psychotic-science
asapscience:

chroniclesofachemist:

cosmicocks:

seti-fan:

offendedfunyarinpa:

standbyfortitanfall:

losed:

A CROW TRIED TO GO IN OUR CLASSROOM AND HE HAD A PEN

You’ve all just like, completely skipped over the possibility that this crow has seen people using pens in this room, found one, and is trying to return it. There’s been videos of crows picking up sweet wrappers and stuff and placing them in bins after seeing humans put their litter in bins. I really do believe that this crow is trying to return the pen and that is ADORABLE AS HELL. 

Another cool crow deal: Once, when trying to assess if crows could reason and use tools, scientists had two crows who didn’t know each other each take a wire from a table (one was hooked, one was straight) and try to grab meat from a bottle with it. The crows could see each other, though they had separate bottles. Only the straight wire worked for this, so they hypothesized that if crows could reason, the second trial would have the two crows fighting over the straight wire. The second trial started and, to the surprise of the scientists, the two crows both went for the bent wire, one held it down and the other unbent it. They both got meat out of their bottles. They came to a peaceful solution without verbal communication. Crows are probably smarter than we are.

I love crows. Bird behavior in general interests me and corvids especially have shown really high levels of intelligence.

There’s a video on youtube somewhere where a thirsty little crow is at an amusement park, and he finds some humans with a water bottle. He starts pecking at the cap and at first the people didn’t catch on, but he kept persisting, trying to get at the cap.It took a little bit for the humans to get it but they unscrewed the cap for him, and filled it with water and he drank from it.The crow was so used to seeing people drinking out of these magical liquid containers and he knew exactly where it came out of and was able to communicate what exactly he wanted.

Planet of the Crows

Crows = the best birds. 

asapscience:

chroniclesofachemist:

cosmicocks:

seti-fan:

offendedfunyarinpa:

standbyfortitanfall:

losed:

A CROW TRIED TO GO IN OUR CLASSROOM AND HE HAD A PEN

You’ve all just like, completely skipped over the possibility that this crow has seen people using pens in this room, found one, and is trying to return it. There’s been videos of crows picking up sweet wrappers and stuff and placing them in bins after seeing humans put their litter in bins. I really do believe that this crow is trying to return the pen and that is ADORABLE AS HELL. 

Another cool crow deal: Once, when trying to assess if crows could reason and use tools, scientists had two crows who didn’t know each other each take a wire from a table (one was hooked, one was straight) and try to grab meat from a bottle with it. The crows could see each other, though they had separate bottles. Only the straight wire worked for this, so they hypothesized that if crows could reason, the second trial would have the two crows fighting over the straight wire. The second trial started and, to the surprise of the scientists, the two crows both went for the bent wire, one held it down and the other unbent it. They both got meat out of their bottles. They came to a peaceful solution without verbal communication. Crows are probably smarter than we are.

I love crows. Bird behavior in general interests me and corvids especially have shown really high levels of intelligence.

There’s a video on youtube somewhere where a thirsty little crow is at an amusement park, and he finds some humans with a water bottle. He starts pecking at the cap and at first the people didn’t catch on, but he kept persisting, trying to get at the cap.

It took a little bit for the humans to get it but they unscrewed the cap for him, and filled it with water and he drank from it.

The crow was so used to seeing people drinking out of these magical liquid containers and he knew exactly where it came out of and was able to communicate what exactly he wanted.

Planet of the Crows

Crows = the best birds. 

vampmissedith
brsis:

achievementhugger:

thebabbagepatch:

ilacktact:

mycosmicreality:

adeyami:

US students will be able to shield themselves during school shootings with the latest in body armour, the Bodyguard Blanket
http://goo.gl/WwvECT
Are fucking kidding me? I have been sitting at home and constantly watching the news after the events of yesterday. For those of you who are wondering, I am a junior at REYNOLDS HIGH SCHOOL! I was there when the shooter kept running in the halls trying to open the doors and get in. I was there in the dark praying and crying while my librarian kept saying ” they’ll have to kill me before they touch my kids” I have known her for three years, her determination to keep us safe broke her heart. Seeing this, that little children need protection in school. Are we sending kids to a battlefield? I have three little brothers ranging from 5-10, and still people have the nerve to speak about the second amendment? Really? I can’t even type anymore. I’m so disgusted and frustrated. When will you realize that it’s important to have gun control? When a shooter is pointing a gun at your child? Is that when you’ll realize that guns aren’t something to be kept around. People say it’s a free country but honesty, this country is more oppressed and diseased than any other country.

Show me ONE instance where gun control and gun free zones prevented school shootings.



Let me tell you guys a story. In 1996, in a little town in Australia called Port Arthur, a gunman killed 35 and injured 23. This place was a tourist attraction, with plenty of visitors and locals going about their business. 35 people died.That’s 35 marriages, anniversaries, birthdays or uni degrees. 35 people left Port Arthur in body bags.At the time, we had a pretty conservative government, and the Prime Minister at the time (in hindsight) was kind of a dick. But within two weeks of the shooting, Howard instituted a massive reform and buyback of all firearms. 
But it must be a statistical flaw, you say, there weren’t that many massacres before 1996, right? No, WRONG. In the eighteen years leading up to Port Arthur, there had been 13 mass shootings. 
But April, you ask, this couldn’t possibly have worked could it? Wouldn’t it only have reduced the mass shootings? WRONG.Since 1996, there have been ZERO mass shootings. That’s right, ZERO. FUCKING ZILCH. There have been scattered homicides, however:
How many schools have been raided and children murdered? NONE.How many film buffs have been murdered in their seats? NONE.How many innocent lives have been lost to the barrel of a gun? NONE.
On top of this, homicides involving the use of guns, and youth suicide involving the use of guns has declined dramatically, by up to 60%
Australia, however much the environment tries to kill you, is a safe haven, and you can walk the streets with 99% assurance that you won’t fall victim to a drive by shooting.
Your move, America.

in 1987 a lone gunman killed 16 people, wounded 15 and then committed suicide. within six months the uk government passed an amendment to the firearms act effectively outlawing all high calibre, high frequency, high capacity rifles and shotguns.
in 1996 another lone gunman killed 16 children and their teacher, and then committed suicide. again within six months the uk government outlawed all handguns. special dispensation had to be issued in order to hold shooting competition as part of the 2012 olympic games, and british hopefuls had to train overseas.
you can legally own certain types of shotgun, .22 calibre rifles over a certain barrel length, and antiques. that’s it.
in the nigh-on twenty years since the uk has had one mass shooting. one. and we’re down to about 30 gun-related deaths annually.
there is not one example of gun control laws reducing mass shootings and gun-related homicide. there are dozens. it literally works every time. the usa is the anomaly not because it didn’t work but because it hasn’t tried.

brsis:

achievementhugger:

thebabbagepatch:

ilacktact:

mycosmicreality:

adeyami:

US students will be able to shield themselves during school shootings with the latest in body armour, the Bodyguard Blanket

http://goo.gl/WwvECT

Are fucking kidding me? I have been sitting at home and constantly watching the news after the events of yesterday. For those of you who are wondering, I am a junior at REYNOLDS HIGH SCHOOL! I was there when the shooter kept running in the halls trying to open the doors and get in. I was there in the dark praying and crying while my librarian kept saying ” they’ll have to kill me before they touch my kids” I have known her for three years, her determination to keep us safe broke her heart. Seeing this, that little children need protection in school. Are we sending kids to a battlefield? I have three little brothers ranging from 5-10, and still people have the nerve to speak about the second amendment? Really? I can’t even type anymore. I’m so disgusted and frustrated. When will you realize that it’s important to have gun control? When a shooter is pointing a gun at your child? Is that when you’ll realize that guns aren’t something to be kept around. People say it’s a free country but honesty, this country is more oppressed and diseased than any other country.

Show me ONE instance where gun control and gun free zones prevented school shootings.

image

Let me tell you guys a story.
In 1996, in a little town in Australia called Port Arthur, a gunman killed 35 and injured 23. This place was a tourist attraction, with plenty of visitors and locals going about their business. 
35 people died.That’s 35 marriages, anniversaries, birthdays or uni degrees. 35 people left Port Arthur in body bags.
At the time, we had a pretty conservative government, and the Prime Minister at the time (in hindsight) was kind of a dick. But within two weeks of the shooting, Howard instituted a massive reform and buyback of all firearms. 

But it must be a statistical flaw, you say, there weren’t that many massacres before 1996, right? No, WRONG. 
In the eighteen years leading up to Port Arthur, there had been 13 mass shootings. 

But April, you ask, this couldn’t possibly have worked could it? Wouldn’t it only have reduced the mass shootings? WRONG.
Since 1996, there have been ZERO mass shootings. That’s right, ZERO. FUCKING ZILCH. There have been scattered homicides, however:

How many schools have been raided and children murdered? NONE.
How many film buffs have been murdered in their seats? NONE.
How many innocent lives have been lost to the barrel of a gun? NONE.

On top of this, homicides involving the use of guns, and youth suicide involving the use of guns has declined dramatically, by up to 60%

Australia, however much the environment tries to kill you, is a safe haven, and you can walk the streets with 99% assurance that you won’t fall victim to a drive by shooting.

Your move, America.

in 1987 a lone gunman killed 16 people, wounded 15 and then committed suicide. within six months the uk government passed an amendment to the firearms act effectively outlawing all high calibre, high frequency, high capacity rifles and shotguns.

in 1996 another lone gunman killed 16 children and their teacher, and then committed suicide. again within six months the uk government outlawed all handguns. special dispensation had to be issued in order to hold shooting competition as part of the 2012 olympic games, and british hopefuls had to train overseas.

you can legally own certain types of shotgun, .22 calibre rifles over a certain barrel length, and antiques. that’s it.

in the nigh-on twenty years since the uk has had one mass shooting. one. and we’re down to about 30 gun-related deaths annually.

there is not one example of gun control laws reducing mass shootings and gun-related homicide. there are dozens. it literally works every time. the usa is the anomaly not because it didn’t work but because it hasn’t tried.

stacyicurn

666grl:

psychoneurotical:

poorcelestialsoul:

itsallbeendonemorethenonce:

sweet-deer:

aunteeblazer:

groudon:

i like this but i don’t fully understand it…

whoa

you don’t understand how sad this is. each adult is a cross, and each child has been crucified by said cross. 

  • the priest (i assume he’s a priest, correct me if i’m wrong) killed the little boy in one way or another, probably rape, which is common among corrupted clergy men. 
  • the tourist comes to an overcrowded, poverty stricken country, taking up any and all resources that could have gone to the little native girl
  • the soldier comes to fight for his country, but ends up killing the innocent girl, probably in her village.
  • the little boy dies under the doctor’s knife
  • the man kills the little girl in a school shooting (represented with the uniform)
  • the “fat” kid is killed by obesity caused by a fast food epidemic in america, most commonly mcdonald’s, shown by ronald mcdonald himself. 

this is /haunting/ to look at. children can die at anyone’s hand. even the “heros”

Just to clarify that the little boy dying under the doctor’s knife is because the doctor is stealing his organs to sell in the black market, hence the cooler at their feet which alludes to keeping the organ alive and stable for selling. This is such a strong photo set, really induces a sense of disgust and sadness.

I cried a little

also, the little girl on the tourists back represents the huge child sex industry in south east Asia, popular among tourists

lizzywhimsy

lizzywhimsy:

megcubed:

I don’t even know where I’m going with this, but like, the fact that Charles Sumner had been demonized in the decades after his death, only to be forgotten to history, really says a lot about the supposed “lost cause” and everything surrounding the Civil War in general…

I’ve been…

proudly-pro-choice

Anonymous asked:

The anon reminded me of something. Do you think it was wrong (before the act prohibiting it was passed) that doctors used to be allowed to not treat fetuses that were born alive during an abortion attempt? Doctors still do it today if I'm going to be honest. I remember how two babies had been born at twenty for weeks. One from an abortion attempt and another had simply been born prematurely. The doctors didn't even try to help the one who'd been born from the failed abortion attempt. :(

proudly-pro-choice answered:

I’d like to know which doctors you’re referring to? I can’t really take “doctors still do it today if I’m going to be honest” as factual evidence. Maybe you’re referring to Kermit Gosnell? He is someone who pro-lifers would love to paint as the face of the pro-choice movement, which is further from the truth. Gosnell is what will happen if safe, legal abortions aren’t readily available. Other than that, I have no idea who you could be referring to.

Anyway, no I don’t feel as if it’s okay to not treat a born neonate after a failed abortion attempt. (Something that is incredibly rare anyway, by the way.) We don’t support infanticide here. That’s not what being pro-choice is about.

Is this really what people think the pro-choice movement is in support of? Really

- Emily.

proudly-pro-choice

Anonymous asked:

What is your take on the "Imagine you wake up and are attached to a famous violinist who will die if he is unplugged from you" scenario? (I'm guessing you've heard it before, as it is quite popular, but if not, I can definitely send you the whole thing!) I am just interested in what you think about that and would say to those who try to refute it. Thanks!!

proudly-pro-choice answered:

I’m going to answer this as simply as possible: no one is entitled to someone else’s body without constant consent. No one. That violinist would not be entitled to my body. I would not be obligated to keep them attached. If I didn’t want that, I would have the right to stop it. 

- Emily.