A few days ago, the new trailer for Rogue One: A Star Wars Story came out and people are speculating that Darth Vader may be in it. (Woohoo!) So of course I have to honor the occasion the best way I know how:

 This one, for example, looks like a codfish. 

Wait - I just realized there's no "t" in "scruffy-looking nerf herder."

When I was a kid I found this nifty stone-texture spray paint at Home Depot, and proceeded to paint everything I could get my hands on, including my room's wall switches, door handles, and lamps. My parents were lucky people, y'all. Anyway, apparently this baker had the same fascination:

But at least this one is icing. So you really can't take it for granite.

(HEYO.)

 

Speaking of stone, I'm not sure what happened to this Darth:

...but it looks like he's having an avalanche.

 

And here's the one they found flattened under the rubble:

Ouch.

 

This is technically the best Darth of the bunch, and that's really saying something:

Something about sweat, and tears, and purple poo.

 

I saved my favorite for last, of course.

("I've got a bad feeling about this...")

Presenting....

Darth Droopy!

"Heavy bweathing."

You know what? That makes me sad.

 

Oh, and if you haven't seen the trailer yet, you can check it out here.

So. Excited.

!!!

 :D

 

Hey Heather S.,  Arielle C., Luci, Brenda J., Clare, Leah S., & Julie Anne D., who's your daddy?

*****

Thank you for using our Amazon links to shop! USA, UK, Canada.

rosalarian:

quixiiify:

So I don’t know about you, but I’m often frustrated by the ridiculous smallness of girls’ pockets. At a bare minimum, I need to be able to shove my cellphone in there - come on, pants companies! So what I started doing was making myself pocket extenders. I’ve done this several times, for pants and shorts. It’s great.

I just got this pair of jeans, so I thought I’d show you how to do it. I kind of feel like it just hasn’t occurred to some of you that this is an option, so maybe now it will. All you need is your pants, some fabric (I just took a random piece from a scrap bin), a needle, and some thread (thread doesn’t even need to match the fabric since literally no one will see it).

See? Ridiculous. Like, half a cellphone, or only 2.5″. Useless.

 So turn those inside out to expose the pockets.

Figure out how big you want your pockets to actually be. I kinda go by whatever looks like might be right. I didn’t really measure them. Fold the fabric in half, so you have a pocket, and then fold it in half again so you can have two equal ones.

Try to get the edges to line up enough, pin it in place, then sew up the sides! Are your stitches crazy uneven and wonky looking? Doesn’t matter; nobody’s going to see it. These are in the inside of your pants. The only thing that matters is that it holds up. So I double-did the corners, since those tend to get the most stress.

Cut open the bottom of the existing pockets.

Pin it in place, then sew around, joining the new pocket to the old pocket. I did this by keeping my hand on the inside, so I wouldn’t accidentally sew through the other side. Again, I reinforced the corners, and didn’t worry about what it actually looks like. Then I turned it in side out to make sure the inside was all joined properly.

Yay all done! And the pockets are so much bigger now!

Whaaaat I can fit my entire phone and entire hand and probably something else now, are girls’ pockets even allowed to do that?! Heck yeah they are.

You are a goddamn hero.

In the game of weeknight cooking — which I feel, at best, is rigged and not in our favor especially if you (or you and your partner) are out working all day — our allies are as follows:

1. Children, should you have them, happy to eat dinner at 8/9 p.m. on a weekday. (Let me know where to find them.)
2. Prepping and planning meals over the weekend so everything is mostly ready to go when you get home from work. (Requires a desire to spend any part of the weekend prepping meals, which I, regrettably, do not.)
3. Mastering the slow-cooker, so your dinner is ready when you get home.
4. Mastering the pressure-cooker, so long cooking times can be reduced to smidgens.
5. Contentment with quick simple meals (scrambled egg toasts, frozen tortellini, sandwiches) and/or a deep arsenal of great recipes that come together quickly.
6. Meal delivery services, which take the recipe-selection, shopping and prep work out of cooking, making it go faster.

... Read the rest of sheet pan chicken tikka on smittenkitchen.com

---

© smitten kitchen 2006-2012. | permalink to sheet pan chicken tikka | 243 comments to date | see more: Cauliflower, Chicken, Gluten-Free, Indian, Photo, Potatoes, Weeknight Favorite

“Your recent memory probably unfolds like this: Reagan fucked everything up, shit continued poorly under Bush I, Clinton comes to town and things improve- the country is doing damn well, in many respects, Bush II comes and… yikes. Obama strides in, makes some notable improvements but R’s stymie him mostly.
 
All the while, your financial situation is more or less OK. Not good. But for most people, life continues OK. Things were good in the 90’s. The Clinton’s were good. Bush really fucked up (big time). And now things are a little better again.
 
I get why you think Clinton is a good candidate.
 
Here’s our experience:
 
We grow up. Bush is the first president we can remember. Everyone says he is awful. I don’t really know anything at my young age but this was more or less ingrained in me via my family and environs. My personal family experienced severe poverty before, during, and after Bush. In that regard we’re a little different than normal but from observing peers I know the general story. As stated above, things were tough under Bush particularly in ‘08, obviously. Things slightly improved for some since. But now we’re at the age that we’re on our own. We never lived through the relatively “good” years of Clinton. Instead, what we see with a Clinton president, is: The Crime Bill, NAFTA, WTO, DLC, no action on climate change, welfare reform, deregulation (especially of wall street), and general corporate-friendliness.  Those are not good things. We have no inclination towards the good ole days cause we didn’t experience them. Instead we’re living the repercussions of those good ole days: financial instability, climate chaos, oligarchy.
 
We live in a world in which the minimum wage is a starvation wage. A world in which student debt is fucking crippling. YOU DIDN’T HAVE DEBT LIKE WE DO, THIS IS FUCKING STUPID. ALL OF OUR LIVES, YOU- THE ADULTS OF THE WORLD- TOLD US TO GET AN EDUCATION AND NOW WHAT?  That education is CRIPPLING US. So many young people = fucked by student debt. Yeah, it’s a pretty big issue. We live in a world in which there are no jobs anyways so fuck it, we can’t even find work to pay our debt cause trade deals let corporations say “Peace out!” Most scaring, we live in a world in which the climate is on the brink of collapse. I will have to deal with your sins. THANKS.
 
Thankfully, in part because of our experience, many in “this generation” are inclined towards militant activism: Occupy, climate warriors, and BlackLivesMatter. All our lives we’ve been told how important it is for us to be involved. We’re getting involved. And what is the response from the “establishment?”
 
No.”

-

Please just listen. A view at 22.

I don’t want to quote the whole thing, but the whole thing is worth reading, and it may help Gen X and Boomers understand why liberal Millennials just aren’t that into Hillary Clinton.

NASA has trialled an engine that would take us to Mars in 10 weeks:

thinkingingallifreyan:

honeywaspkittenbaby:

mindblowingscience:

NASA scientists have reported that they’ve successfully tested an engine called the electromagnetic propulsion drive, or the EM Drive, in a vacuum that replicates space. The EM Drive experimental system could take humans to Mars in just 70 days without the need for rocket fuel, and it’s no exaggeration to say that this could change everything.

But before we get too excited (who are we kidding, we’re already freaking out), it’s important to note that these results haven’t been replicated or verified by peer review, so there’s a chance there’s been some kind of error. But so far, despite a thorough attempt to poke holes in the results, the engine seems to hold up.

Continue Reading.

Well, I for one am getting my hopes up.

Warp factor SCHWING.

rainnecassidy:

trythefish:

mcgarrygirl78:

fvckthisreality:

misandry-mermaid:

rainfelt:

the-fandom-feminist:

officialhuman:

can you imagine being this aggressively ugly

The Homosexuals™

Deadpool, to Thor: “I really find you very attractive did I say that out loud OH THANK GOD A DISTRACTION”

This is one of the tamer examples, and is not how you “compliment” guys unless you would like to be dating them.

Also the writers said “omnisexual” like four years ago, but this dude didn’t freak out then because he’s a fake geek boy.

Straight man: *sees a gay*
Straight man: What is this anti-heterosexual propaganda?!

Have these assholes ever even picked up a Deadpool comic?!

Apparently not.

Deadpool has always been canonically queer. Like… Fake ass comic nerd boys need to sit down. Cable and Wade were together.

fake geek boys

thechanelmuse:

Oh, you know there’s more.

All you really need to know about New York Senate Bill S6325A is that it would create a law named after a person (this one would be “Evan’s Law”), since any law named after a person is almost always a terrible idea. (See, e.g., “Caylee’s Law,” a terrible idea in 2011.) If the law were a good idea, they wouldn’t need to try to generate support by manipulating people’s emotions. I personally would vote against any bill named after a person without knowing anything else about it, a principle I am now calling “Kevin’s Law.”

No, Kevin’s Law doesn’t apply to Kevin’s Law, because Kevin’s Law isn’t a statute. Naming other kinds of laws after a person—”Godwin’s Law,” “Newton’s Law,” etc.—totally fine. Just not statutes. Says who? Says Kevin, whose law it is.

But even setting that aside, this New York bill is in fact a terrible idea. The stated purpose is to help deter “distracted driving,” meaning the use of a cell phone or similar devices while you’re behind the wheel. That’s a great purpose. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with achieving it by requiring drivers to surrender their cell phones and similar devices whenever they’ve been in any “accident or collision.”

Every person operating a motor vehicle which has been involved in an accident or collision involving damage to real or personal property, personal injury or death, and who has in his possession at or near the time of such accident or collision, a mobile telephone or personal electronic device, shall at the request of a police officer, surrender his or her mobile telephone and/or portable electronic device to the police officer solely for the purpose of field testing such mobile telephone and/or portable electronic device.

Well, that’s a search for Fourth Amendment purposes, so you need probable cause or a warrant or my consent, and I’m definitely not giving my—

Any person who operates a motor vehicle in this state shall be deemed to have given consent….

Oh.

Refuse to hand it over as you “consented” to do, and your license would be immediately suspended, pending a hearing at which it will most likely be revoked for at least a year.

So, what is this “field testing” to which you will have consented?

“Field testing” shall mean the use of an electronic scanning device … to determine whether or not the [driver] was using a mobile telephone or a portable electronic device [while driving, which is already illegal]. Provided, that such use of an electronic scanning device shall be limited to determining whether the [driver] was using a mobile telephone or portable electronic device … at or near the time of the accident or collision…. Furthermore, no such electronic scan shall include the content or origin of any communication or game conducted, or image or electronic data viewed, on a mobile telephone or portable electronic device.

That is, they would get into your phone only for the purpose of finding out whether you were using it at the time of the collision. They would not, of course, look at anything else while they were in there. They totally promise.

Does a device even exist that could be limited to scanning only for “usage”? Maybe. The bill says the state will develop one, but there are already devices that can suck out all of a phone’s data in minutes, so maybe they will just adapt one of those. And if there’s anything history has taught us, it’s that law enforcement and government can be trusted not to adapt a new technology for questionable uses despite promises to the contrary. Plus, they could never look at your private information anyway because it’s all encrypted, unless something crazy happens like a law making unbreakable encryption illegal. And that would be insane.

I would have those concerns even if the bill was clear and limited, but it isn’t. First, it applies not just to a driver suspected of causing injury or death but to all drivers in any “accident or collision involving damage … to property.” Somebody backed into your car at the gas station? Hand over your phone. Oh, you didn’t have it with you right then? Did you have it “near the time of such accident or collision”? Hand it over. And I’m not sure how they could determine whether you were using it at any particular time without learning about what you were using it for. For that matter, if the fact of “use” is really all they would learn, how would they know you were using it illegally? I “use” my phone all the time for voice navigation. Is that a problem now? What about hands-free calling?

Not only would this create lots of problems, it doesn’t even seem necessary. The press release that accompanied the bill on April 5 says that in Evan’s case, the police didn’t examine the other driver’s phone, but his family filed a civil lawsuit in which they “subpoenaed the phone records and discovered the driver had been texting while he was driving, leading up to the crash.” So the lesson seems to be that police should conduct better investigations, not that some new, elaborate, and heavy-handed procedure is necessary to get the information. We already have a procedure for that—it’s called getting a warrant. We should stick with that one.

The late summer and fall of 1888 was a rough time for women in the Whitechapel district in London. The ever evasive Jack the Ripper slowly but surely made his way into history and headlines, culminating in what is believed to be the last attack on Mary Kelly, who was discovered the morning of November 9, 1888.

Mark Hodgson has illustrated the room she rented with stunning detail of how it looked prior to the first week of November that year.

The alley way, building front, and room are full of detail of the cramped quarters where she lived. Her life, up until her tragic death, is illustrated in one tiny room. Her murderer was never found, and the legends surrounding Jack the Ripper endure to this day.

“The issue of comments on news sites is often conflated with conversations about free speech - about the ability of individuals to speak their minds without fear of government censorship. But, as we do with the stories we publish, the Guardian can and should make decisions about the tone of the conversations we want to see flourish here. Allowing freedom for some means effectively silencing others - and deciding to let everyone speak regardless of what they say is, in effect, a statement that abuse is acceptable. Moderation is not censorship, any more than editing is - it’s a careful process that aims to curate the best of the web and allow expert voices and thoughtful discussion to emerge.”

- The Guardian wants to engage with readers, but how we do it needs to evolve

Since we’ve been talking about the biological basis of intelligence lately, this is appropriate Frans de Waal writes about animal intelligence. His whole point is that this thing we call “intelligence” is multi-dimensional and complex, and that other animals share properties of the brain with us. There are lots of ways an organism can be smart!

But think about it: How likely is it that the immense richness of nature fits on a single dimension? Isn’t it more likely that each animal has its own cognition, adapted to its own senses and natural history? It makes no sense to compare our cognition with one that is distributed over eight independently moving arms, each with its own neural supply, or one that enables a flying organism to catch mobile prey by picking up the echoes of its own shrieks. Clark’s nutcrackers (members of the crow family) recall the location of thousands of seeds that they have hidden half a year before, while I can’t even remember where I parked my car a few hours ago. Anyone who knows animals can come up with a few more cognitive comparisons that are not in our favor. Instead of a ladder, we are facing an enormous plurality of cognitions with many peaks of specialization. Somewhat paradoxically, these peaks have been called “magic wells” because the more scientists learn about them, the deeper the mystery gets.

I also very much like this illustration of the scala naturae that shows all the ways intelligence doesn’t fit neatly onto a progressive ladder (the only good use of the ol’ scala anymore is in debunking it).

There isn’t even just one kind of human intelligence! Simon Singh quotes a book Joshua Foer on people with amazing memories, discussing savants. Savants exhibit extreme intellectual abilities, but they’re all different — and they demonstrate that even human intelligence isn’t unitary.

And yet, combing through the literature, one comes across a few rare cases here and there – perhaps less than a hundred in the last century – of savants with remarkable memories who appear to break the rules. What’s most striking about these individuals is that their exceptional memories – “memory without reckoning,” it’s been called – almost always coexist with profound disability. Some are musical prodigies, like Leslie Lemke, who is blind and brain damaged and couldn’t walk until he was fifteen, but can nevertheless play complicated musical pieces on the piano after hearing them just once. Some are artistic prodigies, like Alonzo Clemons, who has an IQ of 40 but can sculpt lifelike animals from memory after just a fleeting glimpse. Some have freakish mechanical skills, like James Henry Pullen, the nineteenth-century “Genius of Earlswood Asylum,” who was deaf and nearly mute, but built stunningly intricate model ships.

This illustrates one of the contradictions inherent in the idea that we can just make people super-smart. They imagine creating a race of neurotypical people who are just more extreme — who are better at engineering and science, for instance. But the whole thing about being neurotypical is that we’re in a state of a kind of balanced mediocrity…all the bits and pieces of our minds are working together in a low-stress fashion, and in a similar way to how most other people’s minds are working. You just can’t make mediocrity extreme.

There certainly are aspects of intelligence that are biological in basis. The blithe confidence that there’s just one kind of intelligence, the mythical g, flies against everything we know about the complexity of brains, human and animal. It’s the myth that allows them to think we can just make people smarter, like turning up a single dial on a big control board. But the truth is that there are hundreds of dials, all working in harmony (we wish), and that everyone is making a different melody. Crank one up, and you fracture the song. You might get something useful to society, but you won’t necessarily make someone who is happily productive.

This is the first time ever for such a response:

A new survey from the annual social-cultural study Norwegian Monitor (Norsk Monitor) shows an historic level of Norwegians who don’t believe in the existence of God, Vårt Land reported. 

To the question “Do you believe in God?”, 39 percent responded “no” while 37 percent said “yes”. Another 23 percent of respondents said they did not know. 

The survey, which was sent to 4,000 Norwegians by post, marks the first time that non-believers outnumber the religious. Two years ago, the number of believers and non-believers was equal. When the question was first asked in 1985, a full 50 percent said they believed in God while just 20 percent did not...

Jan-Paul Brekke of Ipsos Norway, who led the survey, said the question did not define who ‘God’ is. “It could be the Christian god, an independent god  or one from other faiths... “There are quite a few immigrants included [in the survey] but the majority of them come from Western religious traditions.

Not in this blog.  But apparently there are different styles, as reported in the Oxford Dictionaries blog:

The latest salvo in the capitalization wars came from the Associated Press Stylebook, which announced that as of June 1, the AP’s style will stipulate that internet and web (with reference to the World Wide Web) should be lowercased. The AP’s is not the first style guide to insist on downcasing internet; many other publications prefer the lowercase form as well. And yet, attentive readers may notice that the headword form in Oxford Dictionaries continues to harbor a capital I (at least for now).

The reason Oxford has retained the capital I is simple: evidence. Our research samples continue to show that the capitalized form of the word is slightly more common. Over the past few years, the proportion of evidence for the two forms in our monitor corpus has remained relatively steady from month to month, with capital-I Internet accounting for about 54% of all examples. Dictionaries are lagging indicators of language change, waiting for new usages to become settled before recording them, and this particular change is still underway...

Why did Internet come to be capitalized in the first place? In fact, the earliest use of the word, cited in the Oxford English Dictionary from 1974, was with a lowercase i. Initially, there were many internets—the word was used to refer to any computer network comprising or connecting a number of smaller networks; it later came to refer specifically to the global network we know today, which was distinguished as “the Internet” as opposed to “an internet”. It isn’t uncommon for words to take on a capitalized form in a particular meaning regarded as a proper noun (for instance, Americans style the foundational document of their federal government as “the Constitution”); however, in the case of “the Internet”, by the mid-1990s the original need for disambiguation was largely obsolete, and the capitalization convention began to strike some writers and editors as unnecessary, dated, and aesthetically unappealing.

We are now in the midst of stylistic change with respect to the capitalization of Internet, but the process is proceeding in patchwork fashion and is far from complete.

Two years ago, Dominique Barnes, the founder of a startup called New Wave Foods, was growing increasingly concerned about the environmental and human-rights costs of fresh seafood....They thought up an unusual way to do it: By making it out of plants and algae, in a lab....

Now, they say they are about eight months away from launching their first product, a popcorn “shrimp” that never touches an ocean... they are breaking down red algae, a food prawns eat to give them their pinkish color, and combining it with plant-based protein powder. The faux-shrimp, Barnes says, looks and tastes like the real thing, down to the elasticity and fishy tang....

Its first product will be a small shrimp that’s disguised in breading, but they ultimately hope to create a “naked” shrimp that can be used for shrimp cocktails and expand to other types of fish as well.

Further details at The Atlantic, where I found this statement that is so emblematic of the typical American diet:

Shrimp is now the most popular seafood Americans eat... “Americans love shrimp because of its low price and conduciveness to being heavily breaded and fried,” said Emily Balsamo, a research analyst...

Pizza Bird

My boyfriend recently took a flight on a plane with wifi, and while he was up there, wistfully asked if I could send him a pizza. I jokingly sent him a photo of a parrot holding a pizza slice in its beak. Obviously, my boyfriend had to go without pizza until he landed at JFK. But this raised the question: could a bird deliver a standard 20" New York-style cheese pizza in a box? And if so, what kind of bird would it take?

—Tina Nguyen

A bird could, possibly, deliver a pizza to a house. Delivering it to an airliner is a lot harder.

A 20-inch pizza weighs about 1.8 kg.[1]Citation: I just ordered a pizza to check. I usually steer clear of experimental science in these articles, but am willing to make an exception when it involves eating a bunch of pizza. That's about 100 times the weight of a sparrow, so we're definitely going to need a large bird. There are all sorts of birds bigger than our pizza, including eagles, swans, cranes, pelicans, and albatrosses. However, some of them would do better at pizza delivery than others. To see why, let's take a look at wing shapes.

Birds have different types of wings depending on what kind of flying they need to do. Of all the types of wings, the ones best suited for pizza delivery are probably the relatively short-and-broad kind found on many soaring hawks and eagles.[2]Long, thin wings, like those of a gull or albatross, are more aerodynamically efficient in many ways. However, these wings are harder to flap, which makes it difficult for these birds to accelerate quickly. Albatrosses require long "runways" to build up speed before they can lift off.​[3]Here's a live feed of some baby albatrosses nesting in Hawaii. These wings are good for taking off while carrying a heavy load, which is of course necessary for pizza delivery.

The largest birds of prey in North America[4]Not counting the California condor, which isn't very good at the kind of hard flapping required to lift heavy loads. And anyway, there are only a few hundred of them in the world—up from 22 in the early 1990's—so someone would definitely notice if you took some for pizza delivery. are the bald eagles[5]Here's a live feed of a bald eagle nest in the US National Arboretum. and golden eagles, which weigh about 4 or 5 kilograms when fully grown. The famous viral video of a golden eagle snatching a toddler is fake, but eagles have been seen to lift some awfully heavy things. Last year, photographer Alex Lamine saw a bald eagle in Georgia carrying a 12-pound (5.4 kg) tree branch, presumably to add to its gigantic nest. The eagle dropped the branch before making it back to the nest, but it definitely proved the bird was capable of flying—at least briefly—while carrying a load equal to its own body weight.

As a general rule, though, birds of prey won't try to pick up more than about half of their own weight. This means a half-kilogram peregrine falcon[6]Here's a live feed of a peregrine falcon nest box in Arizona. couldn't pick up our 2-kilogram pizza. A 5-kilogram eagle, on the other hand, probably could.

However, picking up a pizza is one thing, but what about delivering it to an airliner?

Soaring birds like vultures—and eagles—can ride thermals[7]Thermals, warm columns of rising air, are a phenomenon familiar to both glider pilots and fans of the Animorphs book series. to extreme heights. In tropical regions, where the sunlight-powered thermals are strongest, planes have encountered[8]😞 soaring Rüppell's vultures at altitudes of over 10 kilometers. That's high enough to reach a cruising airliner—but, unfortunately, this kind of soaring flight requires ideal flying conditions. "Having a pizza strapped to you" is definitely not that.

So a bird could potentially carry a pizza, but it couldn't fly up to an airliner with it. That's just as well, because there's one more major problem you'd face: Speed.

Whether or not a bird can fly as high as an airliner, it definitely can't fly as fast. Even if the person in the plane managed to get the emergency door open, they'd have to find a way to grab the pizza.

If you tip a pizza box too far, the cheese runs off one side. This critical angle varies from pizza to pizza and depends greatly on temperature, but let's suppose it's about 45°. That angle tells us that a pizza can handle a maximum sideways acceleration of about 1g.[9]Assuming you've managed to keep the pizza warm at those high altitudes—because what kind of a monster delivers a cold pizza? To accelerate up to an airliner cruising speed of 500 mph, we'll need the acceleration to happen over a distance of over a mile. In other words, we'd need a mile-long mechanism trailing behind the plane to gently reel in the pizza.

But wait—those calculations assume sideways acceleration. Pizzas—like humans—handle "face-first" acceleration best. If the pizza were rotated during the handoff, it could survive a much greater acceleration, allowing the grabbing mechanism to be smaller.

What kind of face-first acceleration can a pizza survive before it spreads out to fill the bottom of the box? I haven't found any data on that, but if anyone wants to try to sneak a pizza into a centrifuge, go for it. Be sure to take pictures!

All in all, if you're in a plane and feel the urge to order a pizza, it's probably easier to just wait until you land. Then, if you really want, you can try to get a bird to deliver it.

But don't be surprised if some slices go missing along the way.

It can take years to save up for a vacation abroad, or sometimes a vacation at home. Ulrik Hansen has taken the time for you and created a beautiful microscale rendition of Copenhagen, Denmark, for us all to enjoy. While it’s taken us a bit to find this to show you, it’s well worth your time to pore over the amazing detail packed into this city snapshot. The level of detail is just exquisite.

I invite you to explore his Flickr gallery to learn more about sites to see in Copenhagen, and there are plenty of detailed shots for you to enjoy.

(via hbW2Yq9h.jpg (JPEG Image, 907 × 692 pixels))

womaninpearls:

thepoorinspirit-extras:

womaninpearls:

As I get older I’m finding that a lot of the “intellectuals” I used to admire are actually just condescending and pretentious. And also realizing how much more important it is to be present, considerate, and empathetic because nobody really knows what they’re talking about and anyone who claims to know everything about anything is feeding you bs.

“When I was young, I admired clever people. Now that I am old, I admire kind people.”

- Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel

Yes. Much more succinct.

foodffs:

3-ingredient chocolate mousse

Really nice recipes. Every hour.

Show me what you cooked!

the-future-now:

Follow @the-future-now

I’ve never even considered owning a motorcycle, until now.

The highest resolution full-color photo of Pluto, so far. Click to embiggen this and just marvel at how beautiful this not-a-planet is.

buzzfeed:

c’mon now

(by @booksofadam)

nerdsandgamersftw:

Nerdy Van Gogh Inspired Prints

By Sagittarius Gallery | Available via Amazon

Banana peels were just the beginning you guys, because it turns out that you can eat avocado pits, and they are apparently very good for you.

Read more...

rhubarbes:

Personal work on Behance by Jan Urschel

If you’re the last one out, please turn off the lights.

Congrats to Dries from Norway on winning this month’s raffle prize – a signed J&M book of your choice.

If you want to join the raffley fun, and keep the blasphemy flowing, please consider becoming a Patron.

+

=

 

Thanks to Anony M. for the wrecks' files. (Eh? EH??)

*****

Thank you for using our Amazon links to shop! USA, UK, Canada.

In the stretch run My Wife Knows Everything battles The Wife Doesn't Know.

Although LEGO bricks and plates are regular symmetrical figures, rarely do we come across creations based on perfect geometry. Hanging Gardens by Letranger Absurde is a modest architectural masterpiece built around harmony and symmetry. Because of the fact that the model was photographed at 45 degrees angle and all the surfaces are carefully tiled, it looks totally like a level from the Monument Valley video game. Bonus points are for falling water: the building technique is brilliant, especially the use of Mixels tooth bricks as water foam.