Sic Transit Gloria

purgatorystuck: Mi papá tiene 47 años= my dad is 47 years old Mi papa tiene 47 anos= my potato has...

Fri, 24 May 2013 11:51:59 -0400

purgatorystuck:

Mi papá tiene 47 años= my dad is 47 years old

Mi papa tiene 47 anos= my potato has 47 assholes

I love spanish

raaynee: breakcorechoirboy: I am borderline crying at how...

Fri, 24 May 2013 11:51:38 -0400

raaynee:

breakcorechoirboy:

I am borderline crying at how sassy this person is

ROLL BACK THE ATTITUDE

"We’re told that God is loving, and kind, and just, and intrinsically good. But, when someone like..."

Thu, 23 May 2013 16:01:28 -0400

“We’re told that God is loving, and kind, and just, and intrinsically good. But, when someone like myself points out the rather obvious, compelling evidence that God is cruel and unjust because he visits suffering on innocent people on a scope and scale that would embarrass the most ambitious psychopath, we’re told that God is mysterious … This is how you play tennis without the net.”

- Sam Harris (video)

christinsanity: Arkansas - where the federal constitution is...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:58:37 -0400

christinsanity:

Arkansas - where the federal constitution is sacred….

"But the 8-hour workday is too profitable for big business, not because of the amount of work people..."

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:56:55 -0400

“

But the 8-hour workday is too profitable for big business, not because of the amount of work people get done in eight hours (the average office worker gets less than three hours of actual work done in 8 hours) but because it makes for such a purchase-happy public. Keeping free time scarce means people pay a lot more for convenience, gratification, and any other relief they can buy. It keeps them watching television, and its commercials. It keeps them unambitious outside of work.

We’ve been led into a culture that has been engineered to leave us tired, hungry for indulgence, willing to pay a lot for convenience and entertainment, and most importantly, vaguely dissatisfied with our lives so that we continue wanting things we don’t have. We buy so much because it always seems like something is still missing.

”

- Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (via beccap)

YESSS i knew i wasnt the only person out there who was making an issue out of this

My dad just explained this to me a month ago. True as fuck.

(via baronessvonbullshit)

Preacher's Kid: Things I wish I had known in high school

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:55:37 -0400

Preacher's Kid: Things I wish I had known in high school:

teachthemhowtothink:

1) Virginity is a social construct. It’s not something you can “lose” or “give.” Sex is something you do. It’s an experience. An action. Like brushing your teeth. You don’t lose your tooth virginity the first time you brush your teeth. You don’t lose your hand virginity…

apreacherskid: skepticalavenger: A good response to another...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:49:27 -0400

apreacherskid:

skepticalavenger:

A good response to another stupid Facebook thing.

Xenophobic pieces of shit. Funny since he’s a legal immigrant and basically grew up here. Is legal immigration a problem now? Newsflash: American culture creates psychopaths. Own that shit.
A+ for trying to blame undocumented immigrants when they have absolutely nothing to do with the bombings, and everything to do with the food that’s on your fucking table.

choosechoice: queerassfemme: made re-bloggable for traduire!...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:48:05 -0400

choosechoice:

queerassfemme:

made re-bloggable for traduire! <3

So true. So fucking true.

Black guy kills some people.

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:46:38 -0400

Black guy kills some people.
News: Criminal.
Muslim guy kills some people.
News: Terrorist.
Latino guy kills some people.
News: Criminal.
White guy kills some people.
News: Mental illness. (lost soul, complicated psyche, quiet loner, misunderstood, frustrated with life, experienced recent, traumatic, life-altering events that set him off; not to mention all the positive descriptors that are attached to him, i.e. intelligent, PhD candidate, honor roll student, etc.)

How the Logic of "Friendzoning" Would Work If Applied in Other Instances:

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:42:27 -0400

*Man walks into a store and finds employee*
Man: Alright, I've had enough. Why haven't you guys hired me?!
Employee: Uh...well sir, when did you put in your application?
Man: I never filled out an application.
Employee: Well sir, we can't consider you for employment if you've never filled out an application.
Man: No, that's bullshit, because I've been coming here for years now, and every single time I tell you all how much I love this store and how much I appreciate your customer service, unlike some of your other customers might I add!
Employee: Well, but that doesn't-
Man: AND I even told you that I didn't have a job!
Employee: But sir, that doesn't indicate to us that you would like a job at our store. And again, if you've never filled out an application, we can't consider you. Besides, we're not hiring.
Man: OH! Not hiring, HA! What a laugh. I see your store go through seasonal workers all the time. They come and go like nothing, but you won't consider me as a part-time employee even though I KNOW you've been looking for workers to fill positions? That's insane!
Employee: Sir, we've been looking to hire a few people for management positions. Do you have any management experience?
Man: Well no, but what does that matter?
Employee: ...Well sir, that's what we're looking for. You won't be suitable for the position without management experience.
Man: Oh that's such a load of crap. You know, you'll be waiting around a long time for a manager if you don't lower your standards a little. Who cares if someone knows how to manage a store? I LOVE this store and I'm willing to work here, that's all that should matter to you.
Employee: That...doesn't make any sense.
Man: NO! I'm done. This is over. From now on, no more Mr. Nice Guy.
Employee:
Man:
Employee:
Man: Fuck you, slut.

"Don’t you believe in flying saucers, they ask me? Don’t you believe in telepathy? — in ancient..."

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:39:39 -0400

“Don’t you believe in flying saucers, they ask me? Don’t you believe in telepathy? — in ancient astronauts? — in the Bermuda triangle? — in life after death?
No, I reply. No, no, no, no, and again no.
One person recently, goaded into desperation by the litany of unrelieved negation, burst out “Don’t you believe in anything?”
“Yes”, I said. “I believe in evidence. I believe in observation, measurement, and reasoning, confirmed by independent observers. I’ll believe anything, no matter how wild and ridiculous, if there is evidence for it. The wilder and more ridiculous something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be.””

- Isaac Asimov (1997) The Roving Mind. Prometheus Books. p.349

I feel the same way.

(via hitchhikingthegalaxy)

Photo

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:36:28 -0400

friendlyatheist: wwiao: throwin crazy amount of shade Why...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:31:29 -0400

friendlyatheist:

wwiao:

throwin crazy amount of shade

Why would she have any shame? She is a”psychic”. She knows she is a fraud, just like the idea of psychics being real in the first place….

proud-atheist: Oh the ironyhttp://proud-atheist.tumblr.com

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:29:21 -0400

proud-atheist:

Oh the irony
http://proud-atheist.tumblr.com

astrodidact: How many climate scientists agree that humans are...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:27:41 -0400

astrodidact:

How many climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warming? If you asked the average person on the street, the response might surprise you. On average, the general public think less than half of climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warming. The reality is 97%. There is a huge gap between public perception of the scientific consensus on human-caused global warming and reality.

The consensus gap has real-world consequences. When people correctly understand that climate scientists agree on human-caused global warming, they are more likely to support policy to mitigate global warming. The consensus gap is directly linked to a lack of public support for climate action. This underscores the importance of clearly communicating the consensus and closing the consensus gap.

For over 20 years, opponents of climate action have understood this and attacked the consensus. In 1991, Western Fuels Association conducted a $510,000 campaign to “reposition global warming as theory (not fact)”. To achieve this, they used a few dissenting scientists as spokesmen in order to construct the perception of ongoing scientific debate. More recently, an analysis of opinion editorials about climate change from 2006 to 2010 by conservative columnists observed that the most common climate myth was “there is no consensus.”

A concise summary of the strategy against the consensus is articulated in the infamous 2002 memo to Republicans by political strategist Frank Luntz:

“Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming in the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate…”

While fossil fuel companies and conservative columnists argue against consensus, what is the reality? The scientific consensus manifests in a multitude of ways, just as there are many lines of evidence for human-caused global warming.

Two recent studies have sought to measure the level of agreement in the scientific community in different ways and arrived at strikingly consistent results. A 2009 study led by Peter Doran surveyed over 3,000 Earth scientists and found that as the scientists’ expertise in climate change grew, so did the level of agreement about human-caused global warming. For the most qualified experts, climate scientists actively publishing peer-reviewed research, there was 97% agreement.

Alternatively, a 2010 analysis led by William Anderegg compiled a database of scientists from public declarations on climate change, both supporting and rejecting the consensus. Among scientists who had published peer-reviewed climate research, there was 97% agreement.

The consensus on climate change is reflected in the published statements of prestigious scientific organizations throughout the world. Academies of Science from many countries endorse the consensus view, as do many prestigious scientific organizations such as NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Royal Society of the UK.

However, it is worth pointing out that science is not decided by majority vote. This is articulated concisely by John Reisman who says: “Science is not a democracy. It is a dictatorship. It is evidence that does the dictating.”

Scientists must back up their opinions with evidence-based analysis that survives the scrutiny of experts in the field. This means the peer-reviewed literature is a robust indicator of the state of the scientific consensus. Naomi Oreskes conducted the seminal study of peer-reviewed climate research in 2004, surveying the abstracts of papers from 1993 to 2003 matching the search “global climate change”. Oreskes found that out of the 928 papers, none rejected the consensus position that humans have caused most of global warming over the last 50 years.

The scientific consensus is robust, manifesting in the peer-reviewed literature, scientific organisations and surveys of climate scientists. Unfortunately (although luck had nothing to do with it), there is a huge gap between perception and reality. This consensus gap is part of the reason why there is a lack of public support for climate action.

This means closing the consensus gap is one of the low-lying fruit of climate communication. This doesn’t require explaining the intricacies of radiative physics—we just need to clearly communicate that climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warming. How do we achieve this? Ironically, I’ll leave you with another quote from Frank Luntz:

“There’s a simple rule: You say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and then again and again and again and again, and about the time that you’re absolutely sick of saying it is about the time that your target audience has heard it for the first time.”

http://www.wunderground.com/earth-day/2013/closing-the-climate-change-consensus-gap

teachthemhowtothink: I chose A! Yay me? Also, adding Leviticus...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:27:35 -0400

teachthemhowtothink:

I chose A! Yay me?

Also, adding Leviticus 14 to my list of favorite Bible passages - especially the part about using the blood of birds, cedar wood and scarlet string to purify a house after a mold situation. Helpful stuff.

burn-thenightaway: pondermoofin: watchtheskytonight: purplesma...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:25:44 -0400

burn-thenightaway:

pondermoofin:

watchtheskytonight:

purplesmauge:

crowleysdelicateass:

popsible:

I love this new trend of actresses calling reporters out on their bullshit.

Can I just, Renner’s face is the second and third frames. He’s so disappointe in the male race at that moment. And so proud of Scarlett.

Scarlett Johansen, you are badass.

Bless her.

Four for you, Scarlett! You go, Scarlett!

Forever reblog this damn woman.

misandry-mermaid: rosalarian: Angelina Jolie had a double...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:25:05 -0400

misandry-mermaid:

rosalarian:

Angelina Jolie had a double mastectomy, in case you hadn’t heard. How dare she remove those ticking time bombs from her chest, amiright? Like, hasn’t she learned by now that her body is public domain and we all get to vote on what she does with it? Sheesh, how selfish can ya get.

Vigorously applauding

rationalatheism: Both morality and depravity are human traits...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:22:54 -0400

rationalatheism:

Both morality and depravity are human traits that far preceded Christianity. It is with the prompt of religious doctrine, however, that moral people can feel justified in committing depraved actions. Morality existed far before religion and, I dare say, will exist far after religion is gone.

-Rationalatheism

thenewenlightenmentage: 6 Women Scientists Who Were Snubbed Due...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:21:27 -0400

thenewenlightenmentage:

6 Women Scientists Who Were Snubbed Due to Sexism

Despite enormous progress in recent decades, women still have to deal with biases against them in the sciences.

In April, National Geographic News published a story about the letter in which scientist Francis Crick described DNA to his 12-year-old son. In 1962, Crick was awarded a Nobel Prize for discovering the structure of DNA, along with fellow scientists James Watson and Maurice Wilkins.

Several people posted comments about our story that noted one name was missing from the Nobel roster: Rosalind Franklin, a British biophysicist who also studied DNA. Her data were critical to Crick and Watson’s work, but as several commenters noted, Franklin was robbed of recognition. (See her section below for details.)

Continue Reading