Sometimes I stress myself out over the unimaginable depths & sheer being of every micro& macrocosm in existence but mostly I just binge watch Netflix.

27th August 2014

Photo reblogged from [Insert Creative Title Here] with 90,303 notes

Source: twitter.com

27th August 2014

Quote reblogged from An Existential Life with 71,570 notes

I am selfish, private and easily bored. Will this be a problem?
Neil Gaiman || A Study in Emerald (via socratic-thinker)

Source: vanished

27th August 2014

Photoset reblogged from tempest in a teapot with 4,645 notes

Source: amypoehler

27th August 2014

Photoset reblogged from tempest in a teapot with 1,839 notes

sizvideos:

Video

Source: sizvideos

27th August 2014

Quote reblogged from don't worry with 56,359 notes

I’ll never punish my daughter for saying no.

The first time it comes out of her mouth, I’ll smile gleefully. As she repeats “No! No! No!” I’ll laugh, overjoyed. At a young age, she’ll have mastered a wonderful skill. A skill I’m still trying to learn. I know I’ll have to teach her that she has to eat her vegetables, and she has to take a nap. But “No” is not wrong. It is not disobedience.

1. She will know her feelings are valid.
2. She will know that when I no longer guide her, she still has a right to refuse.

The first time a boy pulls her hair after she says no, and the teacher tells her “boys will be boys,” we will go to her together, and explain that my daughter’s body is not a public amenity. That boy isn’t teasing her because he likes her, he is harassing her because it is allowed. I will not reinforce that opinion. If my son can understand that “no means no” so can everyone else’s.

3. She owes no one her silence, her time, or her cooperation.

The first time she tells a teacher, “No, that is wrong,” and proceeds to correct his public school, biased rhetoric, I’ll revel in the fact that she knows her history; that she knows our history. The first time she tells me “No” with the purpose and authority that each adult is entitled, I will stop. I will apologize. I will listen.

4. She is entitled to her feelings and her space. I, even a a parent, have no right to violate them.
5. No one has a right to violate them.

The first time my mother questions why I won’t make her kiss my great aunt at Christmas, I’ll explain that her space isn’t mine to control. That she gains nothing but self doubt when she is forced into unwanted affection. I’ll explain that “no” is a complete sentence. When the rest of my family questions why she is not made to wear a dress to our reunion dinner. I will explain that her expression is her own. It provides no growth to force her into unnecessary and unwanted situation.

6. She is entitled to her expression.

When my daughter leaves my home, and learns that the world is not as open, caring, and supportive as her mother, she will be prepared. She will know that she can return if she wishes, that the real world can wait. She will not want to. She will not need to. I will have prepared her, as much as I can, for a world that will try to push her down at every turn.

7. She is her own person. She is complete as she is.

I will never punish my daughter for saying no. I want “No” to be a familiar friend. I never want her to feel that she cannot say it. She will know how to call on “No” whenever it is needed, or wanted.

— Lessons I Will Teach, Because the World Will Not — Y.S. (via poetryinspiredbyyou)

Source: poetryinspiredbyyou

27th August 2014

Quote reblogged from Liberals Are Cool with 530 notes

There was a tradition of not allowing black and whites, and, actually, other interracial couples from marrying. It was a tradition. It got swept aside. Why is this tradition better?

Federal Appeals Court judge: Ban on same-sex marriage is “based on hate”. (via think-progress)

There is a correct side of history.

(via liberalsarecool)

Source: think-progress

27th August 2014

Photo reblogged from Δ S > 0 with 163 notes

we-are-star-stuff:

Why Are So Few People Left-Handed?
Handedness - the idea that one hand is better able to perform certain tasks than the other - is, if not exclusively a human trait, then certainly a mostly human one. After all, how could you tell if a dog was left-handed or a lion was right-handed? Their paws aren’t evolved to handle complex tasks like our hands are, and there’s no evidence that non-primates favor one limb over any other.
For reasons that can probably best be described as “stupid”, people have historically held left-handers in contempt. You can find evidence of an anti-left bias throughout the world’s languages. The word “left” itself comes from the Anglo-Saxon word “lyft”, which means “weak.” We get the word “sinister” from the Latin word for “left”, and that double meaning persists in the modern Romance languages.
But exactly why humans favor different hands, or why most people tend to be right-handed, remains mysterious. The most common answer is that handedness is determined by the structure of our brains, which are divided into two hemispheres. Our brains are far more specialized than those of other animals, with different regions of the brain responsible for different specific tasks. Admittedly, these are only general guidelines, and most neural activities are shared between the hemispheres to some extent, but we can definitely say that many functions are primarily handled by one hemisphere as opposed to another. This is known as brain lateralization.
Two of the most energy-intensive human activities are language and the use of our fine motor skills - in other words, the use of our hands. One theory suggests that it’s more efficient for the brain to cluster control of these two major tasks in one hemisphere rather than having it spread throughout the brain. Since the vast majority of people have their language functions centered in the left hemisphere, it follows that most people’s fine motor skills would be controlled by the left hemisphere too. Each hemisphere generally controls the opposite side of the body, so the end result is that most people are right-handed.
However, the opposite does not hold true - being left-handed does not mean the language centers are located in the right hemisphere, which is fairly rare. Certainly, lefties are more likelythan righties to have their right hemisphere responsible for language, but it’s still not a common arrangement. Between 61 and 73% of lefties have their language centers in the left hemisphere, compared to over 90% of right-handed people.
This doesn’t necessarily invalidate the division of labor theory. After all, between 70 and 90% of people are right-handed, and well over 90% of those people do indeed cluster language and fine motor skill control in the left hemisphere. What we’re looking at here is the evolutionary equivalent of a rule of thumb. People’s brains are generally organized to maximize energy efficiency, but a reasonably large minority of people - including most lefties - get along just fine with a less efficient arrangement.
What does it actually mean to be right-handed or left-handed?
The everyday answer to that question is probably this: if you write with your right hand, then you’re right-handed. It’s a straightforward enough popular definition, but translating that into scientific terminology is trickier than you might think. Even simply saying that handedness is determined by which hand you prefer to use doesn’t actually help us that much. Let’s consider some of the problems here. Should a person’s dominant hand be determined by the hand they prefer to use, or the hand that performs better in tests? In other words, is handedness primarily psychological or physiological? Even if you can sort that out, there’s still the question of how to categorize all this. Should left-handed and right-handed be considered precisely equal, or does the fact that such a vast majority of people are right-handed suggest that the people are simply either right or non-right? That’s a bit of a charged way to look at things, but it does have some popularity in scientific literature.
And how about people who use different hands for different tasks? I write and throw with my right hand but bat and play(ed) hockey with my left hand - should I be considered primarily right-handed, a mix of right- and left-handed, or ambidextrous, meaning I feel equally comfortable using both hands? And should we look at handedness as something that can be lumped into only a very few categories - say true right-handed, more right-handed, ambidextrous/mix, more left-handed, and true left-handed - or something that exists on a broad spectrum?
Indeed, the very idea that one hand is “dominant” might be a complete misunderstanding of how our hands divide up tasks. In a Science post, Michael Balter details an argument by University of Liverpool archaeologist Natalie Uomini:

Uomini points out that handedness does not mean that one hand is “dominant” over the other. Rather, she writes, “both hands have different but equally important roles.” In right-handed people, for example, the right hand might be used for tasks requiring greater manual dexterity whereas the left hand might perform the more mundane but nevertheless crucial role of supporting an object. (Imagine eating dinner with just a knife but no fork, for example.)

[Continue Reading→]

we-are-star-stuff:

Why Are So Few People Left-Handed?

Handedness - the idea that one hand is better able to perform certain tasks than the other - is, if not exclusively a human trait, then certainly a mostly human one. After all, how could you tell if a dog was left-handed or a lion was right-handed? Their paws aren’t evolved to handle complex tasks like our hands are, and there’s no evidence that non-primates favor one limb over any other.

For reasons that can probably best be described as “stupid”, people have historically held left-handers in contempt. You can find evidence of an anti-left bias throughout the world’s languages. The word “left” itself comes from the Anglo-Saxon word “lyft”, which means “weak.” We get the word “sinister” from the Latin word for “left”, and that double meaning persists in the modern Romance languages.

But exactly why humans favor different hands, or why most people tend to be right-handed, remains mysterious. The most common answer is that handedness is determined by the structure of our brains, which are divided into two hemispheres. Our brains are far more specialized than those of other animals, with different regions of the brain responsible for different specific tasks. Admittedly, these are only general guidelines, and most neural activities are shared between the hemispheres to some extent, but we can definitely say that many functions are primarily handled by one hemisphere as opposed to another. This is known as brain lateralization.

Two of the most energy-intensive human activities are language and the use of our fine motor skills - in other words, the use of our hands. One theory suggests that it’s more efficient for the brain to cluster control of these two major tasks in one hemisphere rather than having it spread throughout the brain. Since the vast majority of people have their language functions centered in the left hemisphere, it follows that most people’s fine motor skills would be controlled by the left hemisphere too. Each hemisphere generally controls the opposite side of the body, so the end result is that most people are right-handed.

However, the opposite does not hold true - being left-handed does not mean the language centers are located in the right hemisphere, which is fairly rare. Certainly, lefties are more likelythan righties to have their right hemisphere responsible for language, but it’s still not a common arrangement. Between 61 and 73% of lefties have their language centers in the left hemisphere, compared to over 90% of right-handed people.

This doesn’t necessarily invalidate the division of labor theory. After all, between 70 and 90% of people are right-handed, and well over 90% of those people do indeed cluster language and fine motor skill control in the left hemisphere. What we’re looking at here is the evolutionary equivalent of a rule of thumb. People’s brains are generally organized to maximize energy efficiency, but a reasonably large minority of people - including most lefties - get along just fine with a less efficient arrangement.

What does it actually mean to be right-handed or left-handed?

The everyday answer to that question is probably this: if you write with your right hand, then you’re right-handed. It’s a straightforward enough popular definition, but translating that into scientific terminology is trickier than you might think. Even simply saying that handedness is determined by which hand you prefer to use doesn’t actually help us that much. Let’s consider some of the problems here. Should a person’s dominant hand be determined by the hand they prefer to use, or the hand that performs better in tests? In other words, is handedness primarily psychological or physiological? Even if you can sort that out, there’s still the question of how to categorize all this. Should left-handed and right-handed be considered precisely equal, or does the fact that such a vast majority of people are right-handed suggest that the people are simply either right or non-right? That’s a bit of a charged way to look at things, but it does have some popularity in scientific literature.

And how about people who use different hands for different tasks? I write and throw with my right hand but bat and play(ed) hockey with my left hand - should I be considered primarily right-handed, a mix of right- and left-handed, or ambidextrous, meaning I feel equally comfortable using both hands? And should we look at handedness as something that can be lumped into only a very few categories - say true right-handed, more right-handed, ambidextrous/mix, more left-handed, and true left-handed - or something that exists on a broad spectrum?

Indeed, the very idea that one hand is “dominant” might be a complete misunderstanding of how our hands divide up tasks. In a Science post, Michael Balter details an argument by University of Liverpool archaeologist Natalie Uomini:

Uomini points out that handedness does not mean that one hand is “dominant” over the other. Rather, she writes, “both hands have different but equally important roles.” In right-handed people, for example, the right hand might be used for tasks requiring greater manual dexterity whereas the left hand might perform the more mundane but nevertheless crucial role of supporting an object. (Imagine eating dinner with just a knife but no fork, for example.)

[Continue Reading→]

27th August 2014

Post reblogged from Wicked Clothes with 255,628 notes

socialnetworkhell:

"Consensual sex" is just sex. To say that implies that there is such a thing as "non consensual sex", which there isn’t. That’s rape. That is what it needs to be called. There is only sex or rape. Do not teach people that rape is just another type of sex. They are two very separate events. You wouldn’t say "breathing swimming" and "non breathing swimming", you say swimming and drowning.

Source: socialnetworkhell

25th August 2014

Photoset reblogged from don't worry with 27,838 notes

#i feel like tilda is everyone’s earth mother #someone approaches her and she’s all did you try that stress relieving oatmeal and eucalyptus body scrub i was talking about #you had to mix it in a clay pot remember #good that’s good i thought your aura seemed lighter #even people she doesn’t know she’s like i’m sensing unwellness what can i do tell me what i can do

25th August 2014

Photoset reblogged from [Insert Creative Title Here] with 91,860 notes

older-and-far-away:

gingerhaole:

queenanunnaki:

Easter Island’s Statues Reveal Bodies Covered With Unknown Ancient Petroglyphs

21 January, 2014

MessageToEagle.com - Standing some 2,000 miles west of Chile, on the Easter Island, 887 mysterious giant statues have intrigued scientists and the public for years.

For a long time it was believed that the massive statutes consisted of just the heads.

However, in October 2011, when the Easter Island Statue Project began its Season V expedition, scientists could reveal remarkable photos showing that the bodies of the statues go far deeper underground than just about anyone had imagined.

Project director Jo Anne Van Tilburg said: “Our EISP excavations recently exposed the torsos of two 7m tall statues.

The statutes on Easter Island have bodies covered with ancient undeciphered petroglyphs.

"We found a round, deep post hole into which the Rapa Nui had inserted a tree trunk," she said. Van Tilburg said ropes were attached to the tree trunk and to the partially carved statue. "We found a rope guide that was actually carved into the bedrock near the statue." The Rapa Nui then used the tree trunk to raise the statue upright. Before the statue was upright, they carved its front. Once it stood erect, they finished the back, Van Tilburg explained.

The excavation team also found about 800 grams of natural red pigment —nearly two pounds —in the burial hole, along with a human burial. Van Tilburg believes the pigment was used to paint the statues, just as the Rapa Nui used pigment to paint their bodies for certain ceremonies.

The unusually large amount of pigment found indicates that it might have been used by a priest or chief, perhaps as part of mortuary practice, she said. Human bones were found throughout the dig, indicating that people buried their dead around the statues.

Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of visitors to the island have been astonished to see that, indeed, Easter Island statues have bodies!

More important, however, we discovered a great deal about the Rapa Nui techniques of ancient engineering.”

Among their discoveries, the team discovered:

· The dirt and detritus partially burying the statues was washed down from above and not deliberatelyplaced there to bury, protect, or support the statues

· The statues were erected in place and stand on stone pavements

· Post holes were cut into bedrock to support upright tree trunks

· Rope guides were cut into bedrock around the post holes

· Posts, ropes, stones, and different types of stone tools were all used to carve and raise the statues upright

The two “heads” in the quarry where Van Tilburg’s team dug are standing figures with torsos, truncated at the waist, that have become partially buried by eroded dirt and detritus over centuries.

The team also discovered that ceremonies were certainly associated with the statues.

On the project website, Van Tilburg said: “We found large quantities of red, some of which may have been used to paint the statues.

Finally, and perhaps most poignantly, we found in the pavement under one statue a single stone carved with a crescent symbol said to represent a canoe, or vaka.

The backs of both statues are covered with petroglyphs, many of which are also vaka.

A direct connection between the vaka symbol and the identity of the artist or group owning the statue is strongly suggested.”

Still, many of these ancient petroglyphs remain undeciphered and the history of one of the most remote islands in the world is now even more mysterious than ever.

MessageToEagle.com
Image credit: EISP.ORG

This is fuckin’ boss!

But seriously, I love how for the longest time everyone was just like ‘yep. Giant heads. just giant heads.’ and no one even ever bothered to check.
You know what happens when you make an assumption, guys.

Source: queenanunnaki

25th August 2014

Photo reblogged from take me to church with 16,358 notes

nevver:

Wes Lang

nevver:

Wes Lang

Source: weslang.blogspot.com

25th August 2014

Photoset reblogged from Girl with the Most Cake with 165,447 notes

loriadorable:

Source: rihenna

25th August 2014

Post reblogged from [Insert Creative Title Here] with 33,642 notes

"I dont get along with other girls because girls are so bitchy"

bigbardafree:

image

Source: bigbardafree

24th August 2014

Photoset reblogged from iheartmyart ♥ with 548 notes

iheartmyart:

Carl Krull

  1. Drawing 6, 100 x 40 cm, 2013, images posted with permission of the artist. 
  2. Graphite 7, 2012, 100 x 141 cm
  3. Graphite 4, 2012, 100 x 141 cm

Carl Krull website 

Upcoming Solo Exhibition, Carl Krull:Seismic at V1 Gallery, Copenhagen, Denmark, September 26th - October 25th, 2014

______

See more on:
♥ iheartmyart | facebook | twitter | instagram | flickr | mailing list pinterest  

See more Carl Krull on iheartmyart.

23rd August 2014

Photoset reblogged from don't worry with 5,478 notes

stereoculturesociety:

CultureHISTORY: #Ferguson Protests - Magazine covers

Amazing images. The TIME & Bloomberg Businessweek cover photos were both taken by Scott Olson (Getty Images) who was arrested by the St. Louis PD during the protests and later released. The New Yorker painting was done by New York artist Eric Drooker.

#MikeBrown #DontShoot

Source: stereoculturesociety