izzy's playlists!
noise dept.
Keni
Cosimo Galluzzi
Game Changer & Make Some Noise
No title available
Sade Olutola
No title available
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
if i look back, i am lost
Discoholic 🪩
pixel skylines
art blog(derogatory)
Show & Tell
Phantogram Three
Game of Thrones Daily
h
Origami Around
Not today Justin
❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
seen from Indonesia
seen from T1
seen from France
seen from France
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Australia
seen from Ecuador
seen from United States
seen from Indonesia
seen from China
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Malaysia
seen from Japan
seen from United States
seen from Algeria
seen from Austria
seen from France
seen from Philippines
seen from Italy
@rightonwoman
This Christmas Eve, I want to freeze during a normal conversation and inform my listener that they will be visited by three spirits , beginning when the bell tolls one, and resume the conversation while pretending to know nothing of the interruption…
when a pelican bites you there's no malice in their eyes. they aren't upset at you. they are just hungry and want to see if you fit in their mouths. and if you don't then it's no problem and everything is fine. and if you do then well i guess your fate is sealed but that's ok it's a beautiful animal
Okay, see, I knew about the capybara gif:
But I didn’t know that they really are That Dense, All The Time. The same way sharks will bite anything that might be a seal, just in case, these birdbrains will apparently test just about anything for beak size.
Behold a short list of bad ideas:
Human foot is not food, bird.
That is clearly bigger than your entire body.
...You do know what a bear cub is, right? Right??
That is a BICYCLE SEAT.
That’s it; arrested for bird crimes.
unatributed street art
Sometimes you just have to look at someone who’s being unnecessarily rude or unkind or hostile towards you & wrinkle your nose & go “it’s not that deep. you’re so weird for thinking it’s that deep” & then go back to your happy fulfilling life that will forever be independent of how people perceive u
thinking abt how fucked up steam engine boiler explosions can look. theyre just pipes under there
gives me the idea of a ghost/monster engine that looks normal, albeit a bit battered, only to swing their smokebox door open and a myriad of pipes come bursting out like fucked up tentacles
I didn’t know a train could be an eldritch horror, but here we are.
The Call of C'thchoochoo.
Gregory Woods has a brilliant reading of Nineteen Eighty-Four which casts some doubt on this reading of Kafka. He sees Winston and Julia’s illicit, furtive love affair, and the efforts of Orwell’s thought police to do away with sex and sexuality, as an account of the lives of gay men in London in 1948, the year the novel was written. Woods quotes passages like this: ‘He wished that he were walking through the streets with her just as they were doing now but openly and without fear, talking of trivialities and buying odds and ends for the household. He wished above all that they had some place where they could be alone together without feeling the obligation to make love every time they met.’ And comments: ‘Gay readers may recognise this as a murmur from the closet. Which brings us to the point.’
Woods’s point is this: ‘whenever I read Nineteen Eighty-Four I cannot help imagining, between its lines, the spectral presence of another novel, a gay novel called “Nineteen Forty-Eight”, in which two young Londoners called Winston and Julian fall in love with each other and struggle to sustain their relationship under the continuous threat of blackmail, exposure and arrest.’ He realises, of course, that neither Orwell nor his straight readers had any idea that the novel could be read in this way. ‘What read as a futuristic nightmare to the heterosexual reader must have seemed to the homosexual reader somewhat paranoid and ignorant, because so close to the reality of homosexual life in England at the time – but showing no sign that Orwell was aware of this fact.’
-Roaming the Greenwood, Colm Toibin
dress codes that arent ppe are stupid as fuck. as an adult human being with a (relatively) functioning brain i have never walked into a place and given a fuck what an employee was wearing. “professional” okay bitch i can make up adjectives too. “grundlous” see easy
whats grundlous mean
of or pertaining to grundle
Literally every conversation with a colleague/peer in the academic field I'm in (anthropology, with a focus on human prehistory and human evolution) upon them learning I'm an observant religious Jew goes like this:
Person: "Sorry if this is a personal question, but how do you.... y'know......deal with it?"
Me: "Deal with what?"
Person: "Y'know...... y'know......your religion......"
Me: "Meaning?"
Person: "Well, um, how old do you believe the earth is?"
Me: "I follow the geological consensus, which is approximately 4.5 Billion years"
Person: "But......but.....your Bible says that it's 6,000 years old....."
Me: "Technically 5,783 years, so you're wrong there, haha"
Person: "Okay but how do you....how do you reconcile that with science?"
Me: "I don't need to reconcile it. They're not in opposition."
Person: "??"
Me: "The plain text in the Tanakh states that it has been 5,783 years since the creation of Adam, and consequently the world. Judaism has never been about taking the text in the Tanakh plainly, there's always deeper meanings. Who's to say that the 5,783 years aren't just the years since a couple named Adam and Eve met and copulated, triggering the begining of the lineage of Abraham, Moses, and the entire Jewish lineage, and that the six days of creation aren't six phases which are actually pretty in-line with our understanding of evolution?"
Person: "But.....some people believe that it's literally been 5,783 years since the earth was literally created!"
Me: "Okay..... that's what they believe. I don't see how it should bother me, especially considering we're in the field of anthropology where we try to study other patterns of belief, not cast judgement upon them."
Person: "But other Jews believe that!!!"
Me: "Again.....why should that affect my religious and academic senses of self? Judaism has never been a monolith of belief, anyway."
Person: "But-"
Jewish Paleontologist who has this exact Discussion with Others and I Feel You
it was always very interesting when I was in evolutionary biology proper having this discussion because even before conversion, my culturally Irish-American ass would generally square up and snap "look. This is a Protestant thing, and really an American evangelical thing at that. Catholic theology sorted this out fifty years ago, it's not a problem!"
Most religions don't have conflicts with the concept of human evolution. Fundamentalist Biblical-literalist Georg, however...
car culture advertising...
After the third or fourth one I started to think someone was just doing this on purpose.
Some of these are so neat that I’ve a feeling they were done accidentally-on-purpose. :->
“Let’s face it - English is a crazy language. There is no egg in eggplant nor ham in hamburger; neither apple nor pine in pineapple. English muffins weren’t invented in England or French fries in France. Sweetmeats are candies while sweetbreads, which aren’t sweet, are meat. We take English for granted. But if we explore its paradoxes, we find that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig. And why is it that writers write but fingers don’t fing, grocers don’t groce and hammers don’t ham? If the plural of tooth is teeth, why isn’t the plural of booth beeth? One goose, 2 geese. So one moose, 2 meese? One index, 2 indices? Doesn’t it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend? If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of them, what do you call it? If teachers taught, why didn’t preachers praught? If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat? In what language do people recite at a play and play at a recital? Ship by truck and send cargo by ship? Have noses that run and feet that smell? How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise man and a wise guy are opposites? You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which your house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form by filling it out and in which an alarm goes off by going on. English was invented by people, not computers, and it reflects the creativity of the human race (which, of course, isn’t a race at all). That is why, when the stars are out, they are visible, but when the lights are out, they are invisible.”
— (via be-killed)
But, but, but!
But, no, because there are reasons for all of those seemingly weird English bits.
Like “eggplant” is called “eggplant” because the white-skinned variety (to which the name originally applied) looks very egg-like.
The “hamburger” is named after the city of Hamburg.
The name “pineapple” originally (in Middle English) applied to pine cones (ie. the fruit of pines - the word “apple” at the time often being used more generically than it is now), and because the tropical pineapple bears a strong resemblance to pine cones, the name transferred.
The “English” muffin was not invented in England, no, but it was invented by an Englishman, Samuel Bath Thomas, in New York in 1894. The name differentiates the “English-style” savoury muffin from “American” muffins which are commonly sweet.
“French fries” are not named for their country of origin (also the United States), but for their preparation. They are French-cut fried potatoes - ie. French fries.
“Sweetmeats” originally referred to candied fruits or nuts, and given that we still use the term “nutmeat” to describe the edible part of a nut and “flesh” to describe the edible part of a fruit, that makes sense.
“Sweetbread” has nothing whatsoever to do with bread, but comes from the Middle English “brede”, meaning “roasted meat”. “Sweet” refers not to being sugary, but to being rich in flavour.
Similarly, “quicksand” means not “fast sand”, but “living sand” (from the Old English “cwicu” - “alive”).
The term boxing “ring” is a holdover from the time when the “ring” would have been just that - a circle marked on the ground. The first square boxing ring did not appear until 1838. In the rules of the sport itself, there is also a ring - real or imagined - drawn within the now square arena in which the boxers meet at the beginning of each round.
The etymology of “guinea pig” is disputed, but one suggestion has been that the sounds the animals makes are similar to the grunting of a pig. Also, as with the “apple” that caused confusion in “pineapple”, “Guinea” used to be the catch-all name for any unspecified far away place. Another suggestion is that the animal was named after the sailors - the “Guinea-men” - who first brought it to England from its native South America.
As for the discrepancies between verb and noun forms, between plurals, and conjugations, these are always the result of differing word derivation.
Writers write because the meaning of the word “writer” is “one who writes”, but fingers never fing because “finger” is not a noun derived from a verb. Hammers don’t ham because the noun “hammer”, derived from the Old Norse “hamarr”, meaning “stone” and/or “tool with a stone head”, is how we derive the verb “to hammer” - ie. to use such a tool. But grocers, in a certain sense, DO “groce”, given that the word “grocer” means “one who buys and sells in gross” (from the Latin “grossarius”, meaning “wholesaler”).
“Tooth” and “teeth” is the legacy of the Old English “toð” and “teð”, whereas “booth” comes from the Old Danish “boþ”. “Goose” and “geese”, from the Old English “gōs” and “gēs”, follow the same pattern, but “moose” is an Algonquian word (Abenaki: “moz”, Ojibwe: “mooz”, Delaware: “mo:s”). “Index” is a Latin loanword, and forms its plural quite predictably by the Latin model (ex: matrix -> matrices, vertex -> vertices, helix -> helices).
One can “make amends” - which is to say, to amend what needs amending - and, case by case, can “amend” or “make an amendment”. No conflict there.
“Odds and ends” is not word, but a phrase. It is, necessarily, by its very meaning, plural, given that it refers to a collection of miscellany. A single object can’t be described in the same terms as a group.
“Teach” and “taught” go back to Old English “tæcan” and “tæhte”, but “preach” comes from Latin “predician” (“præ” + “dicare” - “to proclaim”).
“Vegetarian” comes of “vegetable” and “agrarian” - put into common use in 1847 by the Vegetarian Society in Britain.
“Humanitarian”, on the other hand, is a portmanteau of “humanity” and “Unitarian”, coined in 1794 to described a Christian philosophical position - “One who affirms the humanity of Christ but denies his pre-existence and divinity”. It didn’t take on its current meaning of “ethical benevolence” until 1838. The meaning of “philanthropist” or “one who advocates or practices human action to solve social problems” didn’t come into use until 1842.
We recite a play because the word comes from the Latin “recitare” - “to read aloud, to repeat from memory”. “Recital” is “the act of reciting”. Even this usage makes sense if you consider that the Latin “cite” comes from the Greek “cieo” - “to move, to stir, to rouse , to excite, to call upon, to summon”. Music “rouses” an emotional response. One plays at a recital for an audience one has “called upon” to listen.
The verb “to ship” is obviously a holdover from when the primary means of moving goods was by ship, but “cargo” comes from the Spanish “cargar”, meaning “to load, to burden, to impose taxes”, via the Latin “carricare” - “to load on a cart”.
“Run” (moving fast) and “run” (flowing) are homonyms with different roots in Old English: “ærnan” - “to ride, to reach, to run to, to gain by running”, and “rinnan” - “to flow, to run together”. Noses flow in the second sense, while feet run in the first. Simillarly, “to smell” has both the meaning “to emit” or “to perceive” odor. Feet, naturally, may do the former, but not the latter.
“Fat chance” is an intentionally sarcastic expression of the sentiment “slim chance” in the same way that “Yeah, right” expresses doubt - by saying the opposite.
“Wise guy” vs. “wise man” is a result of two different uses of the word “wise”. Originally, from Old English “wis”, it meant “to know, to see”. It is closely related to Old English “wit” - “knowledge, understanding, intelligence, mind”. From German, we get “Witz”, meaning “joke, witticism”. So, a wise man knows, sees, and understands. A wise guy cracks jokes.
The seemingly contradictory “burn up” and “burn down” aren’t really contradictory at all, but relative. A thing which burns up is consumed by fire. A house burns down because, as it burns, it collapses.
“Fill in” and “fill out” are phrasal verbs with a difference of meaning so slight as to be largely interchangeable, but there is a difference of meaning. To use the example in the post, you fill OUT a form by filling it IN, not the other way around. That is because “fill in” means “to supply what is missing” - in the example, that would be information, but by the same token, one can “fill in” an outline to make a solid shape, and one can “fill in” for a missing person by taking his/her place. “Fill out”, on the other hand, means “to complete by supplying what is missing”, so that form we mentioned will not be filled OUT into we fill IN all the missing information.
An alarm may “go off” and it may be turned on (ie. armed), but it does not “go on”. That is because the verb “to go off” means “to become active suddenly, to trigger” (which is why bombs and guns also go off, but do not go on).
I have never been so turned on in my entire life.
You know, it's kinda funny how much of high fantasy centers around kings and nobility and courtly intrigue considering that the archetypal high fantasy, Lord of the Rings, had the rather explicit moral of "saving the world is up to this backwater hick and his gardener because no politician, least of all inherited nobility, would have the ability to see past their own ambition and throw away a weapon". Oh sure, Aragorn is a great king and all, but there's a reason he's over there running a distraction ring while the hobbits do the real work. Sauron loses because he gets distracted by kings and armies and great battles (i.e. typical high fantasy stuff) letting Frodo and Sam sneak through his back door and blow it all to hell.
Just saying, maybe old Jirt knew what he was saying when he said that the small folk doing their best and holding to each other was more powerful than a dozen alliances and superweapons and we should respect him for it.
(No but seriously OP you’re exactly right)
s(he's) bro(ken)
Also I was looking at 2021 in paleontology and apparently this year we discovered this awful shark that is wider than it is long
why
I love this thing
can we pretend that airplanes in the night sky are like stupid sharks?
I could really use a fish right now
it’s crazy how much diversity there can be in one species…these are all pictures of the same bird species (red-tailed hawk)
all these birds are like-
ironically, they are all exactly the same amount of Pissed Off
the key to understanding kermit is that line from the original muppet series where lesley anne warren is like "i thought you were the only person here who wasn't crazy" and kermits like "me not crazy? i hired the others" that guy loves chaos. he loves crazy shit, and he loves being the guy who has to handle the crazy shit. he deliberately creates these circumstances! he puts himself in these positions! and then he's like "i cant believe youre making me do this." anyway that frog is more human than any of us
That Frog Creates Circumstances
