the wonderful freedoms that secular humanists enjoy today are only because of Christian principles. If you want to rip out the foundation you're going to sink the boat, and that's exactly what is happening today.

Good navigation skills, not so much for Inverse Kinematics (calling second elevator).

>> ^csnel3:

39.52°


On a right angled triangle the 80 feet of the mast is the hypotenuse.

If the bridge is 65 feet from the water then leaving a foot of clearance requires a height from the top of the mast to the water of 64 feet, not 66, otherwise the mast is trying to pass through the bridge, not under it.

For the angle between the mast and the water you want the inverse sine of 64/80, (opposite over hypotenuse), which gives approximately 53.13 degrees.

For the angle between the mast and vertical you want the inverse cosine of 64/80, (adjacent over hypotenuse), which gives approximately 36.87 degrees.

The inverse tangent that you calculated would be for the opposite and adjacent sides of the triangle, implying measuring the 80 feet across the surface of the water, not the length of the mast.

Based on the prior comments here I realise that my excessive level of pedantry may cost me friends too, but hey, someone was wrong on the Internet, and that's more important.

PS: @Yogi - I showed my work, do I get a cookie?

I'm neither an apprentice nor a Journeyman. As a Master I do not show my work, but the results I freely share.

(i would normaly use my TI-30 and divide 66 by 80 = and inverse the tangent. But tonight all I had is my Iphone so I divided 66 by 80 = and 2nd functioned the tangent. I was not confident in my answer so I didnt show my work, as I knew the sifters would tear me apart if I was wrong).
>> ^Yogi:
>> ^csnel3:
39.52°

B-
you didn't show your work <IMG class=smiley src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/tongue.gif">

God this checkbox bothers me.

Sarcastic intonation is a fucking sin. Like, there is actually a level of hell for it. If you can't say it deadpan then don't say it, otherwise you may as well follow every sarcastic comment with the inverse. This Checkbox is really cool! (The checkbox isn't cool - ed)

So I'm torn between not using it, or using it on every single post like some sort of metasarcasm.

>> ^gwiz665:

I find it interesting that pro-choice is bad here and good in abortions. Seems like an inversion of morals.


That's because when one decides to have an abortion, they don't condemn everyone else's baby to die.

the quality of the song is inversely proportional to the quality of dancing

@SDGundamX "no permanent damage to [its] function"

Circumcision reduces sexual pleasure and cutting off ears reduces our hearing ability. Both sometimes have complications.

I guess, though, that it's better for society if the lower classes enjoy sex less and spread less STDs (seems likely circumcision inversely correlates with education level). So I've changed my mind.

>> ^gwiz665:

I find it interesting that pro-choice is bad here and good in abortions. Seems like an inversion of morals.


Having an abortion affects JUST the mother (and father, friends, emotionally etc.), not getting vaccinated affects the population as a whole. So it's the whole 'do whatever ever you like to yourself as long as you're not hurting others' argument. Not getting vaccinated IS hurting others.

Oh, and Jenny McCarthy is a fool.

A fool who I've seen directly influence members of my extended family who questioned whether they should get the MMR shot for their kid because they were scared it would make them Autistic.

And don't get me started on fricken homoeopathic 'vaccines'... ARGH!

I find it interesting that pro-choice is bad here and good in abortions. Seems like an inversion of morals.

Not wishing to be merely contrary, I find reviews by Roger Ebert to be highly insightful. The recent half-star review of Battlefield: Los Angeles, for example, is hilarious and quite useful to those of us who have historically identified with Mr. Ebert's cinematic prowess. The television program Siskel & Ebert, when it was on, can be forgiven for its rare misstep, like the review of The Professional, even though, as I've pointed out, the version screened was quite compromised. Those who systematically regard their reviews with, as stated above, an "inversion principle" have my pity as surely possessing an abating sum of cognitive capacity. In short, lick my balls. Siskel & Ebert rule.