amazing science/nature images

Page: 1 ... 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 ... 79
Online now: DukeofNuke, Google [Bot], ukimalefu
Post Reply
obvs Social Distancing Grandmaster
Send private message
Saying "I'm sure he has the resources to help," doesn't matter.

You don't say "Hey, you're stick fiddled up," and expect people's next question to be "How can you help me?"

You say "It looks like you have a problem, and here's how we can help you get through this."

Regardless of whether you have the ability to help someone, condemning their situation without simultaneously presenting the resources needed to improve their situation is just being a dick.
obvs Social Distancing Grandmaster
Send private message
Oh, and fat acceptance is not remotely the same as pro-anorexia.

Fat acceptance is like the reaction of anyone who's being blamed for something.

Pro-anorexia is a reaction to society pushing for certain body standards, and people's belief that they can't meet other people's expectations without extreme measures.

Fat acceptance is a reaction to defend themselves from society's expectations.

Pro-anorexia is a reaction to try to meet society's expectations.
TOS
User avatar
the rate of anorexia among american women is somewhere around 1-4%

the rate of obesity among americans is around 40%
macnuke Afar
User avatar
TOS posted:
the rate of anorexia among american women is somewhere around 1-4%

the rate of obesity among americans is around 40%


and the amount of money made off that is stick fiddling obscene.
it pays to fatten your farm animals.
it's just with humans.. you rotate your crops.
obvs Social Distancing Grandmaster
Send private message
TOS posted:
the rate of anorexia among american women is somewhere around 1-4%

the rate of obesity among americans is around 40%
Anorexia is not the only eating disorder, and being fat and having an eating disorder are not mutually exclusive.

One thing that I've noticed is the wide availability of pre-prepared high-calorie packaged meals.

I am someone who likes to cook, but even I don't have the time to cook literally every night. I've noticed that it's becoming harder and harder to find low-calorie pre-prepared packaged meals(250-450 calories).

It's easy to blame, but all that these people are trying is yelling "You're fat!" at fat people, and expecting them to feel bad(and the fat people obviously do feel bad). The goal isn't to solve a problem. The goal is "I feel bad, and I feel entitled to try to make someone else feel bad," and they do so in a way that they can then reply "But they really do need to change their behavior, for their own health!" if anyone calls them on it. People who like to make other people feel like human waste are just wasteful people.

But if you go into a grocery store and all you see are pre-packaged 500-to-1000-calorie meals and junk foods as far as you can see, it's difficult to avoid becoming fat and it makes it difficult to get skinny if you already are fat.
sean Royal Wombat
User avatar
ukimalefu posted:
The back of a macaw

Image



Image
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
Image

transit of Venus

Don't know why the gif is oriented that way, I found like that. Still cool.
Séamas Honorary Consul General
User avatar
TOS posted:
Image



Um… neither of those hearts are healthy for as long as they are outside the body.

Just sayin'.

(I'm not a doctor but I am pretty sure I am right)
macnuke Afar
User avatar
ukimalefu posted:
Image

transit of Venus

Don't know why the gif is oriented that way, I found like that. Still cool.

orientated because of gravity. DUH :der:
TOS
User avatar
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
yeah, that happens a lot, I know because I'm using OS X snow leopard

sometimes it just scares itself and falls down
Snow Leopard? Isn't that supposed to be the good one?
dv
User avatar
Betonhaus posted:
Snow Leopard? Isn't that supposed to be the good one?


It was the first one that didn't truly suck and the last one that worked on first-gen Intel Macs, so it holds a place in some peoples' hearts.

But as long as you have the hardware to support it, every version since has been measurably better in some way.
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
Betonhaus posted:
Snow Leopard? Isn't that supposed to be the good one?


well... maybe it was... when it was new, on new hardware of the time, and when google chrome didn't exist
macnuke Afar
User avatar
ukimalefu posted:
Betonhaus posted:
Snow Leopard? Isn't that supposed to be the good one?


well... maybe it was... when it was new, on new hardware of the time, and when google chrome didn't exist

chrome runs like an impacted turd on two macs and three windows units i have.
I cannot bring myself to "enjoy the moment" no matter what i do to try and help chrome.
When I saw that leaping snow leopard clip, I was reminded of this.
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
macnuke posted:
ukimalefu posted:
Betonhaus posted:
Snow Leopard? Isn't that supposed to be the good one?


well... maybe it was... when it was new, on new hardware of the time, and when google chrome didn't exist

chrome runs like an impacted turd on two macs and three windows units i have.
I cannot bring myself to "enjoy the moment" no matter what i do to try and help chrome.


I suppose it could be better with a new computer with a fast SSD and LOTS of ram. But maybe I'm wrong.

I do know that restarting it and deleting the cache every now and then helps, a bit, for a short time.

Having lots of extension does NOT help. But that's my fault. Sadly, the good thing about chrome, and computers in general I suppose, is that the ability to customize it to do what I want, the way I want it, makes it slow and unstable.

And other browsers aren't much different
Metacell Chocolate Brahma
User avatar
dv posted:
Betonhaus posted:
Snow Leopard? Isn't that supposed to be the good one?


It was the first one that didn't truly suck and the last one that worked on first-gen Intel Macs, so it holds a place in some peoples' hearts.

But as long as you have the hardware to support it, every version since has been measurably better in some way.

Snow Leopard was the last iteration that just tried to make everything work better without enticing us with a bunch of marginally headache inducing new features and technologies.
dv
User avatar
Metacell posted:
dv posted:
Betonhaus posted:
Snow Leopard? Isn't that supposed to be the good one?


It was the first one that didn't truly suck and the last one that worked on first-gen Intel Macs, so it holds a place in some peoples' hearts.

But as long as you have the hardware to support it, every version since has been measurably better in some way.

Snow Leopard was the last iteration that just tried to make everything work better without enticing us with a bunch of marginally headache inducing new features and technologies.

Some of us like the new tech.
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
sean Royal Wombat
User avatar
ukimalefu posted:
[Pluto is most definitely a planet -- and should never have been downgraded, say some scientists.


I'm to the point where I don't give a human waste one way or the other. Just make a decision and stick with it.
TOS
User avatar
it was a stupid decision made by people desperate to be significant
My question is, how do they decide that Pluto is the planet and Charon is the moon and not vice versa considering their binary orbit?
jkahless Custom Title
User avatar
obvs posted:
Oh, and fat acceptance is not remotely the same as pro-anorexia.

Fat acceptance is like the reaction of anyone who's being blamed for something.

Pro-anorexia is a reaction to society pushing for certain body standards, and people's belief that they can't meet other people's expectations without extreme measures.

Fat acceptance is a reaction to defend themselves from society's expectations.

Pro-anorexia is a reaction to try to meet society's expectations.


The reasons are immaterial, they're both movements promoting deeply unhealthy lifestyles. Fat acceptance doesn't need to lie about the medical implications of obesity in order to be a positive social force, That it does precludes that possibility. Believe me, as someone who's done a lot of damage to their body, denial is easy to cultivate and reinforce when you surround yourself with enablers.
Betonhaus posted:
My question is, how do they decide that Pluto is the planet and Charon is the moon and not vice versa considering their binary orbit?

The basic answer is easy: Pluto is by far the more massive of the two bodies, being 0.22% the mass of the Earth vs. the 0.027% for Charon (or 12.2% of the mass of Pluto). Sure, that ratio between mass of Pluto to that Charon is about 8:1 and so is much closer to being equivalent than the 81:1 mass ratio between those of the Earth and of our own Moon, but there is no question which body is the more massive in each of these pairs.

On the other hand: what is your definition for a "binary orbit"? That is not a term with a formal definition at the International Astronomical Union (IAU).

There are arguments to be made for various definitions for a double planet (also not formally defined by the IAU) but most of these have problems and the Pluto-Charon system fits none of them except for the barycenter (the mutual center of gravity between two bodies) definition. It is true that the barycenter for Pluto-Charon is "above" the surface of Pluto and thus it has been argued that this makes them a double planet, but note that in a few hundred million years that because the Moon is gradually moving away from the Earth then the barycenter for the Earth-Moon system will also be above the Earth's surface, so THEN it would classified as a double planet? Likewise it could be similarly argued that if we go back in time a few (tens of?) million years then the barycenter for Pluto-Charon would also be be within the surface of Pluto, so back then it would not be a double planet?

BTW: some folks have gone to the trouble to determining the Roche limit for Pluto-Charon (the Roche limit being the estimate of how close a body must get before internal orbital stresses could overcome that body's gravity). If I am reading their last table correctly, then Charon would have to be 12.5 times closer to Pluto than it is now to be at its Roche limit or about 1400 km. While technically still being outside of Pluto's surface (radius: 1188 km), since Charon's radius is 606 km then these bodies would be more than overlapping each other before Charon could get close enough to be torn apart by its Roche limit with Pluto. In any case: in the past Charon could have been close enough to Pluto so that their barycenter was within Pluto's surface.
obvs Social Distancing Grandmaster
Send private message
jkahless posted:
obvs posted:
Oh, and fat acceptance is not remotely the same as pro-anorexia.

Fat acceptance is like the reaction of anyone who's being blamed for something.

Pro-anorexia is a reaction to society pushing for certain body standards, and people's belief that they can't meet other people's expectations without extreme measures.

Fat acceptance is a reaction to defend themselves from society's expectations.

Pro-anorexia is a reaction to try to meet society's expectations.


The reasons are immaterial, they're both movements promoting deeply unhealthy lifestyles. Fat acceptance doesn't need to lie about the medical implications of obesity in order to be a positive social force, That it does precludes that possibility. Believe me, as someone who's done a lot of damage to their body, denial is easy to cultivate and reinforce when you surround yourself with enablers.
The reasons are most definitely not immaterial.

As someone who actually has an eating disorder and isn't just trying to compare it to recklessly damaging one's body, your claims that fat acceptance is like an eating disorder are just. Freaking. Wrong.

Pro-anorexia is actively encouraging people to *meet* what they perceive as others' beauty standards. It is a psychological compulsion to follow given behaviors. It is based upon the idea that you will be rejected by others if you eat, because doing so will make you fat and therefore not meet society's beauty standards, and therefore you will be socially disregarded and attacked. It's like if people who had any other psychiatric disorder had cheerleaders actively encouraging them. It's not about the behavior. The behavior is only a symptom, not the cause. Getting people to eat doesn't solve the problem.

Fat acceptance is actively encouraging people to *disregard* society's beauty standards. The idea that one would have a cheerleader for this wouldn't make sense, because the idea is that other people who would bother you for your weight aren't relevant.

Fat acceptance is not about encouraging a person to gorge themselves eating. It's about not encouraging people to feel entitled to attack fat people.

The people who argue against fat acceptance are the personification of anorexic people's fears. "If I get fat, people will hate and attack me." Claiming that they are the same when they are so clearly opposite is really dangerous, and it's done because people want to feel entitled to comment on others' weights in ways that people should not feel entitled to comment on others' lives.
TOS
User avatar
TOS
User avatar
juice Inadvertently correct
User avatar
WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?!?!?
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
"This South African cave stone may bear the world’s oldest drawing":

Image


Dated to 73,000 years ago based upon the sediment surrounding the stone.

No particular meaning taken from it. Some are claiming that the incompleteness of the lines indicate that this stone was likely only a small fragment of a larger drawing, while others think that the seemingly random marking might indicate that this was used as a test surface for the ocher "paint" to be applied for other less-durable purposes (like body-painting or tattooing?).
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
How Much Hotter Is Your Hometown Than When You Were Born?

Quote:
As the world warms because of human-induced climate change, most of us can expect to see more days when temperatures hit 32 degrees Celsius (90 degrees Fahrenheit) or higher. See how your hometown has changed so far and how much hotter it may get.

ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
dv
User avatar
ukimalefu posted:
How Much Hotter Is Your Hometown Than When You Were Born?

Quote:
As the world warms because of human-induced climate change, most of us can expect to see more days when temperatures hit 32 degrees Celsius (90 degrees Fahrenheit) or higher. See how your hometown has changed so far and how much hotter it may get.



According to their data and metric, it's not. :awe:
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
Finding out where Apollo 11 moon samples ended up:

Image


All 50 states got tiny samples encased in a ball of acrylic and mounted on a board with a state flag like the above, but about 40 of them were missing AND with no formal listing in that state's records until this investigator started looking. He's found all but two (for NY and DE, the latter was stolen from a museum in 1977 and never recovered). One of them (presumably Alaska's) was reportedly in the possession of a former crab boat captain who appeared on "Deadliest Catch".

There were similar samples sent to 135 countries with about 70% now missing.

There was a similar set of samples from Apollo 17--the <sigh> LAST manned lunar mission--and most of THEM are missing as well.

The investigator was spurred to this effort in preparation for the 50th anniversary of the first moon landing next July.
maurvir Steamed meat popsicle
User avatar
dv
User avatar
Subsequent topic  /  Preceding topic
Post Reply

amazing science/nature images

Page: 1 ... 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 ... 79