leupagus:

sashayed:

silvermoon424:

poppypicklesticks:

billybatsonandjameshowlettsbro:

cosmicallycosmopolitan:

billybatsonandjameshowlettsbro:

james-winston:

The Titanoboa, is a 48ft long snake dating from around 60-58million years ago. It had a rib cage 2ft wide, allowing it to eat whole crocodiles, and surrounding the ribcage were muscles so powerful that it could crush a rhinoTitanoboa was so big it couldn’t even spend long amounts of time on land, because the force of gravity acting on it would cause it to suffocate under its own weight.

I’m so glad they aren’t around

omg me too. I’m scared enough of 26 ft long anacondas. I’m so happy Megalodons, those giant sharks, aren’t alive either

Praise natural selection

I remember watching Walking with Beasts or something similar, or some British tv show about evolution

The subject was something like a 12 foot long water scorpion

I was so startled by its sudden appearance and narration that I yelped: “12 fucking feet?!?!  I’m fucking glad it’s extinct!” 

Dude, prehistory was home to some fucking TERRIFYING creatures. For some reason, everything back then was enormous and scary. Extinction doesn’t always have to be a bad thing!

And Poppy, what you saw was an arthropod known as Pterygotus (it was actually featured in Walking With Monsters). Not only was it as big (or maybe even bigger) than your average human, it had a stinger the size of a lightbulb. REALLY glad that bugger isn’t around anymore.

Also, Megalodon deserves to be mention again, because just hearing its name makes me want to never be submerged in water ever again.

GOD, I HATE THIS POST. HOW DO WE EVEN KNOW THAT SHIT ISN’T STILL AROUND? LURKING? EVOLVING? WE DON’T. WE DON’T KNOW SHIT ABOUT SHIT DOWN THERE. THE OCEAN IS A PRIMEVAL HELLSCAPE NIGHTMARE AND WE ALL GO ON VACATION AND DIP OUR STUPID FRAGILE UNPROTECTED FETUS BODIES AROUND THE EDGES OF IT ON PURPOSE, LIKE THAT’S NORMAL. FUCK THE OCEAN.

FUCKING WORD

asylum-art:

Calligraphy by Tolga Girgin

xysciences:

A purple snail that can be found in Australia. 
[Click for more interesting science facts and gifs]

xysciences:

A purple snail that can be found in Australia. 

[Click for more interesting science facts and gifs]

explore-blog:

Ann Friedman's Disapproval Matrix for handling criticism is a thing of genius, not to mention essential internet-age literacy. She explains:

Critics: These are smart people who know something about your field. They are taking a hard look at your work and are not loving it. You’ll probably want to listen to what they have to say, and make some adjustments to your work based on their thoughtful comments.
Lovers: These people are invested in you and are also giving you negative but rational feedback because they want you to improve. Listen to them, too.
Frenemies: Ooooh, this quadrant is tricky. These people really know how to hurt you, because they know you personally or know your work pretty well. But at the end of the day, their criticism is not actually about your work—it’s about you personally. And they aren’t actually interested in a productive conversation that will result in you becoming better at what you do. They just wanna undermine you. Dishonorable mention goes to The Hater Within, aka the irrational voice inside you that says you suck, which usually falls into this quadrant. Tell all of these fools to sit down and shut up.
Haters: This is your garden-variety, often anonymous troll who wants to tear down everything about you for no rational reason. Folks in this quadrant are easy to write off because they’re counterproductive and you don’t even know them. Ignore! Engaging won’t make you any better at what you do. And then rest easy, because having haters is proof your work is finding a wide audience and is sparking conversation. Own it.
The general rule of thumb? When you receive negative feedback that falls into one of the top two quadrants—from experts or people who care about you who are engaging with and rationally critiquing your work—you should probably take their comments to heart. When you receive negative feedback that falls into the bottom two quadrants, you should just let it roll off your back and just keep doin’ you.

Complement with Benjamin Franklin’s trick for neutralizing critics, Daniel Dennett on how to criticize with kindness, and Anne Lamott’s definitive manifesto for handling haters.

explore-blog:

Ann Friedman's Disapproval Matrix for handling criticism is a thing of genius, not to mention essential internet-age literacy. She explains:

Critics: These are smart people who know something about your field. They are taking a hard look at your work and are not loving it. You’ll probably want to listen to what they have to say, and make some adjustments to your work based on their thoughtful comments.

Lovers: These people are invested in you and are also giving you negative but rational feedback because they want you to improve. Listen to them, too.

Frenemies: Ooooh, this quadrant is tricky. These people really know how to hurt you, because they know you personally or know your work pretty well. But at the end of the day, their criticism is not actually about your work—it’s about you personally. And they aren’t actually interested in a productive conversation that will result in you becoming better at what you do. They just wanna undermine you. Dishonorable mention goes to The Hater Within, aka the irrational voice inside you that says you suck, which usually falls into this quadrant. Tell all of these fools to sit down and shut up.

Haters: This is your garden-variety, often anonymous troll who wants to tear down everything about you for no rational reason. Folks in this quadrant are easy to write off because they’re counterproductive and you don’t even know them. Ignore! Engaging won’t make you any better at what you do. And then rest easy, because having haters is proof your work is finding a wide audience and is sparking conversation. Own it.

The general rule of thumb? When you receive negative feedback that falls into one of the top two quadrants—from experts or people who care about you who are engaging with and rationally critiquing your work—you should probably take their comments to heart. When you receive negative feedback that falls into the bottom two quadrants, you should just let it roll off your back and just keep doin’ you.

Complement with Benjamin Franklin’s trick for neutralizing critics, Daniel Dennett on how to criticize with kindness, and Anne Lamott’s definitive manifesto for handling haters.

hedgehog-goulash7:

Best ending ever.  The “freeing of Tony Stark” as all the suits explode is emotionally resonant and just wonderful.  To all the people who are complaining that “he blew up all his suits” — you are totally missing the entire point of the movie. 

Tony can always build more suits. His problem was that, traumatized and emotionally scarred (and Tony, despite all his surface ego and bravado, has always been emotionally needy and unsure of himself — factors that Downey’s performance has always showcased…), Tony was hiding behind the suits, making suit after suit, more comfortable as a tinker/mechanic than as a superhero or a true loving partner to Pepper.  The Clean Slate Protocol — which, touchingly, he had obviously built in to potentially use someday — is a gesture of great personal courage.  He has learned, through that vast swathe of “Iron Man 3” storyline where he’s deprived of his suits, or his suits don’t come through for him, that HE is Iron Man.  “You Know Who I Am” — his “egotistical” nametag in Bern — becomes an ironic metaphor for the entire movie, which is ABOUT “who is Iron Man — does the suit really make the man?” 

And the answer is no.  Tony, himself, without the suits, IS Iron Man.  It’s his bravery, his willingness to lean from his mistakes, his brains, his creativity, his adaptability and his humanity that are Iron Man/Tony Stark, for they are one and the same.  The suits without the man in them are JUST suits — they are expendable, they can be built again, they can be blown up at will.  And the arc reactor is not Iron Man, either, by the way - it, too, is expendable, and by ridding himself of it he rids himself of another crutch.

This is why I loved “Iron Man 3” and thought it was the best of the three Iron Man movies, or at least equal to “Iron Man” the first.  It really tells the story of a hero who grows and learns something important about himself through the course of the movie.  It proves again that Tony Stark/Iron Man is the most human of superheroes, which is, of course, why so many of us love him. 

And if there ever were Oscars that fairly considered superhero movies and other genre fare, RDJ’s amazing, complex, touching and human portrayal of Tony Stark would have won something by now — it’s twice the performance of many actors who actually have won the award.  Just sayin’.

(Source: kpfun)

banilly:

stlgeekgirl:

tastefullyoffensive:

[theodd1sout]

Rebloging for the last 2 panels

Perfect.

moshita:

Those beautiful skulls are hand carved and painted with oil on raw, gold-lip and black-lip Philippine mother-of-pearl

Gregory Raymond Halili

first-kiss-since-45:

nataliehickey94:

I bet this is what Coulson has in his bathroom

I bet that’s what I’m going to now purchase for my bathroom

first-kiss-since-45:

nataliehickey94:

I bet this is what Coulson has in his bathroom

I bet that’s what I’m going to now purchase for my bathroom

scootinfrooty:

gtaichou:

!!!!!

This is the Borneo Bay Cat, one of the rarest wild cat breeds in the world.  Endangered, forest-dwelling, and about the size of a house cat, it’s population is facing a projected decline of more than 20% by 2020 due to habitat loss.

I never thought I’d see photos of them on my dash!

reblog for sir cat

(Source: thecatdogblog)

awwww-cute:

You’re not leaving me behind, right?

awwww-cute:

You’re not leaving me behind, right?