occasionally subtle
will byers stan first human second
Jules of Nature
Cosmic Funnies
Misplaced Lens Cap
Not today Justin
No title available
todays bird
if i look back, i am lost
❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
KIROKAZE
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
hello vonnie
gracie abrams
blake kathryn
Cosimo Galluzzi
One Nice Bug Per Day
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
official daine visual archive
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
seen from United States
seen from Bangladesh
seen from United States
seen from Jamaica
seen from Jamaica
seen from Iraq
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@aardvarkingmad
They know but their bosses told them to STFU The MSM is the propaganda wing of the State.
Remember when they did that with Ruth B Ginsberg too?
Yeah, they know. But they're the propaganda wing of the Deep State, so they're not gonna say a word.
F.U.C.K.
E.M.
+ YOU CAN DO 1 COMMIE THEN 1 PEDOPHILE!!!
🖕😎⚡️
Hell YEAH!! EXACTLY 💯 💯
Buy TWO woodchippers! Avoid the wait.
A Brief Vindication Of The Homemaker
Conservative Philosophy 7/27/2026
Not too long ago I heard a commentator online bluntly declare that any young woman who says that their “dream job” is to be a stay at home mother is simply lazy and devoid of any genuine ambition. They went on to argue that the underlying activity in question is not actually a job but a role. Raising one’s own children is a role that most human beings perform at some point in their lives as a consequence of conceiving them. Therefore all that this young woman is actually saying is that she wishes to live a life in which she does not have to exert herself at an actual job.
Now the necessary assumption here is that child rearing is more or less a token chore that is indifferent to the way that it is performed. This critique is similar to the famous quote by the influential 1970’s Feminist Germaine Greer in which she states that “bringing up children is not a real occupation, because children come up just the same brought up or not.” Greer is literally saying: they will reach adulthood no matter what we do, we have more important things to tend to. And what are those more important things? They are endeavors which serve to fulfill and to affirm us as individuals.
The objective of both Greer and the commentator I have mentioned is to deny the trade off that takes place when both parents must work in order to financially sustain the family. And the purpose of that denial is to justify the decision to have both parents work when no such trade off is even necessary, in order to gratify themselves. To acknowledge that the stay at home mother is doing something deeply important is to recognize that one is allowing one’s own children to go without that thing, in a situation in which one has the option to do otherwise. For this reason the calling of the homemaker must become superfluous.
Before we proceed there are some distinctions that we need to draw; we will work backwards toward the most general concept in this discussion. The term homemaker (just mentioned above) refers to a calling. It is a person who has decided to invest all of their imagination, energy and resourcefulness as a human being into optimizing the development of their own children (instead of into defending Pizza Hut’s trademark rights).
The homemaker is committed to creating the ideal home environment for those children. I know of homemakers who are well educated, and who even use that education in the cultivation of their children’s potential (some formally educated, a few informally). Others may instead be rich in moral or practical wisdom which they devotedly impart into their children. But every serious homemaker is an individual who has decided to wholeheartedly commit all of her gifts and talents to producing the best version of her children that she can during the most critical and formative period of their lives.
Now while the term “homemaker” refers to a calling, the phrase“stay at home mother”merely refers toaphysicalreality. The commentator that I mentioned at the opening is not entirely incorrect. There are some women who simply have no drive to invest themselves heavily into anything (i.e. women who are “lazy”). Such women may indeed seek status as stay at home mothers as nothing more than an opportunity to be shiftless and indifferent, but this does not define the state. Every stay at home mother is not a homemaker, but every homemaker is a stay at home mother.
Finally, we come to the most general concept here, that of a parent. A parent is one who conceives and/or assumes primary responsibility for a child. It is a role. Most parenting in this day and age is performed with as much sincere attentiveness as can be fit into spare time away from a full time occupation in the marketplace. And of course there will always be in any time period the [abusively] negligent parent who performs the role with indifference.
Therefore the opportunity to grow up in the household of a loving and devoted homemaker is a precious one, and we should be happy for children who enjoy that privilege. It should also be mentioned that it is not merely a privilege limited to families who are extremely well off money wise. One can find households with a solitary blue collar bread winner alongside a financially thrifty wife and mother, in areas of the country with a lower cost of living.
For them the commitment is worth it; the intangible things that they are able to provide for their children in that environment are more valuable in their minds than any additional material item they could offer them. And somewhere in the world I suspect there is some deeply troubled and neglected child of some wealthy household who senses inwardly that this is the case as well.
Instead of celebrating this office however, certain ideologues are compelled to belittle it. But the one thing that cannot be said of the calling of a genuinely devoted homemaker is that it is devoid of aspiration. What feat can any person accomplish that is greater than the cultivation of other human souls? And is this not itself the final objective of every other truly worthwhile job or calling?
We cannot accept the idea that children only require passive supervision to flourish once we understand the truth that children are constantly learning, whether that learning is good or bad. And a parent can elicit things from a child in a way that no other person can. This is why the calling in question is uniquely identified with the role of the parent. No nanny or professional childcare provider can carry it out. It is far from superfluous.
i read this to adam and he just yelled, outraged, "THEYRE BABIES"
TRUE HATERS, SINCE DAY 1 THEY HAVENT BEEN GIVING THEM A FUCKING INCH
this is next level
20 years later. you're kermit. opening night at the muppet theater. you look up. you can't believe it. those two awful cunts from next door are here. neither of them died yet. they're going to be here, forever.
They're immortal.
They were heckling the actors in Ford's theater on the day Lincoln was shot.
They heckled the first reading of the Epic of Gilgamesh.
They heckled the first lifeform to crawl onto land.
They heckled the big bang.
"They say that time exists now."
"I can tell."
"How so?"
"Because this show is a waste of it!"
"DOHOHOHOHOHO!"
You know those Great Old Ones (tm) that Lovecraft was always going on about?
Yeah, he was referring to Statler and Waldorf. They're not sleeping for aeons beneath the sea...they're obsessed with heckling the muppets. Kermit and company are risking their sanity (and in some cases, arguably losing it) and their lives so that the world endures.
so many leftists, particularly those who make movies and tv, seem to think that america is headed for some christian-type dystopia in which anyone who doesn't align with christian ideology or lifestyle will be systematically oppressed and killed when, in reality, it's very likely that the opposite will happen. if anything, leftist ideology has become so popular that if america WERE to dissolve into a dystopia, christians would be the first to face the consequences. it's already happening in multiple parts of the world, but leftists love to turn a blind eye to that in favor of this paranoid delusion that they're going to be snuffed out by christian extremists any day now because they're obsessed with wanting to be victims, even in a completely made up scenario. it just makes me roll my eyes so hard.
It’s so ridiculous. They preach love and tolerance but are always hating on Christians, Jews, and conservatives.
But especially when you get into leftist entertainment, they legit act like Christianity is some huge threat as if we’re calling the shots today and not them. Like every time a Christian gets owned it’s something to be applauded.
Like as long as they keep Christians the Bad Guy then everything will be ok.
Leftists tend to have a victimhood fetish.
Plus they have no real understanding of people who think differently than they do, so they assume anyone else with power would be as viciously evil as they would be.
That kid has already learned that it's better to ask for forgiveness than for permission.
Anyone driving slower than me is an idiot. Anyone driving faster than me is a maniac.
I am hoping that this is some sort of exaggeration or oversimplification because this is just blatant erasure of a major element of Greek culture and replaced by a more Christian version and I want to bang my head into a wall. That’s not what xenia is, and you just erased a major part of the Odyssey.
This is the first time I've heard that Nolan's Odyssey want completely faithful to the source
It is neither an exaggeration or oversimplification.
Nolan's Odyssey is a blatant act of cultural vandalism, and deliberately so.
ough this Property tax exemption amendment for homesteads in FL is not gonna pass
literally every city has has gone on and on about how they won't have any money for anything and now that they've repeated it enough you have regular people going along too 😔
"we wouldn't have enough money to operate if we got rid of property tax"
"why? What are you spending the money on?"
"dont ask questions like that, are you racist?"
Hey, here's an idea. Given the unimaginably high amount of fraud and graft so far discovered at the federal, state and local level--even in red states--how about we just zero out the budget for EVERY NGO in every local or state-funded NGO program in Florida. That should free up PLENTY of money for roads, schools, police, fire, and all the other base functions the governments are supposed to be funding.
Anyone who thinks their pet charity is necessary is welcome to reapply--with ten years of receipts for every dollar they've ever received from the taxpayers. If they can't or won't provide that? Too fucking bad, no money for you! Maybe you're corrupt. Maybe you're just incompetent and financially illiterate. Either way, no more taxpayer money for you.
The Economics of Living Forever
Peter St. Onge 7/24/2026
A new study says humans could live healthy to 194.
Which seems oddly specific but it’s also a long time.
And lest that sound bonkers, on a recent Peter Diamandis’ podcast Elon himself said “aging is not that hard a problem,” with that faraway look Elon does when he’s thinking of starting another company.
Now, immortality has been on humanity’s to-do list for awhile. Isaac Newton chased immortality with alchemy. Han dynasty China experimented with mercury and arsenic. Gilgamesh searched in vain for the secret to living forever, which was sadly stolen by a snake.
The kicker is biologically it’s absolutely possible. Lobsters, for example, essentially don’t age. Naked mole rates live 15 times longer than other rodents -- call it 1,000 years in human terms. Quahog clams are still charming the lady-clams at 500 years old.
The trick, of course, is figuring how they do it and translating that into humans. There’s about 8 mechanisms to reverse what’s essentially the body’s clock, including telomeres, mitochondria, chronic inflammation, so-called zombie cells.
These are the mechanisms the new study modeled, concluding they could buy lifespans of 200 years.
Population Growth
An environment-obsessed media’s first reaction will be overpopulation. But in fact population doesn’t increase as fast as you’d expect.
In rich countries today 1% of people die per year, falling to 0.7% in poor countries since they’re young. So population growth would essentially double in rich countries — 0.9% to 1.9% — but only go up a third in poor countries, from 3.4% to 4.1%.
Put differently, both would return to where they were in the 1970’s.
This is great for Japan or Italy, who are dying off. And it wouldn’t make much difference in Africa for decades.
The Economy and Immortality
On the economy, you have 3 effects combining to dramatically raise wealth and growth.
First, the preservation of human capital. Ballpark a third of everything we do is thrown away for death, a treadmill that replaces experienced neurologists, engineers, and CEO’s with unskilled 18 year olds.
Second is more direct: Education and healthcare costs plunge, since the ratio of kids and frail elderly to workers crashes. That’s about 1 in 4 dollars we spend.
And, finally, longer careers. After all, if you’re living to 194 you’re not retiring at 65. This may sound depressing, but remember your assets compound much longer. So you’d do grownup work til 65 then you do fun stuff for the next century.
Put it together and growth and incomes roughly double.
Meanwhile the political consequences are fascinating: People get smarter and more conservative as they age, so voters swing hard to the right. For young people it’s a mixed bag -- faster growth and wages, but tons of old people hogging the choice jobs. And, finally, inequality as those extra decades of compounding mean all boats may rise but rich boats are getting very rich.
What’s Next
Nature has already solved living forever -- we just gotta find it. Science is hopping along, but the main barrier is regulatory -- governments getting in the way.
200 year lifespans may or may not come in time for Boomers and Gen X. But it’s almost guaranteed for our kids and grandkids unless government kills it.
I've seen (several times over the years) a statement that, based on insurance actuarial tables, if you remove illnesses and "natural causes" (basically old age) from the statistics, the average person would be expected to live about 300 years before accident, suicide or homicide kills him.
That's just an average of course. A gangbanger can still get gunned down at 15. And a careful and lucky individual could live essentially indefinitely if disease and old age aren't an issue. But 300 years of youthful health would be a hell of an improvement for everyone.
Also, given the way birthrates plummet in wealthy, high-tech societies, people living a lot longer would not be a serious issue.
PRESIDENT TRUMP INTRODUCES THE “NEW AMERICAN AVENGERS” TO COMMEMORATE AMERICA’S 250TH BIRTHDAY
THE STAR-STUDDED TEAM CONSISTS OF: - ELLA LANGLEY AS CAPTAIN AMERICA - SYDNEY SWEENEY AS SUPERGIRL - SOPHIE CUNNINGHAM AS BATGIRL - CAITLIN CLARK AS IRON WOMAN EARLY REPORTS INDICATE THE TEAM’S FIRST MISSION IS “OPERATION MAKE LIBERALS CRY AGAIN”.
Important rules for the "age verification" era of the internet that we're living in:
1. Do not do age verification.
2. If you have to do age verification, cheat. Do not under any circumstances give them your real ID.
The tool presents users with a 3D model they can then manipulate to, the creator says, bypass Discord's age verification system.
Oh no I dropped my link, what a horrible thing! Sure hope this doesn't get reblogged until it reaches users from the UK and Brazil!
And remember to not make a second account just to test out what works best when verifying your identity
A reminder that we still dont support Age Verification bullshit.
Paywall removed here
Oh boy, I sure I hope I don't drop this box of pins on this post
It's nice to occasionally see my own posts.
inspired by this image of a panic attack during a CT scan
this was omitted from some reblogs:
*EDIT: this was wrongly described as a CT scan panic attack back in the day - this person just moved their head at the wrong time during an X-ray and made an incredible image that inspired me! 🩻
theyre doing this to me tomorrow
PLEASE SHARE THIS FAR AND WIDE.
THIS IS THE LETTER FROM MY POD.
🔹THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITALS KNOW. THEY HAVE KNOWN SINCE 2014. A PEDIATRIC ONCOLOGIST JUST SENT US HIS RESIGNATION LETTER. READ IT.
"To the Board of Directors, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. Effective immediately, I resign.
I have spent 19 years in pediatric oncology. I have treated 2,300 children with cancer. I have watched 814 of them die.
I am writing this letter because I cannot carry the weight of what I know for one more day.
In 2014, I was invited to a closed-door presentation at a medical conference in Geneva. The presentation was titled: 'Non-Invasive Electromagnetic Approaches to Pediatric Tumor Regression.' It was not listed in the public program.
The presenter — whose name I will not reveal for his safety — showed us data from 340 pediatric cancer cases treated with frequency-based therapy between 2009 and 2014:
— 312 out of 340 children achieved complete tumor remission
— Average treatment time: 3 sessions of 25 minutes each
— Side effects: ZERO
— Recurrence rate: 4%
— Age range: 2 to 16 years old
312 children. Cured. No chemotherapy. No radiation. No hair loss. No vomiting. No organ damage. No death.
I sat in that room with 40 other pediatric oncologists. We all saw the same data. We all understood what it meant.
Then we were told:
'This technology is not approved for civilian use. Any attempt to replicate, discuss, or disseminate these findings will result in immediate termination and criminal prosecution. You are bound by the non-disclosure terms of your conference registration.'
We went home. We went back to our hospitals. We went back to injecting children with chemotherapy that we KNEW was unnecessary.
I went back to Room 4B. That's where we do pediatric chemo at my hospital. Room 4B.
I went back to holding the hands of 6-year-olds while poison dripped into their veins.
I went back to telling mothers: 'We're doing everything we can.'
We were not doing everything we could. We were doing everything we were ALLOWED to do.
Since 2014, I have personally administered chemotherapy to 847 children.
I know — with absolute certainty — that at least 70% of them could have been cured in 75 minutes with zero pain.
Instead, I gave them 6-18 months of chemical torture. I watched their hair fall out. I watched them vomit until they had nothing left. I watched their parents sell their homes to pay for treatment that I KNEW was inferior to technology that already existed.
I watched 214 of those children die.
214 children. Dead. Since 2014. Under my care. While I knew.
I am not asking for forgiveness. There is no forgiveness for this.
I am asking for this letter to reach every parent who has ever been told 'there's nothing more we can do.' Because that sentence is a lie. It has been a lie since at least 2014.
There IS more they can do. There is a treatment that cures pediatric cancer in 75 minutes with zero side effects. It exists. It works. 312 children proved it works.
Your doctor knows. Your hospital knows. The board of directors knows.
They chose money over your child's life. I chose my career over your child's life.
I will not choose it one more day.
To the 214 families whose children I failed:
I am sorry. I am sorry I was a coward. I am sorry I chose silence. I am sorry I let the system convince me that obedience was the same as ethics.
It is not. Obedience killed your children. My obedience killed your children.
This letter is not enough. Nothing will ever be enough. But the silence ends today."
— Name withheld. Pediatric Oncologist. 19 years. 2,300 patients. 814 deaths. 214 preventable.
He watched 214 children die knowing the cure existed. He stayed silent for 10 years. He is not silent anymore. Neither are we.
Amazing if true, but I call bullshit.
Why, for one thing, would They (tm) show a roomful of doctors an amazing technique vastly superior to current practice for treating cancer--cheaper, easier, safer, less painful, far more effective--only to then tell them they can NEVER use it? That they can never even SPEAK of it on pain of being fired immediately and criminally prosecuted?
That is the most aggressively, abysmally, arrogantly STUPID way imaginable to try to keep a secret. It's worthy of Dr. Evil, and worthy of Scott Evil's eternal mockery.
Besides, if it actually worked as advertised, keep in mind that the essence of pricing in a market economy is you charge as much as the market will bear. Do you think people wouldn't be willing to pay a fortune for a non-invasive, non-surgical, painless treatment with far better results than surgery and chemotherapy? Of course they would.
"Hey, cancer patient (or parent of cancer patient): you can pay a fortune for poison IV drips and surgery with a low to moderate chance of successfully treating the cancer OR you can pay a fortune for a quicker, painless, almost totally effective treatment. What say you?"
"Yes, PLEASE!"
No, this is just baseless, imaginary rage-bait.
Her face launched a thousand ships, alright.
"Here. We've brought Helen back to you. And brought our entire navy to make sure you take her."
