🔥 Popular | Latest

sexhaver: this is from 2003: POINT/COUNTERPOINT This War Will Destabilize The Entire Mideast Region And Set Off A Global Shockwave Of Anti-Americanism vs. No It Won't Nathan Eckert and Bob Sheffer f 3/26/03 3:00pm. SEE MORE: OPINION This War Will Destabilize The Entire Mideast Region And Set Off A Global Shockwave Of Anti- Americanism George W. Bush may think that a war against Iraq is the solution to our problems, but the reality is, it will only serve to create far more. This war will not put an end to anti-Americanism; it will fan the flames of hatred even higher. It will not end the threat of weapons of mass destruction; it will make possible their further proliferation. And it will not lay the groundwork for the flourishing of democracy throughout the Mideast; it will harden the resolve of Arab states to drive out all Western (i.e Nathan Eckert U.S.) influence. If you thought Osama bin Laden was bad, just wait until the countless children who become orphaned by U.S. bombs in the coming weeks are all grown up. Do you think they will forget what country dropped the bombs that killed their parents? In 10 or 15 years, we will look back fondly on the days when there were only a few thousand Middle Easterners dedicated to destroying the U.S and willing to die for the fundamentalist cause. From this war, a million bin Ladens will bloom And what exactly is our endgame here? Do we really believe that we can install Gen. Tommy Franks as the ruler of Iraq? Is our arrogance and hubris so great that we actually believe that a U.S. provisional military regime will be welcomed with open arms by the Iraqi people? Democracy cannot possibly thrive under coercion. To take over a country and impose one's own system of government without regard for the people of that country is the very antithesis of democracy. And it is doomed to fail A war against Iraq is not only morally wrong, it will be an unmitigated disaster No It Won't No it won't It just won't. None of that will happen You're getting worked up over nothing. Everything is going to be fine. So just relax, okay? You're really overreacting "This war will not put an end to anti-Americanism; it will fan the flames of hatred even higher"? It won't Bob Sheffer "It will harden the resolve of Arab states to drive out all Western (i.e. U.S.) influence"? Not really "A war against Iraq is not only morally wrong, it will be an unmitigated disaster"? Sorry, no, I disagree "To take over a country and impose one's own system of government without regard for the people of that country is the very antithesis of democracy"? You are completely wrong Trust me, it's all going to work out perfect. Nothing bad is going to happen It's all under control. Why do you keep saying these things? I can tell when there's trouble looming and I really don't sens se that right now. We're in control of this situation, and we know what we're doing. So stop being so pessimistic Look, you've been proven wrong, so stop talking. You've had your say already Be quiet, okay? Everything's fine. You're wrong sexhaver: this is from 2003

sexhaver: this is from 2003

Save
someoneintheshadow456: nautica-the-savant: marbledmartin: thegrumpymathematician: nunyabizni: sarcasmsuitsme: skypig357: iswearimnotnaked: hi hello CATS!!!! CANNOT!!!! BE VEGAN!!!!! i cannot believe i have to fucking say this. dogs are omnivore and IF YOUR VET APPROVES your pooch MAY be able to go on an APPROVED(!!!!!) commercial vegan dog food like the brand “v-dog” which has all the essential vitamins, protein, etc. (the oldest record winning dogs have been vegan) cats are CARNIVORE and cannot fucking live on a vegan diet. a vet would laugh in your face and probably find some way to have your pet taken away from you because you’re obviously not fit to have an animal if you think you can feed a cat a diet based on your own ethics i’m vegan but this is so fucking harmful. it’s about minimizing your harm, not putting your animals on risky diets in an attempt to be perfect. DON’T FUCKING DO THIS TO YOUR PETS Idiot people If you see someone you know doing this, report them for animal cruelty and neglect. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This posts, and many of the notes on it, are bothering me. Ladies, gentlemen, esteemed colleagues from outside the confines of the gender binary; gather ‘round. Let’s throw some science in this joint. 1. Humans. Humans are not cats. Humans are not dogs. One would think this obvious, but people have a tendency to attempt such interspecies comparisons when discussing diet. Humans are order omnivora; we have essentially evolved in a manner that attempts to give us as much dietary flexibility as possible. We do, however, require a substance called B12 (or cobalamin), which is extremely important for brain and nervous system functions, as well as the synthesis of DNA and the construction of red blood cells. We cannot produce this vitamin ourselves–no animal, plant, or fungus can. The enzymes used in cobalamin production are essentially unique to bacteria and archaea–some species of which hang out in the digestive tracks of other animals. We get cobalamin in a roundabout way from fish, shellfish, meat, eggs, milk, and dairy products. While there is no naturally-occurring, vegan source of the vitamin that has been demonstrated effective in a human study of statistically significant sample size, effective synthetic forms do exist and can be used as a substitute.  Cyanocobalamin is one of the most common and is frequently found in fortified foods and vitamins. In short: Humans are omnivores. Humans have evolved for dietary flexibility, including viable vegetarianism. Humans did not evolve for veganism (be extremely suspicious of people who tell you that we did, as they are lying), but due to modern technologies, veganism is also a viable diet that humans can thrive on, should they so choose. 2. Cats. Cats are order carnivora. Cats require (amongst other things) an amino acid called taurine. We’re not quite sure how, exactly, but we know that it’s extremely important to feline heart wall tissue, retinal tissue, and brain tissue amongst other things. Cats cannot manufacture their own taurine, and must get it from other sources–primarily shellfish, fish and meat. Taurine breaks down when heated, so feeding your cat a home-cooked diet rich in this foods is also not necessarily a good idea (talk to a vet). Secondary (read: SUPPLEMENTARY. NOT A SOLE SOURCE OF TAURINE.) sources of taurine for cats include dairy, eggs, and seaweed- or yeast-based taurine supplements. In nature, cats don’t really need to worry about getting enough taurine, because (as you may have noticed), taurine sources are indeed the things that cats tend to catch and eat. However, a cat that lives in a human household is dependent on humans for food, and sometimes humans are utter fucktrucks. In short: Cats are obligate carnivores. Their primary source of nutrition is meat. They must eat meat, preferably as close to raw as possible. They have digestive tracks designed for digesting meat. There are vegan/vegetarian cat kibbles on the market. Do not buy them. Your cat is neither vegan nor vegetarian, and if you adjust their diet as if they were, you are a terrible person who is harming and possibly killing your pet. You suck. End of discussion. 3. Dogs. Dogs are slightly more nuanced here. They are facultative carnivores–meaning that they optimally should eat meat, but can survive on other things if resources are scare. Dogs also need the amino acid taurine, but can technically manufacture it themselves if the proper building blocks are in their diets. They also need vitamin D–D3 is preferable, but D2 can be used to some degree. Dogs are somewhere between us (the true omnivore) and the cat (the true carnivore). A vegan or vegetarian diet will keep a dog alive, certainly, but is unlikely to allow your pet to thrive as it lacks the recommended nutrients. You should probably be feeding your dog meat. The exception here–some dogs are allergic to conventional dog foods, or find symptoms of certain diseases alleviated by vegetarianism. In this case, a veterinarian (not you, layperson, I mean an actual trained veterinarian) may determine that the benefits of putting your dog on a vegetarian/vegan diet outweigh those of feeding your dog meat. This is relatively rare, but does occasionally happen. And no, actually, the oldest dog is not vegan–Bramble is the only dog on this list that I found had some indication of veganism. The oldest dog on record is an Australian Kelpie named Maggie, who was not vegan. It is more likely that Bramble lived that long despite the veganism, not because of it. In short: If a vet thinks that your dog may be allergic to dog food/require a special diet and recommends you try feeding it a vegetarian/vegan diet, listen to your vet. Otherwise? Dogs are carnivora. They do need vegetables and other sources of nutrients, but their optimal fuel, as it were, is meat. Your dog needs meat to be happy. Fucking feed your dog.  Now, I did manage to find two veterinarians who disagree with every other study I dug up and the American Veterinary Medical Association. Their articles are here and here. They don’t really have sources, and are essentially wholly dependent on anecdotal evidence (“my dog is a vegetarian and hasn’t died!”), but for those of you data cherry-pickers reading this, there you go.  As a rule, dogs and cats need meat. If that makes you uncomfortable, that is your problem, not theirs. If you try to implement a vegan or vegetarian diet for your pets because you implemented one for yourself, you shouldn’t have those pets. That is animal abuse. (By the way, those of you not feeding your cats and non-allergic dogs the food they need to survive and thrive? What the fuck is wrong with you? Do you not love your pets?) TL;DR If you do not want a pet that must be fed meat, you should under no circumstances acquire a cat or a dog. Thank you for your time. Rebloobing for the more detailed info on B12 and obligate carnivore vs true omnivores Always reblog. Dear Vegans, If you’re not willing to at least feed your dogs and cats commercial food, get a rabbit or a parrot. : Meg OVeganMegane Vegans who feed their pets meat: u guys have gotta see the bigger picture. We shouldn't support animal exploitation w/ our money That's it. 7/13/16, 10:50 PM aer @thelilmermade @VeganMegane yes um so how would I feed my cat? 7/13/16, 11:02 PM lI VIEW TWEET ACTIVITY Meg @VeganMegane @thelilmermade is your cat male or 7m female? :) check out this website for more info: vegancats.com/ veganfaq.php Meg @VeganMegane @thelilmermade I know you want to best for your companion, and I won't deny that there are risks, but you can minimise those risks! 5m someoneintheshadow456: nautica-the-savant: marbledmartin: thegrumpymathematician: nunyabizni: sarcasmsuitsme: skypig357: iswearimnotnaked: hi hello CATS!!!! CANNOT!!!! BE VEGAN!!!!! i cannot believe i have to fucking say this. dogs are omnivore and IF YOUR VET APPROVES your pooch MAY be able to go on an APPROVED(!!!!!) commercial vegan dog food like the brand “v-dog” which has all the essential vitamins, protein, etc. (the oldest record winning dogs have been vegan) cats are CARNIVORE and cannot fucking live on a vegan diet. a vet would laugh in your face and probably find some way to have your pet taken away from you because you’re obviously not fit to have an animal if you think you can feed a cat a diet based on your own ethics i’m vegan but this is so fucking harmful. it’s about minimizing your harm, not putting your animals on risky diets in an attempt to be perfect. DON’T FUCKING DO THIS TO YOUR PETS Idiot people If you see someone you know doing this, report them for animal cruelty and neglect. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This posts, and many of the notes on it, are bothering me. Ladies, gentlemen, esteemed colleagues from outside the confines of the gender binary; gather ‘round. Let’s throw some science in this joint. 1. Humans. Humans are not cats. Humans are not dogs. One would think this obvious, but people have a tendency to attempt such interspecies comparisons when discussing diet. Humans are order omnivora; we have essentially evolved in a manner that attempts to give us as much dietary flexibility as possible. We do, however, require a substance called B12 (or cobalamin), which is extremely important for brain and nervous system functions, as well as the synthesis of DNA and the construction of red blood cells. We cannot produce this vitamin ourselves–no animal, plant, or fungus can. The enzymes used in cobalamin production are essentially unique to bacteria and archaea–some species of which hang out in the digestive tracks of other animals. We get cobalamin in a roundabout way from fish, shellfish, meat, eggs, milk, and dairy products. While there is no naturally-occurring, vegan source of the vitamin that has been demonstrated effective in a human study of statistically significant sample size, effective synthetic forms do exist and can be used as a substitute.  Cyanocobalamin is one of the most common and is frequently found in fortified foods and vitamins. In short: Humans are omnivores. Humans have evolved for dietary flexibility, including viable vegetarianism. Humans did not evolve for veganism (be extremely suspicious of people who tell you that we did, as they are lying), but due to modern technologies, veganism is also a viable diet that humans can thrive on, should they so choose. 2. Cats. Cats are order carnivora. Cats require (amongst other things) an amino acid called taurine. We’re not quite sure how, exactly, but we know that it’s extremely important to feline heart wall tissue, retinal tissue, and brain tissue amongst other things. Cats cannot manufacture their own taurine, and must get it from other sources–primarily shellfish, fish and meat. Taurine breaks down when heated, so feeding your cat a home-cooked diet rich in this foods is also not necessarily a good idea (talk to a vet). Secondary (read: SUPPLEMENTARY. NOT A SOLE SOURCE OF TAURINE.) sources of taurine for cats include dairy, eggs, and seaweed- or yeast-based taurine supplements. In nature, cats don’t really need to worry about getting enough taurine, because (as you may have noticed), taurine sources are indeed the things that cats tend to catch and eat. However, a cat that lives in a human household is dependent on humans for food, and sometimes humans are utter fucktrucks. In short: Cats are obligate carnivores. Their primary source of nutrition is meat. They must eat meat, preferably as close to raw as possible. They have digestive tracks designed for digesting meat. There are vegan/vegetarian cat kibbles on the market. Do not buy them. Your cat is neither vegan nor vegetarian, and if you adjust their diet as if they were, you are a terrible person who is harming and possibly killing your pet. You suck. End of discussion. 3. Dogs. Dogs are slightly more nuanced here. They are facultative carnivores–meaning that they optimally should eat meat, but can survive on other things if resources are scare. Dogs also need the amino acid taurine, but can technically manufacture it themselves if the proper building blocks are in their diets. They also need vitamin D–D3 is preferable, but D2 can be used to some degree. Dogs are somewhere between us (the true omnivore) and the cat (the true carnivore). A vegan or vegetarian diet will keep a dog alive, certainly, but is unlikely to allow your pet to thrive as it lacks the recommended nutrients. You should probably be feeding your dog meat. The exception here–some dogs are allergic to conventional dog foods, or find symptoms of certain diseases alleviated by vegetarianism. In this case, a veterinarian (not you, layperson, I mean an actual trained veterinarian) may determine that the benefits of putting your dog on a vegetarian/vegan diet outweigh those of feeding your dog meat. This is relatively rare, but does occasionally happen. And no, actually, the oldest dog is not vegan–Bramble is the only dog on this list that I found had some indication of veganism. The oldest dog on record is an Australian Kelpie named Maggie, who was not vegan. It is more likely that Bramble lived that long despite the veganism, not because of it. In short: If a vet thinks that your dog may be allergic to dog food/require a special diet and recommends you try feeding it a vegetarian/vegan diet, listen to your vet. Otherwise? Dogs are carnivora. They do need vegetables and other sources of nutrients, but their optimal fuel, as it were, is meat. Your dog needs meat to be happy. Fucking feed your dog.  Now, I did manage to find two veterinarians who disagree with every other study I dug up and the American Veterinary Medical Association. Their articles are here and here. They don’t really have sources, and are essentially wholly dependent on anecdotal evidence (“my dog is a vegetarian and hasn’t died!”), but for those of you data cherry-pickers reading this, there you go.  As a rule, dogs and cats need meat. If that makes you uncomfortable, that is your problem, not theirs. If you try to implement a vegan or vegetarian diet for your pets because you implemented one for yourself, you shouldn’t have those pets. That is animal abuse. (By the way, those of you not feeding your cats and non-allergic dogs the food they need to survive and thrive? What the fuck is wrong with you? Do you not love your pets?) TL;DR If you do not want a pet that must be fed meat, you should under no circumstances acquire a cat or a dog. Thank you for your time. Rebloobing for the more detailed info on B12 and obligate carnivore vs true omnivores Always reblog. Dear Vegans, If you’re not willing to at least feed your dogs and cats commercial food, get a rabbit or a parrot.
Save
potheidon: we need to remember the role of lobbying in all this. the government tries annually to make taxes IRS-managed, but HRBlock and TurboTax and various other tax firms lobby heavily to make sure that NEVER passes because their companies thrive on our confusion. remember that gross policies are more often than not influenced by financial gain! copyright law? disney lobbyists. poor public transportation infrastructure? automotive and gas lobbyists! lack of clean energy? oil lobby! comb through government policies and see just HOW many companies are puppeteering them with gross amounts of money. a LOT can change if we directly target lobbying policies. : jordan @jordan_stratton Government: You owe us money. It's called taxes. Me: How much do l owe? Gov't: You have to figure that out. Me: I just pay what I want? Gov't: Oh, no we know exactly how much you owe. But you have to guess that number too. Me: What if I get it wrong? Gov't: You go to prison 8:17 AM 16 Apr 19 Twitter for iPhone potheidon: we need to remember the role of lobbying in all this. the government tries annually to make taxes IRS-managed, but HRBlock and TurboTax and various other tax firms lobby heavily to make sure that NEVER passes because their companies thrive on our confusion. remember that gross policies are more often than not influenced by financial gain! copyright law? disney lobbyists. poor public transportation infrastructure? automotive and gas lobbyists! lack of clean energy? oil lobby! comb through government policies and see just HOW many companies are puppeteering them with gross amounts of money. a LOT can change if we directly target lobbying policies.

potheidon: we need to remember the role of lobbying in all this. the government tries annually to make taxes IRS-managed, but HRBlock an...

Save
bogleech: revretch: awed-frog: Prairies are some of the most endangered ecosystems in the world, with the tallgrass prairie being the most endangered. Only 1-4% of tallgrass prairie still exists. Prairies are critically important, not only for the unique biodiversity they possess, but for their effect on climate. The ability to store carbon is a valuable ecological service in today’s changing climate. Carbon, which is emitted both naturally and by human activities such as burning coal to create electricity, is a greenhouse gas that is increasing in the Earth’s atmosphere. Reports from the International Panel on Climate Change, a group of more than 2,000 climate scientists from around the world, agree that increased greenhouse gases are causing climate change, which is leading to sea level rise, higher temperatures, and altered rain patterns. Most of the prairie’s carbon sequestration happens below ground, where prairie roots can dig into the soil to depths up to 15 feet and more. Prairies can store much more carbon below ground than a forest can store above ground. In fact, the prairie was once the largest carbon sink in the world-much bigger than the Amazon rainforest-and its destruction has had devastating effects. [source] I just have to add–that extensive root system? It’s not just how the plant eats, and how it keeps itself from getting pulled out of the ground during storms, or dying when its aboveground portion is eaten… it’s how it talks to its friends and family, how it shares food with its friends and family, and more than likely, how it thinks. That’s a whole plant brain we’ve domesticated away, leaving a helpless organism that has trouble figuring out when it’s under attack by pests, what to do about it, has very little in the way of chemical defense so it can do something about it, and can’t even warn its neighbors. Even apart from the ecological concerns, what we’ve done is honestly pretty cruel. Here’s some more articles on this too!https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/may/02/plants-talk-to-each-other-through-their-rootshttp://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141111-plants-have-a-hidden-internethttps://www.the-scientist.com/features/plant-talk-38209Whether or not you think this should qualify as a form of “intelligence” as we know it (which in itself as a pretty nebulous and poorly defined thing), plants exhibit complicated interactive behaviors that help them grow and thrive, and the way we harvest a lot of them for our produce just doesn’t even give them a chance to reach their maturity and begin trading nutrients the way they’re supposed to.: Agriculture Nature bogleech: revretch: awed-frog: Prairies are some of the most endangered ecosystems in the world, with the tallgrass prairie being the most endangered. Only 1-4% of tallgrass prairie still exists. Prairies are critically important, not only for the unique biodiversity they possess, but for their effect on climate. The ability to store carbon is a valuable ecological service in today’s changing climate. Carbon, which is emitted both naturally and by human activities such as burning coal to create electricity, is a greenhouse gas that is increasing in the Earth’s atmosphere. Reports from the International Panel on Climate Change, a group of more than 2,000 climate scientists from around the world, agree that increased greenhouse gases are causing climate change, which is leading to sea level rise, higher temperatures, and altered rain patterns. Most of the prairie’s carbon sequestration happens below ground, where prairie roots can dig into the soil to depths up to 15 feet and more. Prairies can store much more carbon below ground than a forest can store above ground. In fact, the prairie was once the largest carbon sink in the world-much bigger than the Amazon rainforest-and its destruction has had devastating effects. [source] I just have to add–that extensive root system? It’s not just how the plant eats, and how it keeps itself from getting pulled out of the ground during storms, or dying when its aboveground portion is eaten… it’s how it talks to its friends and family, how it shares food with its friends and family, and more than likely, how it thinks. That’s a whole plant brain we’ve domesticated away, leaving a helpless organism that has trouble figuring out when it’s under attack by pests, what to do about it, has very little in the way of chemical defense so it can do something about it, and can’t even warn its neighbors. Even apart from the ecological concerns, what we’ve done is honestly pretty cruel. Here’s some more articles on this too!https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/may/02/plants-talk-to-each-other-through-their-rootshttp://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141111-plants-have-a-hidden-internethttps://www.the-scientist.com/features/plant-talk-38209Whether or not you think this should qualify as a form of “intelligence” as we know it (which in itself as a pretty nebulous and poorly defined thing), plants exhibit complicated interactive behaviors that help them grow and thrive, and the way we harvest a lot of them for our produce just doesn’t even give them a chance to reach their maturity and begin trading nutrients the way they’re supposed to.

bogleech: revretch: awed-frog: Prairies are some of the most endangered ecosystems in the world, with the tallgrass prairie being the...

Save
ᴍᴏʀᴇ ᴀᴛ @ᴘɪᴍᴘᴄᴇssᴍɪsʜᴀ: 126 Successful Women Think Differently and health by Dutch researcher Dr. Ruut Veenhoven she being chronically unhappy has the same effect on lon ng cigarettes daily. Onaverade theefrecisotunhappinessk. expectancy by sx Successful people take their happi They don't dwell on the negative and they fill their life with fho tive-positive words, positive people, and a positive outlok showed that longevity as sm Onaverage the effects ofunha Cut the Posi as rustened to a presectorbout happiness given by Dr. V hoven, a noted sociologist, I was intrigued by his classification of qualities of life that comprise overall happiness and well-beino sider them (paraphrased below with my definitions and coachino tions) to help you determine the areas of your life in which you have room to enhance your happiness and well-being: fo may Read that shit! iva "Livability" is about the environments in which you live, work, an play. Does your environment nurture you or drain you? Do the cumstances in which you find yourself empower you to thrive or merely survive? What would create a more livable and happier e ronment for you? 2. Life abilities Life abilities are your personal strengths, knowledge, preparation ibility, and potential. They can be developed, explored, and imp upon. Greater personal abilities often create more enjoyable op nities. What talents and strengths are going underutilized in yo What potential is going untapped? Meaning CHAT ᴍᴏʀᴇ ᴀᴛ @ᴘɪᴍᴘᴄᴇssᴍɪsʜᴀ
Save
detenebrate: 0xymoronic: shitarianasays: theeyesinthenight: the-sonic-screw: platinumpixels: volpesvolpes: unseilie: sarahvonkrolock: gaysexagainstawall: them-days-was-olden-as-fuck: The spread of the black death. Poland Poland, tell us your secret. Poland is the old new Madagascar.  If I remember correctly, Poland’s secret is that the jews where being blamed all over europe (as usual) as scapegoats for the black plague. Poland was the only place that accepted Jewish refugees, so pretty much all of them moved there.  Now, one of the major causes of getting the plague was poor hygiene. This proved very effective for the plague because everyone threw their poop into the streets because there were no sewers, and literally no one bathed because it was against their religion. Unless they were jewish, who actually bathed relatively often. When all the jews moved to Poland, they brought bathing with them, and so the plague had little effect there. Milan survived by quarantining its city and burning down the house of anyone showing early symptoms, with the entire family inside it.  I reblogged this tons of times, but the Milan info is new. Damn Italy, you scary. Poland: “Hey, feeling a bit down? Have a quick wash! There, you see? All better” Milan: “Aw, feeling a bit sick are we? BURN MOTHERFUCKER, BURN!!!!!” Also, this might have something to do with it: from what I understand, O blood type is uncommonly… common in Poland. Something to do with large families in small villages and a LOT of intermarriage. The black plague was caused by a bacterium that produced, in its waste in the human body, wastes that very closely mimic the “B” marker sugars on red blood cells that keep the body from attacking its own immune system. Anyone who has a B blood type had an immune system that was naturally desensitized to the presence of the bacterium, and therefore was more prone to developing the disease. Anyone who had an O type was doubly lucky because the O blood type means the total absence of ANY markers, A or B, meaning that their bodys’ immune system would react quickly and violently against the invaders, while someone with an A may show symptoms and recover more slowly, while someone with B would have just died. Because O is a recessive blood type, it shows in higher numbers when more people who carry the recessive genes marry other people who also carry the recessive gene. Poland, which has a nearly 700 year history of being conquered by or partnering with every other nation in the surrounding area, was primarily an agricultural country, focused around smaller, farming communities where people were legally tied to, and required to work, “their” land, and so historically never “spread” their genes across a large area. The economy was, and had been, unstable for a very long period of time leading up to the plague, the government had been ineffective and had very little reach in comparison to the armies of the other countries around for a very very long time, and so its people largely remained in small communities where multiple generations of cross-familial inbreeding could have allowed for this more recessive gene to show up more frequently. Thus, there could be a higher percentage of O blood types in any region of the country, guaranteeing less spread of the illness and moving slower when it did manage to travel. Combine this with the fact that there were very few large, urban centers where the disease would thrive, and with the above facts, and you’ve got a lovely recipe for avoiding the plague. Interestingly enough, as a result from the plague, the entirety of Europe now has a higher percentage of people with O blood type than any other region of the world.  WHY IS THIS ALL SO COOL When Tumblr teaches you more about the plague than 12 years of school ever did. Just to throw a nod in, as a medieval historian, this is all credible, and is the leading theory as to the plagues effectiveness at this point. So. Enjoy your new knowledge!: 1346 Moscow Stockholm openhagen Kiey London ologne Cracow Vienna Paris Milan Constantinople Marsailles Rome Barcelona detenebrate: 0xymoronic: shitarianasays: theeyesinthenight: the-sonic-screw: platinumpixels: volpesvolpes: unseilie: sarahvonkrolock: gaysexagainstawall: them-days-was-olden-as-fuck: The spread of the black death. Poland Poland, tell us your secret. Poland is the old new Madagascar.  If I remember correctly, Poland’s secret is that the jews where being blamed all over europe (as usual) as scapegoats for the black plague. Poland was the only place that accepted Jewish refugees, so pretty much all of them moved there.  Now, one of the major causes of getting the plague was poor hygiene. This proved very effective for the plague because everyone threw their poop into the streets because there were no sewers, and literally no one bathed because it was against their religion. Unless they were jewish, who actually bathed relatively often. When all the jews moved to Poland, they brought bathing with them, and so the plague had little effect there. Milan survived by quarantining its city and burning down the house of anyone showing early symptoms, with the entire family inside it.  I reblogged this tons of times, but the Milan info is new. Damn Italy, you scary. Poland: “Hey, feeling a bit down? Have a quick wash! There, you see? All better” Milan: “Aw, feeling a bit sick are we? BURN MOTHERFUCKER, BURN!!!!!” Also, this might have something to do with it: from what I understand, O blood type is uncommonly… common in Poland. Something to do with large families in small villages and a LOT of intermarriage. The black plague was caused by a bacterium that produced, in its waste in the human body, wastes that very closely mimic the “B” marker sugars on red blood cells that keep the body from attacking its own immune system. Anyone who has a B blood type had an immune system that was naturally desensitized to the presence of the bacterium, and therefore was more prone to developing the disease. Anyone who had an O type was doubly lucky because the O blood type means the total absence of ANY markers, A or B, meaning that their bodys’ immune system would react quickly and violently against the invaders, while someone with an A may show symptoms and recover more slowly, while someone with B would have just died. Because O is a recessive blood type, it shows in higher numbers when more people who carry the recessive genes marry other people who also carry the recessive gene. Poland, which has a nearly 700 year history of being conquered by or partnering with every other nation in the surrounding area, was primarily an agricultural country, focused around smaller, farming communities where people were legally tied to, and required to work, “their” land, and so historically never “spread” their genes across a large area. The economy was, and had been, unstable for a very long period of time leading up to the plague, the government had been ineffective and had very little reach in comparison to the armies of the other countries around for a very very long time, and so its people largely remained in small communities where multiple generations of cross-familial inbreeding could have allowed for this more recessive gene to show up more frequently. Thus, there could be a higher percentage of O blood types in any region of the country, guaranteeing less spread of the illness and moving slower when it did manage to travel. Combine this with the fact that there were very few large, urban centers where the disease would thrive, and with the above facts, and you’ve got a lovely recipe for avoiding the plague. Interestingly enough, as a result from the plague, the entirety of Europe now has a higher percentage of people with O blood type than any other region of the world.  WHY IS THIS ALL SO COOL When Tumblr teaches you more about the plague than 12 years of school ever did. Just to throw a nod in, as a medieval historian, this is all credible, and is the leading theory as to the plagues effectiveness at this point. So. Enjoy your new knowledge!
Save
lackadaisycats: St. Louis Area Cats - these two urgently need adoption, rescue or foster. Hey all.  I’m sorry to spam you with non-comic stuff. I try not to do this too routinely, but sometimes I can’t not. Shelter Friends works very hard to network and get cats and dogs out of the municipal animal control shelter here. They work so hard, in fact, they’ve effectively turned this former high kill rate shelter into a no-kill shelter for the past 5 years running.  Unfortunately, adoptions have been very slow this season, nearby rescues have issued an intake freeze, and these two beautiful cats might fall victim to the situation on October 30th. They’re on the euthanasia list. It’s rather an emergency.  - Bronte (top) is a shy, sweet adult female who loooves meal time.   Here’s a video of her.  - Charlie (bottom) is a bit of both worlds - he’s got some loner edge, but he can     be the very affectionate life of the party when he feels like it too.   A video of him being very lovey.Both are FeLV/FIV negative and up to date on shots. Neither seem to be super-fans of other cats (no attacking - just hissing and hiding), but a noisy, chaotic shelter is the least ideal place to see a cat’s real personality shine, so there’s every chance they’d adjust and thrive in a moderately quiet home with other animals.If you are in or around the St. Louis area and might have some room in your home and heart for Bronte or Charlie, please reach out to Shelter Friends!(314) 750-7979info@shelter-friends.com Reblogs are immensely appreciated! pləasə adopt thəsə babiəs!!!: lackadaisycats: St. Louis Area Cats - these two urgently need adoption, rescue or foster. Hey all.  I’m sorry to spam you with non-comic stuff. I try not to do this too routinely, but sometimes I can’t not. Shelter Friends works very hard to network and get cats and dogs out of the municipal animal control shelter here. They work so hard, in fact, they’ve effectively turned this former high kill rate shelter into a no-kill shelter for the past 5 years running.  Unfortunately, adoptions have been very slow this season, nearby rescues have issued an intake freeze, and these two beautiful cats might fall victim to the situation on October 30th. They’re on the euthanasia list. It’s rather an emergency.  - Bronte (top) is a shy, sweet adult female who loooves meal time.   Here’s a video of her.  - Charlie (bottom) is a bit of both worlds - he’s got some loner edge, but he can     be the very affectionate life of the party when he feels like it too.   A video of him being very lovey.Both are FeLV/FIV negative and up to date on shots. Neither seem to be super-fans of other cats (no attacking - just hissing and hiding), but a noisy, chaotic shelter is the least ideal place to see a cat’s real personality shine, so there’s every chance they’d adjust and thrive in a moderately quiet home with other animals.If you are in or around the St. Louis area and might have some room in your home and heart for Bronte or Charlie, please reach out to Shelter Friends!(314) 750-7979info@shelter-friends.com Reblogs are immensely appreciated! pləasə adopt thəsə babiəs!!!

lackadaisycats: St. Louis Area Cats - these two urgently need adoption, rescue or foster. Hey all.  I’m sorry to spam you with non-comic...

Save
siryouarebeingmocked: darkado: mornington-the-crescent: mightyoctopus: siryouarebeingmocked: cisnowflake: anti-capitalistlesbianwitch: 100 Women: The artist redrawing ‘sexist’ comic book covers An artist in India is challenging sexist drawings of women in comic books by parodying them using male heroes in poses typically associated with women. She-Hulk has superhuman strength and speed and is one of the most formidable hand-to-hand combatants in the Marvel world. Like Hulk, not only does she have physical power, she’s also completely green. Yet, on a 1991 comic book cover, she is shown in a seductive pose, wearing a G-string bikini, with her curves sharply accentuated. Indian artist Shreya Arora was shocked when she saw the image. “For Hulk, the visual representation focuses on his strength. For She-Hulk, all we see is an emphasis on sexuality,” says Arora, who grew up reading comic books. The 21-year-old graphic designer decided she wanted to flip the narrative. Why is depicting women as sexy considered sexist? The irony, of course, is that there already was a Spider-Man cover like that second one. Also, this is literally judging a book by its cover. Heck, you’re even ignoring the self-aware speech bubble. The book actually starts with She-Hulk on a beach, so the cover is actually appropriate to the contents. And can I just- LOOK AT SPIDEY’S CROTCH. LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT IT. Yes, clearly we needed a view of Tony’s skintight bodysuit. This is doing the same thing as the Hawkeye Initiative. It’s not clever or original. There are blogs I’d expect to caption a Spiderman picture with “LOOK AT SPIDEY’S CROTCH. LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT IT.” and then there is this blog. Guess I was wrong. The artist also completely failed to get the joke: August, 1991, Demi Moore appears on the cover of “Vanity Fair” magazine, nude and pregnant. It caused quite an outrage, but the controversy lead to increased sales. In December of the same year, Marvel decided to riff on that idea, showing She-Hulk in the same pose, with a beach ball instead of a pregnant belly. She even says, “It’s not FAIR to accuse me of VANITY“, a not-so-subtle nod to the famous magazine cover. tl;dr: Artist is offended by someone else’s work, not understanding anything about the history or concept behind the artwork. I’m usually here for pointing out that men can be sexualized like women but wow you guys really chose the wrong thing to argue with. Sure, Spidey has a nice crotch and Tony is in a bodysuit, but I do really need to point out that not all of these comics are even from the same era? Using Civil War II is ridiculous considering it came out only two years when others are over two decades older. Also, trying to say that the She-Hulk cover is a simple nod could be acceptable if they didn’t do this for every single issue of The Sensational She-Hulk. Even a quick Google search will show that they tried to sell the the comics with sex appeal and She-Hulk admitting that doesn’t make it any better. Comepltely unrelated to the story Entirely nude Completely unnecessary (as stated by She-Hulk) I don’t think I need to explain why these are much more gratuitous than Spidey or Tony. Sure, Spidey has a nice crotch and Tony is in a bodysuit, but I do really need to point out that not all of these comics are even from the same era?OP didn’t make distinctions about era.Using Civil War II is ridiculous considering it came out only two years when others are over two decades older.The Spider-Woman cover is from 2014. That Spidey web-ball cover is from 2000 or so. She-hulk is from 1991.So, even if I give you the whopping two years between the Spider-Woman cover and Civil War 2, OP’s range still covers the time period of that Spidey cover.But in the interests of fairness, lets take a gander at 90s Iron Man.Look at that cyber-bulge and those cyber-abs.Also, trying to say that the She-Hulk cover is a simple nod could be acceptable if they didn’t do this for every single issue of The Sensational She-Hulk. You mean the light-hearted, self-aware comic where the fanservice is clearly a joke, and the character still has choice and agency? How does that represent all female-led comics? At least if they had used a few Catwoman Jim Balent covers, they might’ve had some ground, seeing as he actually seems to have a thing for leather, latex, and lace. Of course, these days Shulk has more conventional covers, which explains why the artist had to go back 25+ years to find them.Also, are you absolutely sure it’s every issue?Every single one?Wow, Electro is ripped here. I don’t need to explain the Bugs Bunny ref, do I?This isn’t even an actual comic cover, it’s Frank Cho fanart. If there’s so much actual examples, why is she using a non-cover? The parody artist even admits she’s focusing on the visuals. People who get bent out of shape because of comic book covers really have too much time on their hands.: SENSATIONA $1.50 US SOMETHING WOT FRivOLOUS ITS NOT FAIR TO ACCUSE ME OF VANITY! BECAVSE IAM A MAN JUST THRIVE 3OTw siryouarebeingmocked: darkado: mornington-the-crescent: mightyoctopus: siryouarebeingmocked: cisnowflake: anti-capitalistlesbianwitch: 100 Women: The artist redrawing ‘sexist’ comic book covers An artist in India is challenging sexist drawings of women in comic books by parodying them using male heroes in poses typically associated with women. She-Hulk has superhuman strength and speed and is one of the most formidable hand-to-hand combatants in the Marvel world. Like Hulk, not only does she have physical power, she’s also completely green. Yet, on a 1991 comic book cover, she is shown in a seductive pose, wearing a G-string bikini, with her curves sharply accentuated. Indian artist Shreya Arora was shocked when she saw the image. “For Hulk, the visual representation focuses on his strength. For She-Hulk, all we see is an emphasis on sexuality,” says Arora, who grew up reading comic books. The 21-year-old graphic designer decided she wanted to flip the narrative. Why is depicting women as sexy considered sexist? The irony, of course, is that there already was a Spider-Man cover like that second one. Also, this is literally judging a book by its cover. Heck, you’re even ignoring the self-aware speech bubble. The book actually starts with She-Hulk on a beach, so the cover is actually appropriate to the contents. And can I just- LOOK AT SPIDEY’S CROTCH. LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT IT. Yes, clearly we needed a view of Tony’s skintight bodysuit. This is doing the same thing as the Hawkeye Initiative. It’s not clever or original. There are blogs I’d expect to caption a Spiderman picture with “LOOK AT SPIDEY’S CROTCH. LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT IT.” and then there is this blog. Guess I was wrong. The artist also completely failed to get the joke: August, 1991, Demi Moore appears on the cover of “Vanity Fair” magazine, nude and pregnant. It caused quite an outrage, but the controversy lead to increased sales. In December of the same year, Marvel decided to riff on that idea, showing She-Hulk in the same pose, with a beach ball instead of a pregnant belly. She even says, “It’s not FAIR to accuse me of VANITY“, a not-so-subtle nod to the famous magazine cover. tl;dr: Artist is offended by someone else’s work, not understanding anything about the history or concept behind the artwork. I’m usually here for pointing out that men can be sexualized like women but wow you guys really chose the wrong thing to argue with. Sure, Spidey has a nice crotch and Tony is in a bodysuit, but I do really need to point out that not all of these comics are even from the same era? Using Civil War II is ridiculous considering it came out only two years when others are over two decades older. Also, trying to say that the She-Hulk cover is a simple nod could be acceptable if they didn’t do this for every single issue of The Sensational She-Hulk. Even a quick Google search will show that they tried to sell the the comics with sex appeal and She-Hulk admitting that doesn’t make it any better. Comepltely unrelated to the story Entirely nude Completely unnecessary (as stated by She-Hulk) I don’t think I need to explain why these are much more gratuitous than Spidey or Tony. Sure, Spidey has a nice crotch and Tony is in a bodysuit, but I do really need to point out that not all of these comics are even from the same era?OP didn’t make distinctions about era.Using Civil War II is ridiculous considering it came out only two years when others are over two decades older.The Spider-Woman cover is from 2014. That Spidey web-ball cover is from 2000 or so. She-hulk is from 1991.So, even if I give you the whopping two years between the Spider-Woman cover and Civil War 2, OP’s range still covers the time period of that Spidey cover.But in the interests of fairness, lets take a gander at 90s Iron Man.Look at that cyber-bulge and those cyber-abs.Also, trying to say that the She-Hulk cover is a simple nod could be acceptable if they didn’t do this for every single issue of The Sensational She-Hulk. You mean the light-hearted, self-aware comic where the fanservice is clearly a joke, and the character still has choice and agency? How does that represent all female-led comics? At least if they had used a few Catwoman Jim Balent covers, they might’ve had some ground, seeing as he actually seems to have a thing for leather, latex, and lace. Of course, these days Shulk has more conventional covers, which explains why the artist had to go back 25+ years to find them.Also, are you absolutely sure it’s every issue?Every single one?Wow, Electro is ripped here. I don’t need to explain the Bugs Bunny ref, do I?This isn’t even an actual comic cover, it’s Frank Cho fanart. If there’s so much actual examples, why is she using a non-cover? The parody artist even admits she’s focusing on the visuals. People who get bent out of shape because of comic book covers really have too much time on their hands.

siryouarebeingmocked: darkado: mornington-the-crescent: mightyoctopus: siryouarebeingmocked: cisnowflake: anti-capitalistlesbianwit...

Save