You could recreate this with the exception of 3D. http://www.algodoo.com/.

Been playing with program for years and it's fairly simple once you play with it for a while.

Algodoo is a physics-based 2D sandbox freeware from Algoryx Simulation AB as the successor to the popular physics application Phun. It was released on September 1, 2009 and is presented as: a learning tool, an open ended computer game, an animation tool, and an engineering tool.

What better proof than your own eyes?! Better hide well, though. I have a history of doing murderous things to ants that come in uninvited! ;-)

The saying is from Greater Tuna, a ridiculous play popular in Texas, I thought maybe everywhere after they put it on video and TV. Maybe check it out, on the tube.

Woah, buddy -- you're going off the deep end with my argument and beating the poor straw man into a puff of dried grass. I'm not saying that everyone is a darn automaton following the whims of popular culture. I'm merely saying that there is a heavy pressure to do things because of culture. And because of Japanese kawaii culture, she gains a lot of social credit for performing in such a way.

Relax. Just beca

I was thinking about car safety and how the biggest variable is likely the driver...how specific cars are driven on average, and it struck me that the best way to promote public safety would be to make your maximum speed limit variable based on gvw (gross vehicle weight). This is already done for vehicles with more than two axles or those towing trailers because it's obvious they take longer to stop. The same logic should apply to every car. It's a no brainer that a Humvee takes longer to stop than a Miata, and is far less controllable under emergency braking. For the safety of both those in such larger vehicles and the general public, they should not be allowed to go as fast as cars weighing 1/4 their weight with better brakes.
A side benefit of such a system would be greater average fuel economy, because bigger cars have greater wind resistance (on average) so become less efficient at higher speeds.
Of course, I wouldn't expect that kind of reason to ever fly in America where the most popular car is a heavy truck that's never used for hauling and could be replaced with a Honda Civic with no loss of functionality for >75% of owners....but everyone wants to drive a tank so they're safer, with no thought about what that means for the other cars on the road.

*quality explanation of why crash testing is only a tiny part of real life safety in cars
*promote

This is the first time I've ever heard anyone call out the non-stop orchestral garbage plastered wall-to-wall over so many popular films (e.g., disney and yes, star wars... which is now, well, you know...). Thanks to this narrator! I hate that nonsense.

There was no ground movement to develop the internet that was somehow community or government funded and that ultimately made it popular and useful.

In reality there was a 60s military communications project that got traction (after decades of basically spare-time tinkering development by weird individuals funded by socialism) when capitalism made home computers possible. Then it skyrocketed because profits could be made.

Socialism was an expensive land telephone line. Capitalism is five different ways I could get connected tomorrow at speed if I decide today. I just realized I stopped thinking about how fast my internet connection is years ago.

Sure, the world has had fire since it's been a planet, but if I told you in 1979 that in the next 5 years both the world's funniest comedian and most popular pop star would survive catching themselves on fire, that's still a miraculously accurate prediction.

Chicken restaurant chain releases new chicken sandwich, runs out, and causes multiple riots was hardly foreseeable, imo....at least not the first time. I kind of expected it for the reboot, granted.

No, I don't talk as if there has never been an amendment. It doesn't even make sense to suggest that since I'm referring to the 2nd Amendment.

Changing the constitution is very difficult. It was made that way on purpose. Article 5:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Five_of_the_United_States_Constitution

"Only inaction and unsupported, unpopular opposition has prevented the government from effectively regulating, not inability."

Whether you believe it is unsupported or unpopular has no bearing on anything. Just to be clear, I never wrote or implied they don't have the ability, only that the constitution prevents "government from effectively regulating arms."

The party in power may not fully represent your views, or the views of the people who directly support the party, no party ever does. But enough Americans wanted them in, and not the opposition who resoundingly lost, that they rule the roost. Considering how many Americans don't vote there is no such thing as a majority of Americans - there can only be a majority of those who vote. And this is not a measure for winning an election. The measure for winning is electoral college votes. The rules were set, one side played it better, the other side lost and whined about the rules.

"You just implied strongly that you're just a sock puppet for Vladimir....AKA @bobknight33....and @wtfcaniuse didn't assume your stance on gun control, he derided your (bob's) snarky but incorrect assessment of our popular opinion and shooting statistics.
Who's being dumb now?!"

I'll answer straight up. You. You are acting dumb. And paranoid. I don't know who those people are. Your "popular opinion" of what? I literally gave links to authoritative statistics for anything under contention. You need to see someone about your mental state.

Try to make people feel welcome. There is a reason this website is sinking into obscurity (look at the rankings).

You talk as if there's never been an amendment, or you don't understand how they work. 98% support is far more than needed.

The founders foresaw this sort of issue, and created a constitution that can evolve with the culture. Only inaction and unsupported, unpopular opposition has prevented the government from effectively regulating, not inability.

That's the thing about having a party in control that doesn't represent the majority (edit: or even the vast majority of their own supporters), the will of the people is neutered.

Duh.
You just implied strongly that you're just a sock puppet for Vladimir....AKA @bobknight33....and @wtfcaniuse didn't assume your stance on gun control, he derided your (bob's) snarky but incorrect assessment of our popular opinion and shooting statistics.
Who's being dumb now?!

Your brain has turned to mush.
Seek medical attention.

The Southern Strategy was in response to Kennedy's civil rights act, which passed after his assassination....a strategy implemented largely after it's passing.

Although the phrase "Southern Strategy" is often attributed to Nixon's political strategist Kevin Phillips, he did not originate it[15] but popularized it.[16] In an interview included in a 1970 New York Times article, Phillips stated his analysis based on studies of ethnic voting:

"From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats".[1]

So, if by "sensible Democrats" you mean the racist ones angry that non whites now have rights, you're partially correct, except that it did work, he did peel them off and won the presidency because of their support.
*facepalm

Yes, he should have said Trump lost the popular vote. But I think we all know what he meant.

I'm assuming it's a hobby, sort of like doomsday prepping. It's mostly popular with people who have a very poor grasp of statistics.

The report is all lies? Some yes.

Mostly grossly over the top and spun to high heaven.
All you really have is the audio grab her by the pussy.. WOW no man ever said that kind of shit to another guy. WOW Got him. Good job.


Democrats are using all this smear to high heaven to fund raise and to nick trump popular vote. They are getting funds but not swaying people to turn against Trump.

Democrats can't afford to have him win again in 2020. CNN, MSNBC are right there with the smear mongering.. So much so that when there is a true Trump mistake no one really believes it to be as bas as it might be.



America is on the right track, low employment, raising wages, slight as they are . They again they been stagnate for last 20 years

Finally addressing the China/ Iran issues. May not like how he is doing it but at least a POTUS is addressing theses issue.


Obama didn't need a lawyer in 8 years -- BS

The video I was attempting to share wasn't one of mine, but from another YouTube channel (the red hot nickel ball guy, not sure if you've heard of him). I tried another one of a haunted theater in Pennsylvania to see maybe if it was that his channel was banned or something (since I know the red hot nickel ball guy is kind of a meme due to his popularity he once had). The haunted theater video didn't work either.

Hopefully it's fixed now and I can submit the video. Thanks for looking into this!

? Did I say there are blatantly Hollywood winning public popularity contests or major endorsements? I certainly didn't intend to imply that.
I do, however, see Hollywood emboldened to be far more public and do things like the nation wide flier campaign this video describes. Ignore Hollywood enough, you'll see it in mainstream commercial productions and products as well. Hollywood must be exposed and opposed before Hollywood gain traction, not ignored and accepted....imo.