You know a Republican did exactly this to a guardian reporter a month ago right? In, like, real life.

I've gone to church for a few years. And I see no women staying silent, nor any man telling them to. I really don't care about "tradition" and would voice serious concern if these type of crap happens in the modern church. Believe me, my church sisters takes no crap from the brothers. And I don't really see much old-school practices except communion, and that's not far-out unacceptable a tradition considering its purpose.

I (or at least hope to) continuously carry a critical eye & mind on these social-issue things as in many others at the church. Church "doctrine/tradition" is no excuse to justify bad social/inequality/bigotry behavior. For me, discussion on why the heck Paul wrote these words is fine, it's good to find faults how those people who lived 2000 years ago and evolve the modern church practices to align better with Jesus' intention.
Overall, in my church, I think most people are pretty grounded in real-life struggles... but hey, I fully understand these are subjective opinions... we all have our blindspots. I think we're all better man/woman if we can take in criticisms.

I can't for the life of me understand the U.S. "Christian Right" (but I'm Canadian, so I'm just a passive observer, as I can't vote on US politics) nor, from my understanding of Him, Jesus (as a preacher of love & peace) could be a far/alt-right-winger. But oh, sorry, I don't mean to talk politics... just hope to convey from which side of the discussion I come from.

It's foolish (and arrogant) to take the Bible literally... so much contradictions, inconsistencies, if read this way. And really, I keep thinking - WHY LITERALLY? - I don't dare listen to my pastors and think their words MUST be what God/Jesus meant. Martin Luther's movement freed us from those chains of mindlessness from the church preachers' power over us.

Akways look to the intention of Jesus, which for me, is honestly good, relevant and much in demand, and do those as the Christian mission. The Bible can be confusing, but the message is crystal clear. And that's love & compassion towards our neighbors, go a preach THAT! Not hate/fear-filled "damn this, damn that"/"End of the World is nigh"-type rhetorics.

Seriously man, looking from a distance (again, Canadian here) those loud-voice Christian Rights in the States scare the hell out of me and most of my brothers & sisters, the general thought around me is that they've move way far out from the Christian's way that Jesus want us to be (that I know of)... makes me so sad.

Your video, If "Real People" Commercials Were Real Life: Burger King, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Yes, by using both pacers and wind blockers, the Nike attempt wouldn't have counted as a world record. At one point it was considered that a sub-4 minute mile was scientifically impossible. The science here would be more reassuring if they talked about that fancy equation, and how it matches various real world runners very well. For example, runner A has a VO2 max of 60, and an efficiency of 95% of theoretical peak. It should be impossible for him to get below the equation's theoretical best time of 2:07, but the best in the world with those stats should get close. Science is all about building a model you think is representative of real life, then test it. I don't see any testing of the model here to prove its validity.

It would have been better if the explanation came after a week or so of random, confusing....what would you call that....dog calls?
Still, excellent revenge. If only more women had the money, connections, and inventiveness to do this in real life.

Your video, If "Real People" Commercials Were Real Life - More Awards, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

You keep saying that, but have never offered a single example where I misunderstood or misrepresented anything, just a mistaken accusation that I added my own term "hypersensitives" out of bias, but it was actually in the title AND the paper.
Present one. What, exactly, am I misrepresenting? Use quotes and be specific.

I think you must not understand plain English then, because that Hopkins synopsis is in plain English and contradicts your original blanket contention I took issue with-"rheumatoid arthritis is a flare up caused by dairy and certain meats".
That might be true in some cases of patients with food hypersensitivities, the science isn't yet clear, but it is clear that your original all encompassing statement is just wrong in most if not all cases and overreaching exaggeration in the extreme as written, something which is specifically warned against in the paper itself. ( "the science is not able to reliably identify specific triggers for individuals." , "These studies are few in number and should be interpreted and extrapolated to real life only with careful thought and caution.")
I personally know 2 long term (over 30 years) vegans in my family with active rheumatoid arthritis, and know of many more. If your statement was correct, that would be impossible.

Edit: had you said 'it appears that, in some people, RA flare ups can be caused by meat and/or dairy.' instead of "rheumatoid arthritis is a flare up caused by dairy and certain meats" you would not have been contradicted. If you could accept that the exaggeration makes your statement unsupportable instead of defending it blindly and zealously with mistaken assumption and misplaced insult, this would have been a single post instead of a whole thread.

According to the JH website, it's not only wrong, the study could not show what you claim by it's design.
Excuse me...let me use their exact words....

Food Hypersensitivities and Their Link to RA

In some patients, specific foods have been shown to exacerbate the symptoms of RA.(ref 5) Avoiding these foods or food groups has been shown to have limited, short term benefits but no benefits long term. Even though different forms of dietary modification have reportedly improved symptoms in some patients, people with RA may have spontaneous temporary remissions. Therefore, it is important to perform double-blind, placebo controlled trials to differentiate diet effect from spontaneous remission. You may identify a food that is a particular trigger for you, and this phenomenon is real. However, the science is not able to reliably identify specific triggers for individuals.

Diet elimination therapy is a method of determining food hypersensitivities with patients. Elimination diets avoid a specific food or group of foods such as milk, meat or processed foods that are known to be prime allergy suspects. These foods are eliminated from the diet for a specific period of time. Foods are then gradually reintroduced one at a time, to determine whether any of them causes a reaction.

Panush and colleagues, demonstrated temporary improvement in the signs and symptoms of RA with diet elimination and modification in a controlled study where the symptoms associated with food sensitivities were studied.(ref 5) During this study when the patient was fasting or on a severely restricted diet, the patients symptoms improved significantly. However, when the patient had milk reintroduced into the diet, episodes of pain, swollen and tender joints and stiffness were experienced. Similarly, Kjeldsen-Kragh and colleagues(ref 6) noted that fasting may be effective in reducing the symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis, however most patients relapsed as new foods were reintroduced into the diet. Pain and discomfort frequently returned once a patient reverted to a normal diet. These studies are few in number and should be interpreted and extrapolated to real life only with careful thought and caution.

Your video, If "Real People" Commercials Were Real Life - CHEVY Awards, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

She brings up the controversy...by correctly answering the man's silly question?

If you have children, you absolutely have a dog in the fight. By homeschooling them, you, statistically (and the few statistics available are heavily biased FOR home schooled children, comparing volunteered home school test scores with the entire public school population), are giving them a better grasp of English, but worse understanding of math, and certainly aren't doing well teaching science. You also leave them with absolutely no real life education on interpersonal relationships, which are almost as important, since you can't use your knowledge if no one will work with you because you are a spoiled narcissist incapable of listening to others.

After 25+ years of education at 13+ different schools, I've NEVER heard the lesson, that you can ONLY learn through formal schooling, taught in any school, and I know of no one who thinks that way, from pre-school teachers to the many Stanford professors I know. Based on my excessive experience, this is absolutely NOT a lesson taught in average schools. You are simply mistaken about that.

For those who don't wish to ignore the sacred honor of teaching one's own child how to work in a group, how to have a reasoned discussion with others, about subjects the parent is not an expert in, or how to delegate responsibility, all without being the sole focus of all attention, school is a great institution. If you wish to relegate them to a life of having problems dealing with others and (statistically) having even worse math and science skills than average, home school works great.

I still have a dog in this fight, even though I have no children, because I live in a society where I have to deal with others. Those I've dealt with that have a home schooling background have been far more difficult to work with than others, being both less competent and less congenial on top of having a misplaced sense of superiority, both moral and educational.

If "Real People" Commercials Were Real Life - CHEVY Awards has been added as a related post - related requested by lurgee on that post.

If "Real People" Commercials Were Real Life has been added as a related post - related requested by lurgee.

*related=https://videosift.com/video/If-Real-People-Commercials-Were-Real-Life-1

You have a wife????? You must a lot more reasonable in real life.

I thought it was great, now I know what Milo is like in real life. It's fascinating to see. Like Coulter, about 5 second reactionary barbs is all that Milo has... and that works brilliantly for news shows and twitter where nothing more is expected. Get them on a show where they can talk unscripted like real people for more than 20 seconds however, and you realize there's nothing else there. I'm glad Realtime exists, because it's one of the only shows where that can happen.