search results matching tag: the pit
» channel: weather
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds
Videos (327) | Sift Talk (7) | Blogs (41) | Comments (889) |
Videos (327) | Sift Talk (7) | Blogs (41) | Comments (889) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
Man goes viral for incredible long jumps over cups in China
I don't know why they simply put about 20 cups into the pit so its not so dangerous when there is a miss. Those long jump pits are... well... long.
Trump: Biden Will "listen to the scientists"
You mean a Brahma day? Close. It's around a 311+ Trillion year cycle, and hardly resembles astrophysics beyond the one hypothesis that the universe "bounces" in and out of existence, expanding then collapsing then expanding....forever....but most hypotheses disagree. Some claim the universe will not collapse but expand eternally, ending in a big freeze, some suggest collapse in 5 billion years from now. Until we understand dark matter/energy, we are in the dark on this question.
The lifespan of Brahma (creator god) lasts for 100 of his years. His 12-hour day or Kalpa (a.k.a. day of Brahma) is followed by a 12-hour night or Pralaya (a.k.a. night of Brahma) of equal length. At the start of his days, he is re-born and creates the planets and the first living entities. At the end of his days, he and his creations are unmanifest (partial dissolution). His 100-year life is called a Mahā-Kalpa, which is followed by a Mahā-Pralaya (full dissolution) of equal duration, where the bases of the universe, Prakriti, is manifest at the start and unmanifest at the end of a Mahā-Kalpa.[13][24][25]
1 day (12 hrs: Kalpa) of Brahma = 4.32 billion solar years (1,000 Mahā-Yugas) (14 Manvantaras + 15 Sandhyās)
1 Day (24 hrs: Kalpa + Pralaya) of Brahma = 8.64 billion solar years
30 Days (1 month) of Brahma = 259.2 billion solar years
12 months (1 year) of Brahma = 3.1104 trillion solar years
50 years (Parārdha) of Brahma = 155.52 trillion solar years
100 years (lifespan: 2 Parārdha) of Brahma = 311.04 trillion solar years
I see a slight similarity, but not a correlation.
Oh my god, that's what you call perfectly describing psychology? Ok, your standard of proof is clearly light years away from mine.
Good poetry outweighs crusades, dark ages, etc?! Not to me.
You can say that, it's just a tool and can be used for good or bad, but in reality it's a tool for controlling the masses and pitting different segments of the population against each other. As a whole, religion has done exponentially more damage to individuals, society, and progress than any estimation of it's real world benefits. Only by adding the infinite good of heaven can the scales be even close to balanced imo.
The same may be true of science, it's real world benefits, which are ubiquitous and undeniable, may be outweighed by it's side effects since making the planet uninhabitable clearly outweighs extending grandpa's expected lifespan by 10% and keeping his lights on.
in general, hindu eschatology resembles the big bang/crunch. the cycle of expansion from a single point only to collapse to another single point and another expansion. these cycles are billions of years apart. (also some idea - that's too fuzzy to recall in detail - about matter changing and slipping into an alternative dimension might be a model of the great beyond)
will use Russell Bertrand - although not a poet, have read poetry that echos this thought (not gonna search) almost verbatim - when he said, “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.” this was pretty much summed up the Dunning-Kruger Effect. (https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/355363-one-of-the-painful-things-about-our-time-is-that)
the other you noted. meditation is healthy. of note, Sufism tends to focus on intense focusing, in music and song...and some of the musicians are peachy keen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QRivHR0c28
and the poetry is beautiful (EX: Rumi). so religion has spawned some good things, too.
in short, religion is no more destructive than the person implementing it. do believe in ideas. whether it comes from a white cassock or lab coat. such is the freedom to keep a mind free.
or take it up w/René Descartes*. he seemed to be better at it than I.
*Descartes died when he was run over by a horse-drawn coach. This is where the saying "Don't put Descartes in front of the horse."
BTW: Earle song?
Dog bites man's foot, man breaks door
Of course it's a Pit Bull.
Trump and the GOP Rocked by Bombshell Woodward Tapes
No, you call b.s. or fake news whenever a true but unflattering fact comes up about Trump, which is all the time thanks to his bottomless pit of corruption belching up proof every day.
Don't you find it odd that EVERY ex employee is "disgruntled" and a never Trumper...His "best people"...and his administration is the most unstaffed ever, most departments headed by "acting heads" because he can't find anyone dumb enough to work for him but competent enough to pass confirmation.
You've rarely said anything truthful, even more rarely intentionally said anything truthful, but on those rare occasions I applauded you. The truth can't be squashed. My calling (nobody pays me) is to squash harmful lies, and Trump and the Trumplings have had me working double time 24/7/365 since before taking office (when Flynn committed subversion to make sweetheart deals with Russia contrary to Obama's official positions and sanctions against them)
I claim BS when BS comes up. With the fake news it every day. So yea I use it alot.
Newt you must be a leftest tool. you allways quick to respond as if this is you only job to squash truth.
RNC 2020 & Kenosha: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)
Woo boy, this is a doozy! The fact of the matter is a video comment section is not the place to have this conversation. There's too much to discuss, too many questions from one another that are best asked soon after they're conceived, etc. I frankly just don't have the time to respond to everything you said. Don't take this as acquiescence; if you'd like to have a Zoom chat some time, I'd be down.
In any event, I'll respond to what I find either the most important or at least most interesting:
Having theories is definitely the best way to go about most of the things you consider fact (for the moment), but the fact of the matter (no pun intended) is that at some point you'll need to use some of those claims as fact/belief in order to take action. And it's just human nature to, if one believes in a claim for long enough, it becomes fact, despite all your suggestions of objectivity. It's easy to say you're a scientist through and through, but if you're really someone who doesn't believe anything and merely theorize things, I think you'd be a sad human being. But that's a claim that I leave up to the scientists.
> Yes, and I eat animals because they're delicious.
You think that's a defensible moral claim? I find that disgraceful. If you truly think your own pleasure is worth sentient beings' lives then... I don't know what to say to you. That strikes me as callous and unempathetic, 2 traits you often assert as shameful. This is my point. You sound pretty obstinate to at least a reasonable claim. To respond with just "they're tasty". You don't sound reasonable to me.
> You may be correct, but eating meat is hardly the worst thing humans are up to.
Aw, come on @newtboy, I thought better of you than to give me a logical fallacy. The fact that you're resorting to logical fallacies wwould indicate to me that either you're confronting some cognitive dissonance, otherwise why would you stoop to such a weak statement?
> I gladly discuss vegetarianism with honest people, but I'm prepared when they start spouting bullshit like " eating any red meat is more harmful than smoking two packs a day of filterless cigarettes" ...
There is a lot of scientific research (not funded by Big ___) that is currently spouting this "bullshit". What happened to your receptive, scientific, theory-based lifestyle? It's true nutrition science is a fucking smog-filled night mare considering how much money is at stake, but I find it telling that a lot of the corporations are using the same ad men from Big Cigarette to stir up constant doubt.
Again, I find it peculiar that you are highly suspicious of big corporations... except when it comes to something that you want to be true.
Again, this is my point. Take a moment, take a few breaths, and look inside. Can you notice that you're acting in the exact same fashion as the people you purport to be obscenely stubborn?
Check out NutritionFacts if you want to see any of the science. Actual science. I would hope that it would give you at least somedoubt and curiosity.
That's a true scientist's homeostatic state: curiosity. Are you curious to investigate the dozens (hundreds?) of papers with a truly non-confirmation-biased mind? How much of a scientist are you?
> I've never met a vegan that wasn't a bold faced liar in support of veganism, so I'm less likely to give them a full chance at convincing me.
This, for me, raises all sorts of red flags. That's quite a sweeping claim.
> Again, that would be long held theories in my case, and it's not hard to change them. Mad cow disease got me to change until I was certain it wasn't in America. No, I'm not recoiling. I'll listen to anyone who's respectful and honest.
So, you're willing to make decisions based on self-interest and not morality? Well, duh. Everyone does that. It doesn't sound like you had a self-reflective moment. It sounds like you merely had a self-interested decision based on the risk to your own health.
And finally, all your talk about Bob -- of course he acts, consistently, like a twat. I just don't like feeding trolls. I don't think there's anyone on Videosift who's on the precipice and would be pushed over into the Alt-right Pit by Bob's ridiculous nonsense.
> Edit: in general I agree that dispassionate fact based replies with references are better at convincing people than derision, there are exceptions, and there are those who are unconvinceable and disinterested in facts that don't support their lies.
Ironically, I think science has disproved this. Facts don't change minds in situations like this. There are lots of articles on this. I didn't have the wherewithal to dig into their citations, but I leave that (non-confirmation-biased) adventure for you. [1]
---
I knew I wouldn't make this short, but I think it's shorter than it could have been.
Lastly, I'm with @BSR; I do appreciate your perseverance. Not everyone has as much as you seem to have! Whenever I see Bob... doing his thing, I can always be assured you'll take most of the words from my mouth. [2]
[1]
Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds | The New Yorker
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds
This Article Won’t Change Your Mind - The Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/this-article-wont-change-your-mind/519093/
Why People Ignore Facts | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/words-matter/201810/why-people-ignore-facts
Why Many People Stubbornly Refuse to Change Their Minds | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201812/why-many-people-stubbornly-refuse-change-their-minds
Why Facts Don't Always Change Minds | Hidden Brain : NPR
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/743195213
[2] This comment has not been edited nor checked for spelling and grammatical errors. Haven't you got enough from me?
If the remarks being contradicted are not only smug they're also ridiculous, devoid of fact, racist, and or dangerously stupid (like insisting in May that Coronavirus is a hoax that's not dangerous and is a "nothing burger", and everyone should be back at work), and contradicting them with facts and references and +- 1/4 the disrespect the original remarks contained makes people vote for Trump, that does indicate they were already trumpsters imo.
Edit: It's like Democrats have a high bar to clear, but Republicans have no depth too deep to stoop to.
Trump changes Bob's beliefs daily, every time he changes a position Bob changes his belief to make the new position seem reasonable to him. He is not consistent. No other opinion matters to him.
I don't hold beliefs, I have theories. It's easy to change your theory when given new information, I do all the time. Beliefs don't work that way, so I avoid them as much as possible.
Yes, and I eat animals because they're delicious. I would eat people if they were raised and fed better, but we are polluted beyond recovery imo.
You may be correct, but eating meat is hardly the worst thing humans are up to. Killing for sport seems worse, so do kill "shelters", puppy mills, habitat destruction, ocean acidification, etc....I could go on for pages with that list. I try to eat free range locally farmed on family farms meat, not factory farm meat. I know the difference in quality.
I gladly discuss vegetarianism with honest people, but I'm prepared when they start spouting bullshit like " eating any red meat is more harmful than smoking two packs a day of filterless cigarettes" (yes, someone insisted that was true because they didn't care it wasn't, it helped scare people, I contradicted him every time he lied.) The difference is, I could agree with some of their points that weren't gross exaggeration, I agreed that excessive meat eating is horrible for people, I agree that most meat is produced under horrific conditions, I would not agree that ALL meat is unhealthy in any amount and ALL meat is tortured it's entire lifetime because I know from personal experience that's just not true. We raised cattle, free range cattle, in the 70's. They were happy cows that had an enjoyable life roaming our ranch until the day they went to market, a life they wouldn't have if people didn't eat meat.
I've never met a vegan that wasn't a bold faced liar in support of veganism, so I'm less likely to give them a full chance at convincing me. The fact checking part of my brain goes on high alert when talking with them about health or other issues involved in meat production, with excellent reason.
Again, that would be long held theories in my case, and it's not hard to change them. Mad cow disease got me to change until I was certain it wasn't in America. No, I'm not recoiling. I'll listen to anyone who's respectful and honest.
Here's the thing, Bob consistently trolls in a condescending, self congratulatory, and bat shit crazy way. Turnabout is fair play.
As the only person willing to reply to him for long stretches, I know him. I've had many private conversations with him where he's far more reasonable, honest, willing to admit mistakes, etc. (Something I gave up when he applauded Trump lying under oath because "only a dummy tells the truth under oath if the truth might harm them, Trump winning!") When someone is so anti truth and snide, they deserve some snidely delivered truth in return. Bob has proven he's undeserving of the civility you want him to receive, it's never returned.
Bob does not take anything in from any source not pre approved by Trump. I've tried for a decade, and now know he only comes here to troll the libtards. It doesn't matter if you show him video proof and expert opinions, he'll ignore them and regurgitate more nonsense claiming the opposite of reality. He's not trying to change minds, in case you're confused. He's hoping to trick people who for whatever reason refuse to investigate his factless hyper biased claims and amplify the madness. That he comes here to do that, a site he regularly calls a pure liberal site (it's not) is proof enough to convict him of just trolling.
Trolls deserve derision.
I spent years ignoring his little jabs, insults, derisions, and whinging and trying hard to dispassionately contradict his false claims with pure facts and references, it was no different then.
While privately he would admit he's wrong, he would then publicly repeat the claims he had just admitted were bullshit. When he started supporting perjury from the highest position on earth down as long as they're Republican but still calls for life in prison for democrats that he thinks lied even not under oath, he lost any right to civil replies imo. He bought it when Republican representatives said publicly in interviews that they have no obligation to be truthful with the American people, and he applauds it and repeats their lies with glee.
Edit: in general I agree that dispassionate fact based replies with references are better at convincing people than derision, there are exceptions, and there are those who are unconvinceable and disinterested in facts that don't support their lies. How long are you capable of rebutting them with just fact and references when they are smug, snide, insulting, dangerous, and seriously delusional if not just purely dishonest?
Rebuttal?
Dad
whee!
trying to disparage joe when folks can compare him to don? what fun! like trying to bail out a sinking boat w/a sieve.
from mental abilities, leadership qualities, human characteristic - what hell that is for don's demons!
even trying to attack joe's kid while three of the orange pits were involved w/cheating charities! adding eric's removal from his eponymous charity and rebranding (more dirt but will limit for space) it's a no-show for 'father of the year'.
it's like trying to diss the brady bunch while lauding the manson family.
come on t.t. and b.k. sing it! (drop-down click for lyrics)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXdNnw99-Ic
Mordhaus (Member Profile)
Congratulations! Your video, Young Pit Bull Has One Speed, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.
This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 463 Badge!
Mordhaus (Member Profile)
Your video, Young Pit Bull Has One Speed, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
Anthony Jeselnik - Mother
He is a craftsman. His setup and delivery are perfect. (not that i am an expert) You can never tell or guess where he's going to drop you off. All of his jokes are built sturdy so as to hold your attention and then he pulls the lever to the trap door where he meticulously placed you and you fall into the pit of laughter. A genuine craftsman.
Just love Jeselniks comedy. His joke writing is so unique to him.
For anyone interested, here is a yt playlist from his comedy central show, Good Talk. They however are just clips. You have to get "creative" if you want to see the full episodes. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZAW5O34QidZjZTuNh0i8NZe4_EA1c-Cn
2020 Jeep Wrangler Rolls Over In Small Overlap Crash Tests
We have already established your experience differs from this in that there was no impact causing the roll.
citation for maximum/force time being a primary factor in vehicular CSI .
You're also making the assumption that the roll doesn't send you roof first into oncoming traffic, telephone pole, tree, parked car, building or whatever.
We saw a rollover on here recently that was the result of a pit maneuver where the driver died. Guess that wasn't an easy flop for him.
*personal experience crashing/rolling...too much of it
I'm no doctor, but I've been in dozens of what normal people would call wrecks/accidents thanks to off road, and multiple rolls. The lateral (to the side) forces in a roll were never close to direct impact forces...not in the same ballpark. It's all about maximum force/time. Rolls are nearly always comparatively slow, drawn out rotational acceleration, crashes are quick, near instantaneous. That makes an enormous difference. Rolling at 50mph, you might get hurt. Hitting a wall at 50mph, you're lucky if you survive.
Rolling looks scary until you've done it. Dead stop crashing is scary.
Edit: I once watched a truck roll 10 times at 100mph + through a fence...driver walked away and raced later that day. That speed into a boulder, he would be dead, no question.
Arkansas State Troopers 109 MPH PIT Maneuver
In California, PIT maneuver isn't attempted above around 35mph because of exactly this scenario. Not just the health of the drivers, but the collateral damage can be astronomical.
w1ndex (Member Profile)
Your video, Arkansas State Troopers 109 MPH PIT Maneuver, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
Mourning in America
Businesses like Blue Flame? They're the fake company created in late March to take hundreds of millions in deposits for medical products they couldn't produce....ventilators, ppe, etc. They took state's money and utterly failed to secure or ship any of the lifesaving supplies they contracted for and have been sued by multiple states for the cash back, but no one can get back the lives they ended by not supplying the medical supplies or by wasting states time and resources relying on them.
One guess who started this fake supply company....Republican lobbyists and fundraisers who quit their jobs in March to start this deadly con.....a con Trump facilitated by refusing to take federal control over the supply lines and instead telling states to fend for themselves with zero federal oversight, pitting them against each other AND the federal government who often seized scarce medical supplies found by the states, only to hand them off to middlemen who then resold them to the states again (and likely tipped off the feds so they could seize more supplies). That's a recipe for cons like this....as a repeatedly convicted con man himself (fraudulent school con, fraudulent charity con just to name two convictions for fraud from the last 4 years), Trump was well aware that's the case.
Trump signed off of shit load of cast for working people and businesses.
The best POTUS in last 60 years.
Capitalism Didn’t Make the iPhone, You iMbecile
your contention that ONLY personal profit drives invention or innovation.
I'm afraid I've never argued that, I can lead by agreeing whole heartedly that such a contention is false.
I merely pointed out that in a video about how 'capitalism didn't create the iphone', the authors own examples of innovations that lead to the iphone are all 100% from within an economy based on capitalism. My very first post stated clearly that it's not a purely capitalist system, but that it is noteworthy that not a one of the examples chosen by the author making his point came from a socialist country.
Can you offer a comparative American/Russian timeline of computer innovations
Well, I could actually. If you want to deny the fact that Russia basically halted their computer R&D multiple times in the 70s, 80s and 90s in place of just stealing American advances because they were so far behind I can cite examples for you...
And for some unknown to you reason China is beating the ever loving pants off America lately.
1. Factually, no they are not. The fastest network gear, CPU and GPU tech are all base on American research and innovation. America is still hands down leading the field in all categories but manufacturing cost, but that isn't for reasons of technological advancement but instead a 'different approach' to environmental and labour regulations.
2. Within the 5G space you alluded to earlier, there is an additional answer. Their 5G isn't 'better' but rather 'cheaper' for reasons stated in 1. The existence of their 'own' 5G tech though isnt' because Huawei's own R&D was caught up so fast through their own innovation. Instead if you look into the history of network companies, Canadian giant Nortel was giving Cisco a solid run for it's money for a time, until they utterly collapsed because of massive corporate espionage stealing almost all of their tech and under cutting them on price. China's just using the same playbook as Russia to catch up.
Russia beat America into space
Well, if you want to go down that road the conclusion is that fascism is the key to technological advancement, as America and Russia were largely just pitting the scientists they each captured from the Nazis against one another.
Once again though, my point has never been that only capitalism can result in innovation. Instead, I made the vastly more modest proposal that personal profit from inventions is beneficial to innovation. I further observed that the video author's own examples support that observation, and in that contradict his own conclusion.
Really? Can you offer a comparative American/Russian timeline of computer innovations, or are you just assuming? Be sure to focus on pre '68 era, before American socialism was applied in large part (public funding/monopoly busting).
And for some unknown to you reason China is beating the ever loving pants off America lately....so what's your point? Certainly not that Capitalism always beats socialism, I hope you aren't that deluded. Both have strengths and weaknesses, both ebb and flow. Neither are the sole determining factor for inventiveness, neither has a monopoly on invention.
Russia beat America into space even with their near poverty level economy at the time, and despite the fact that their scientists definitely didn't personally profit from their myriad of inventions required to make it happen.
I'm not arguing which is better, that's like arguing over which color is better....better in what way? I'm arguing against your contention that ONLY personal profit drives invention or innovation. That's clearly a mistaken assumption.
Little Girl Puts On Lipstick All By Herself
She is going to be serious trouble in about 10 years.
Lying comes naturally to her, and dad is encouraging it.
This is like playing rough with your pit bull/mastiff puppy, teaching it to bite people. Sure, it may be cute when they're little, but it's also just begging for real problems later.