>> ^Engels:

This is a trailer for a trailer of a remake of a movie that was bad in the first place? We've come a long way, baby! Christ.


Nope! A teaser for a trailer for a remake of a movie.

Quality-level mileage may differ on a viewer by viewer basis.

>> ^rgnjc:

Health insurance is clearly not the same as college. With higher education you volunteer to pay X amount of dollars to get an education per year that is optional. Considering there are literally thousands of options in this country to choose from, CHOOSE ONE THAT WORKS FOR YOUR BUDGET! Consider buying a car, certainly we all don't go out and buy lamborghini's...instead we buy Toyota Corolla's and Ford Focus's...something that is more fiscally realistic. I wouldn't go buy a lamborghini and have the gall to sit here and complain about the price when there are better options.
Health insurance is different, and I don't care to talk about that, that's not the point of this thread.

>> ^Fletch:
>> ^rgnjc:
IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE TUITION DON'T GO THERE! Find another school that fits your fiscal requirements, moron.

THIS! So succinct!
Hey, while I got ya here... It doesn't look like my medical insurance will pay even a third what they payed the first time, should I relapse. I'm not rich and, admittedly, I'm kind of a moron, so what should I do if that happens? Find another insurance company, or find another disease? Two seemingly impossible solutions... should I desire to live, but I just bet you can help me.



Except at some point, writing your degree on a paper napkin probably carries more weight that the low budget degrees. Or, I have 2 grand, my car options would be something that needs a lot of work and additional money invested or an extreme high mileage vehicle that has a good maintenance record but let's face it after some point on mileage maintenance or not something is going to happen...severity dependant. Or I borrow or otherwise go beyond my means in hopes that it will give me a reliable car that will get me to where I want to go but have no warranty, and then the transmission goes out and the dealership wants nearly what the car is worth to fix it. So I face having no car or going even further beyond my means to hopefully continue to keep my reliable car on track and get my invested money back out of it. I think that more accurately represents the school situation for that guy. You can't just go to another school and hope they transfer every credit 1:1....depending on where you are in your degree you might get boned out of many credits you otherwise would have kept had you not switched schools/programs.

And I'd argue the "optional" portion of a higher education when jobs that SHOULDNT require them, do. It's either tradeschool or college unless you like digging ditches, collecting trash or some other unskilled workforce area. And that's not a bash on those jobs, in fact I think most of those unskilled jobs should pay more than a teachers salary...because a lifetime of those utterly destroys your body. Be lucky if you don't need back surgery by 50 if you do hard manual labor from 18 on up.

He must get horrible gas mileage from having to haul around those balls...

>> ^coolhund:

I agree completely with visionep. Milkmans points are just not true or avoidable.
Theres also the point of engines not being able to run Ethanol at all. Vintage cars for example.
In the end this bio ethanol is just another farce to make money, at a very high cost to... as always... the poor.
What this guy says in the video is just not true. Even with only E10, a higher priced gasoline will still give you better mileage (up to 10%). This is happening in Germany right now. Nobody is buying this ethanol crap because it simply isnt worth it. Not to mention because of the detrimental effects on people and cars.


Yes, some older cars do not run well with an ethanol blend, and some might take that to a point where they wouldn't run at all.

You say bio ethanol is a farce to make money (aren't all businesses?) and the cost targets the poor. That makes a good soundtext-bite but I don't see how ethanol production is particularly detrimental to the poor, at least not in any way that isn't heavily outweighed by other competitors. Care to elaborate?

About mileage: yes, any blend of ethanol will give lower gas mileage than pure gasoline. The point that I would suggest is that when you burn that gallon of gasoline, it isn't coming back. At least not for a few million years. We can/will keep on burning through oil for a while, but as we do so the prices will go up.

Right now, today, the market settles out so that in Brazil the cost per unit of distance traveled may actually favor gasoline; car owners "vote" at the pump. But I'm talking about the long term, in the future. Corn, or better yet switchgrass, grows back. Not in millions of years, *next* year. We're just a few years down the line from the initial introduction of ethanol and ethanol blends as a fuel. And yet already it is making a bit of competition with big oil.

If better alternative fuels come along (hydrogen fuel cells or whatever), I'll be open to them. But at this point ethanol seems like one that actually works, and has been working, in spite of the fact that it doesn't have a fully stable infrastructure yet.

I agree completely with visionep. Milkmans points are just not true or avoidable.

Theres also the point of engines not being able to run Ethanol at all. Vintage cars for example.

In the end this bio ethanol is just another farce to make money, at a very high cost to... as always... the poor.

What this guy says in the video is just not true. Even with only E10, a higher priced gasoline will still give you better mileage (up to 10%). This is happening in Germany right now. Nobody is buying this ethanol crap because it simply isnt worth it. Not to mention because of the detrimental effects on people and cars.

I did indeed! I really wouldn't get much mileage out of a new t-shirt these days and figured someone else would appreciate it more.. congrats!

In reply to this comment by thegrimsleeper:
You apparently decided to decline your prize in the Simpsons giveaway and that means I'll receive it instead.
Thank you. :

Volkswagon opposes the requirement to install further CO2 reducing equipment on top of what is already required because it reduces gas mileage ergo putting more CO2 into the environment. They would much rather research alt fuel.

See you think you are rooting for Greenpeace but it turns out you're helping oil companies. Way to go!

>> ^Deano:
>> ^shinyblurry:
>> ^Deano:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Proposal that I must accept? Please. The argument isn't even coherent. A lot of jawjacking which adds up basically to Mr Harris's incredulity that you could go from having a damaged brain to another existence intact. Well, if you have a soul then obviously the brain isn't the center and it doesn't really matter what happens to it.
Having a soul means there is a creator who gave you one. Why should it be too hard for God to move you from one place to the other. That is why this argument just breaks down. It doesn't consider the logical implications of what it's talking about. It picks and chooses and ends up with nothing but inconsistancy. Really what he is after is to try to isolate the question of the soul so as to gain ground on the question of God. Sorry, Sam, they're inseperable. When you bring the question around to what it's really asking, could God do this, then there really isn't anything to debate about anymore is there.

Good to see we have an expert on the soul here on the Sift!
It's more likely that every bit of EVIDENCE we have is that brain is undoubtedly "you". It's the conscious and unconscious and your sense of self.
Not much evidence for anything else, soul, god or any other guff. But I could be wrong of course. Maybe the soul is running a backup copy every day.

There's plenty of evidence, just not from sources you would accept. My experience confirms there is a soul, your mileage may vary. If you would like to think of yourself of some vague conglomeration of wiring and chemicals, having no life but this one, it being nothing more than the product of random chance, having no intrinsic meaning, but rather subject to happenstance and absurdity, have at it.
To me, the materialist perspective is the most primitive. There is more going on beneath the surface of things than anyone could know or see; the barest glimpse of it will convince you everything you know is wrong. If you're lucky, you might realize that you are actually loved and always have been. Good luck.

I'm afraid with logic like that you can believe in anything and of course that means your "evidence" is utterly unreliable. And that's a self-deluding and potentially dangerous path to embark on.


Fortunately God works by direct revelation, so we don't need to sit around and wonder. Anyone who has experienced that doesn't doubt anymore that He is real. The logic I spoke of was to open your mind. The material universe is the thinnest of veils. The curtain was rent when God stepped down to become one of us. When I was agnostic, I did not perceive the Spirit and thought more like you do. I can see why people doubt, because I thought it was all nonsense. I didn't see it. When I did see I realized immediately that the entirety of my knowledge didn't amount to a whole lot. I wish everyone could have that moment and expand their awareness because it is an evolution of understanding of many orders of magnitude. It makes you pretty humble when you thought you had it down and had a grip on what is and isn't, and then learn you've been playing in the kiddie pool this whole time and didn't really know how to swim.

>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^Deano:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Proposal that I must accept? Please. The argument isn't even coherent. A lot of jawjacking which adds up basically to Mr Harris's incredulity that you could go from having a damaged brain to another existence intact. Well, if you have a soul then obviously the brain isn't the center and it doesn't really matter what happens to it.
Having a soul means there is a creator who gave you one. Why should it be too hard for God to move you from one place to the other. That is why this argument just breaks down. It doesn't consider the logical implications of what it's talking about. It picks and chooses and ends up with nothing but inconsistancy. Really what he is after is to try to isolate the question of the soul so as to gain ground on the question of God. Sorry, Sam, they're inseperable. When you bring the question around to what it's really asking, could God do this, then there really isn't anything to debate about anymore is there.

Good to see we have an expert on the soul here on the Sift!
It's more likely that every bit of EVIDENCE we have is that brain is undoubtedly "you". It's the conscious and unconscious and your sense of self.
Not much evidence for anything else, soul, god or any other guff. But I could be wrong of course. Maybe the soul is running a backup copy every day.

There's plenty of evidence, just not from sources you would accept. My experience confirms there is a soul, your mileage may vary. If you would like to think of yourself of some vague conglomeration of wiring and chemicals, having no life but this one, it being nothing more than the product of random chance, having no intrinsic meaning, but rather subject to happenstance and absurdity, have at it.
To me, the materialist perspective is the most primitive. There is more going on beneath the surface of things than anyone could know or see; the barest glimpse of it will convince you everything you know is wrong. If you're lucky, you might realize that you are actually loved and always have been. Good luck.


I'm afraid with logic like that you can believe in anything and of course that means your "evidence" is utterly unreliable. And that's a self-deluding and potentially dangerous path to embark on.

>> ^Deano:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Proposal that I must accept? Please. The argument isn't even coherent. A lot of jawjacking which adds up basically to Mr Harris's incredulity that you could go from having a damaged brain to another existence intact. Well, if you have a soul then obviously the brain isn't the center and it doesn't really matter what happens to it.
Having a soul means there is a creator who gave you one. Why should it be too hard for God to move you from one place to the other. That is why this argument just breaks down. It doesn't consider the logical implications of what it's talking about. It picks and chooses and ends up with nothing but inconsistancy. Really what he is after is to try to isolate the question of the soul so as to gain ground on the question of God. Sorry, Sam, they're inseperable. When you bring the question around to what it's really asking, could God do this, then there really isn't anything to debate about anymore is there.

Good to see we have an expert on the soul here on the Sift!
It's more likely that every bit of EVIDENCE we have is that brain is undoubtedly "you". It's the conscious and unconscious and your sense of self.
Not much evidence for anything else, soul, god or any other guff. But I could be wrong of course. Maybe the soul is running a backup copy every day.


There's plenty of evidence, just not from sources you would accept. My experience confirms there is a soul, your mileage may vary. If you would like to think of yourself of some vague conglomeration of wiring and chemicals, having no life but this one, it being nothing more than the product of random chance, having no intrinsic meaning, but rather subject to happenstance and absurdity, have at it.

To me, the materialist perspective is the most primitive. There is more going on beneath the surface of things than anyone could know or see; the barest glimpse of it will convince you everything you know is wrong. If you're lucky, you might realize that you are actually loved and always have been. Good luck.

Isn't it tax fraud on wheels?

If I remember correctly, this plug-in hybrid has enough juice for about 25km at minimum speed, just so it passes the standardized mileage test and enters the books at some 78mpg (3l/100km). So for this 700hp+ monster, you'd actually pay less taxes in this country than for a bloody Fiat 500.

His next video will probably be a "making of the Nightmare Before Xmas Review" clip and then after that he'll release another retrospective of his own filmmaking career. Hardly ever seen a guy get more mileage out of shit he'd probably be better off not showing to people. I do love when he actuall discusses games or does something great like the Ninja Gaiden review.

Ahhh, we got a lot of mileage out of this sketch, love it!

*promote

>> ^chilaxe:

What I do object to is what seems to be the attitude in my liberal community that liberalism doesn't need to be self-critical and try to continually decrease its error rate.
For that reason, the safest prediction seems to be that its error rate will remain at the same level. (That's why liberals in Canada were surprised to find they had elected their enemy Harper, even though they had 4 years to ponder US liberals' 2000 loss.)


I don't get the sense that liberals aren't self-critical enough. On the contrary, the problem I see is that we can't stop being self-critical long enough to actually form a cohesive bloc that can agree on a course of action and rally around it.

I'm not sure what the fix for that really is. Republicans get a lot of mileage out of strong, hierarchical discipline, but as a result they seem to have zero capability to have self-critical conversations anymore.

I was kinda hoping Obama would spend a little more time trying to rally and unify liberals than make all these ill-fated attempts to reach out to conservatives.