Let's go!

Plants, pets and reblogs

[bodhrancomedy]

Look, it’s a weird hill to die on, especially when I don’t really explain, but children deserve to experience fear, disgust, and discomfort in safe scenarios where they can process those sensations.

Media for children used to be scary and that’s important.

[the-davest-of-uncles]

“Since it is so likely that (children) will meet cruel enemies, let them at least have heard of brave knights and heroic courage. Otherwise you are making their destiny not brighter but darker.” ― C.S. Lewis

[grace-in-the-wilderness]

"Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed."

-- G. K. Chesterton

[tiny-forests]

moss mfriday #3: Glacier Mice

[image credit]

That's right - it's glacier mice. One of my favorite things maybe on the entire planet. Let's talk about these freaky fuzzy little rats!!

Glacier mice are balls of moss that live in large herds like this in a few select glaciers. They are moss all the way through, with a center consisting of dead moss matter, implying that they begin as small growths of moss and simply accumulate over time, like snowballs. However, their outside surface is alive and well on all sides. Glacier mice have been observed, through tagging and tracking, to roll across the glacier like a majestic herd of wildebeest, exposing all of their sides to the sunlight. They trundle along at a pace of about 2.5 cm per day. That's 30 feet in a year! They're really schmovin'! Certainly further than most mosses can claim to travel.

What's really exciting, though, is that they all move in the same direction, and we're not sure why or how. Scientists experimented to try and attribute their coordinated behavior to wind, sunlight, and the direction that their grazing ground slopes, but to no avail. They speed up, slow down, and change direction in unison, based on some mysterious moss code that we haven't cracked yet.

Cross-section of a glacier mouse. Note the dead moss matter inside, and the short gametophytes on the outside, adapted to harsh winds and sunlight. [image credit]

We have figured out how they roll, though - while the moss ball sits on the ice, it insulates the ice directly underneath it, protecting it from melting. This forms a little pillar of ice that the moss eventually rolls off of. The insulating power of glacier mice also gives it the wonderful ability to host all kinds of microorganisms that otherwise wouldn't survive the glacier's harsh conditions, and their ability to move makes it possible for microorganisms to spread from one habitable spot to another. They're like a bunch of little tardigrade passenger ships, braving the dangerous glacier to go where no water bear has gone before!!

Glacier mice have been found to consist of several moss species, most of which must reproduce asexually in order to survive in the dry climate. They've been observed to live for at least six years, but are projected to live much, much longer. I love them. So much. I hope they know that I love them!! I LOVE THEM!!!!

[source][source][source]

[samwisethewitch]

Aromatherapy for Processing Trauma

Aromatherapy uses scent, usually in the form of essential oils, for physical and emotional well-being. Our sense of smell is very closely connected to memory, and certain smells can have an effect on our emotions and mood.

Essential Oil Safety and Ethics

Because this is the Internet and because certain multi-level marketing corporations have intentionally spread misinformation about essential oil safety, let's talk about a couple of things real quick.

You should never, ever eat or drink essential oils. These are very concentrated extracts of the active compounds from plants, and just like you would never sit down and eat 200 pounds of lavender, you shouldn't eat lavender oil. Ingesting essential oils can have very serious side effects, up to and including organ failure and death. Just don't.

If you want to work with a liquid plant extract that you can take internally, I recommend trying a tincture or a tea.

Use caution when applying essential oils topically. Again, essential oils are very concentrated, so they can cause skin reactions even if you are not normally allergic to the plant they come from. Always do a patch test to check for an allergic reaction before applying an essential oil to your skin or putting it in a bath. Some, like cinnamon oil, should never be used topically.

Always dilute your oils. Whenever you put essential oils on your skin, mix them with a carrier oil (like olive oil or coconut oil). Typically for adults you want to only use two drops of essential oil for every teaspoon of carrier oil, but you might use a stronger or weaker concentration depending on your body and your needs. If you're adding essential oils to your bath, make sure you mix them into a bath salt (either Epsom salt or plain table salt) before adding them to the water.

When you diffuse essential oils, make sure you don't use too much. For a typical aromatherapy diffuser, you really only need 1-5 drops of oil.

Be careful using essential oils around children and pets. Contrary to what some MLMs say, essential oils may not be safe for your baby or your dog. If you have kids, make sure your oils are stored out of their reach. Don't diffuse essential oils around babies under 6 months old, and don't apply oils to the skin on children under 3 years old. If you use essential oils on your older child's skin, they should be TWICE as diluted as for an adult (so you would use HALF as much essential oil for the same amount of carrier oil). If you diffuse oils around your kids, don't run the diffuser for more than 60 minutes. Follow other essential oil safety rules.

If you have a pet in the house, only diffuse essential oils in open, well-ventilated rooms, never let the diffuser run for more than 60 minutes, and make sure your pet is able to leave the room if they want to. Never apply essential oils to a pet's skin. Research your oils to make sure they aren't toxic to your pets.

Moving from safety concerns to ethics concerns, don't use essential oils in public spaces. Many people don't tolerate these scents well because of health conditions, allergies, or chemical sensitivities. For this reason, you should only practice aromatherapy in your own private space.

Try to be an eco-conscious consumer. It takes a whole lot of plant material to make essential oils -- one pound of lavender oil requires 250 pounds of lavender buds! That's a lot of natural resources. Even "wildcrafted" or "wild harvested" products may still be contributing to overharvesting. Try to limit your environmental impact by using oils sparingly, avoiding oils made from endangered plants, buying from companies that use sustainable harvesting practices, and reusing or recycling the bottles.

Making Aromatherapy Trauma-Sensitive

Because scent is so strongly connected to memory, scents that remind us of a traumatic event can trigger anxiety or panic, or even make us physically ill. Before using aromatherapy, think carefully about the scents you feel drawn to and whether they may be triggering for you.

For example, if your abuser wore a floral perfume with rose and geranium notes, the scents of rose and geranium might activate your fight or flight response, even though those are usually considered calming scents. If your abuser wore a cologne or deodorant with a lot of woodsy notes, you might want to avoid woodsy essential oils like cedarwood.

If at any point you start to feel triggered or activated when using aromatherapy, stop using that scent until you can speak to a therapist or counselor about your experience.

Helpful Essential Oils for Trauma Survivors

Note: Much of the information in this section comes from Elizabeth Guthrie's book, The Trauma-Informed Herbalist.

Lavender (Lavandula angustifolia): The ultimate relaxing scent. Guthrie says that lavender "allows a person to completely relax. It is a wonderful tonic for a person who has been overthinking situations." Lavender is really helpful for anxiety and paranoia, especially if your anxiety takes the form of doom spiraling or thinking about worst case-scenarios.

Cedarwood (Cedrus virginiana): An excellent grounding scent. Guthrie says that cedarwood "is loved for its ability to help people reconnect to themselves." Be aware that Atlas Cedarwood (Cedrus atlantica) is endangered due to overharvesting -- try to use more sustainable varieties.

Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis): Great for mental clarity. Rosemary strengthens memory, and it can be useful for people who struggle with short-term memory or who are dealing with brain fog or gaps in memory as a product of trauma. Rosemary promotes alertness.

Clary Sage (Salvia sclarea): Promotes a sense of well-being and helps decrease feelings of stress.

Sweet Marjoram (Origanum majorana): Brings balance to the body and mind. Marjoram has a relaxing effect and can help release tension.

Geranium (Pelargonium graveolens): Another relaxing scent. Guthrie says that geranium "can also help a person who is feeling jumpy, as if they're living in a horror movie and a jump scare is just around the corner."

Chamomile (Anthemis nobilis): Reduces anxiety and relieves feelings of depression. Chamomile also famously helps with sleep issues such as insomnia.

Patchouli (Pogostemon cablin): Very strong grounding. Guthrie recommends patchouli to help reset the sleep-wake cycle for people struggling with insomnia and/or fatigue.

Bergamot (Citrus bergamia): Balances emotional energy and uplifts the mood. Guthrie recommends it for brain fog from exhaustion and for aid in letting go of anger.

Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus): A superstar for healing, whether physical, mental, emotional, or even spiritual. Guthrie recommends eucalyptus "to jumpstart the emotional healing process" and "to release the feeling that their trauma is part of their identity."

Sweet Orange (Citrus sinensis): An uplifting and energizing scent. Great for bringing up the mood, promoting happiness, and helping with burnout.

Aromatherapy on a Budget

Listen, y'all. Essential oils are expensive. Ethically sourced essential oils are even more expensive. I save some money by 1.) using essential oils sparingly, and 2.) buying pre-mixed blends. I'll typically look for a blend that contains several oils that I want to work with instead of buying each oil individually. Right now I'm working with the "Harmony" synergy blend from Eden's Garden, which contains lavender, cedarwood, rosemary, clary sage, sweet marjoram, geranium, and chamomile.

If you can't find a blend that has all the qualities you want, you can still save money by buying a blend with most of the qualities you're looking for, then adding one or two low-cost oils. For example, I wanted a slightly more grounding effect than the blend I'm using has, so I add a little bit of patchouli oil to bring in that earthy, grounding quality.

Sources:

The Trauma-Informed Herbalist by Elizabeth Guthrie

"5 Benefits of Clary Sage Oil" by Corey Whelan

"Marjoram Essential Oil" on AromaWeb

"The 8 Proven Benefits of Chamomile Oil and How to Use It" by Jill Seladi-Schulman, Ph.D.

"Essential Oils & Pets" on Saje

"Are Essential Oils Safe for Kids?" by Teresa Carr

[ndnbutch]

negative self talk IS unproductive and painful for you and often those around you. but like every other post that talks about this is like “yeah it makes you an exhausting and burdensome person to be around and if you don’t stop now everyone in your life will abandon you. Also I personally hate you for it”. and it’s like hey hi hello. basically the theme of all my negative self talk is that I’m an exhausting and burdensome person to be around and that everyone in my life will soon abandon and hate me. so like haha what’re we doing here? are you going to provide any actionable advice for how to get out of this habit, or just tell me that I’m Doing Bad And Wrong And Must Suffer For It?

Anyway. If you struggle with negative self-talk I feel for you. It’s hellish, and it’s not something that can just be bludgeoned out of someone by telling them it sucks. We know! I’m not out of the weeds just yet by a long shot, but here’s some of the stuff that’s been helpful for me:

Fake it til it’s real: cliche, I know! but it really has helped for me, even though it makes me suuuuper uncomfortable at times. but literally tell yourself that you’re super charismatic and sexy and everyone loves you. or whatever version of that feels good for how you’d like to be seen. it’s gonna feel silly and untrue for a really long time, but it helps!

Reframe: I struggled to phrase this one, but what I mean basically is like… taking that notion of “hey negative self-talk sucks for the people around you too” and turning it into “wow, it is kind of mean to my friends to just assume they’re lying when they say they love me. I don’t want to be mean to my friends. I’m going to take the risk of trusting them”. Try not to go too far in the direction of “oh god I’m being mean to my friends” and stay on the path of “I want to and CAN do right by them”

Separate from it: I like to kind of act like my negative self talk is something of a different entity from me. Your mileage may vary on this one. I was a really mean really sad teenage girl once, and for me that kind of feels like the place the negative self talk comes from. So instead of being like “I guess I just hate myself and always will”, I can be like “I have this wounded inner child who is lashing out. I’m going to be gentle with her, but I’m also not going to listen to the things she tells me we are, because she is 16 and hasn’t experienced anything good yet.”

This is far from a comprehensive list but this post is getting long—feel free to add on if you have any tactics that have worked especially well for you!

[ellewantsrevenge]

i started correcting myself OUT LOUD

"i'm so stupid" "no i'm not. i'm so silly. why am i so silly?"

"what the fuck is wrong with me?" because "a lot is wrong because i am doing the best i can in a sick society that wants me to do and survival is a middle finger to capitalism"

"i'm not doing enough" became "why do you feel you aren't doing enough when you donated $100 this week and shared lots of information with people? wanting to be able to do more is not same as refusing to do more. be gentle with yourself. this is going to last 50 more years at least"

"i don't need to bother bc i'm not going to see anyone" became "no one is more worthy of my efforts of getting dressed up than me"

"i'm so ugly" became "i would never say that to another woman with my body. other women with my body are hot. maybe i'm hot?" which eventually became "i am fucking hot"

i also apologized to myself too. i'm doing a lot better than i was a year ago

[theatsymbol-deactivated20210220]

Its such a rip off that flowers don’t taste good

[recoil-operated-deactivated2021]

Spoken like a woman who’s never used garlic blossom in a stirfry, had an elderflower fritter or used Calendula and Nasturtium in a salad.

[theatsymbol-deactivated20210220]

I have not but im going to now

Add pics of the tasty flowers plz

[recoil-operated-deactivated2021]

garlic blossoms (allium) balls of tiny flowers, may be white to deep purple. literally just the flowering head of the garlic you use in food. it tastes like garlic. but colorful.

elderflower, the blossom of the elderberry bush. can be battered and fried. excellent with elderberry syrup or honey. tastes fruity with a tiny hint of anise. also good in teas and sweets.

Calendula, also known as pot marigold. (please, verify you’re using pot marigold, not regular marigold. calendula is actually a daisy.) tastes similarish to bell pepper, sans crunch. leaves are also edible. should be grown with broadleaf plantain:

as a poultices of calendula and plantain can be used to rapidly heal small cuts and scrapes, and are also helpful for other dermatitis. don’t use it on deep wounds though, as it can and will cause the surface skin to heal before the underlying tissues. all of broadleaf plantain is also edible. if bitter.

Nasturtium ranges in color from bright yellow to deep red. it’s peppery and very slightly spicy.

[glumshoe]

Personally I love squash blossoms stuffed with ricotta and fried in a pan. Not ideal if you also want to harvest squash, though.

[3gallopingdogs]

Elderflowers also make great wine or cordial! I concur with the squash blossoms, can always just use the male ones so the female flowers can still form fruit.

[blackwoolncrown]

Finally a thread for the REAL folks: those who eat flowers

[therestlesswitch]

Borage! Looks like blue stars and tastes a like lightly sweet cucumber. The young leaves tase like cucumber too!

The flowers that come from any brassica (cabbage, radishes, broccoli, kale, etc) are all excellent and taste like the rest of the plant.

Queen Anne’s lace blossoms, (daucus carota, just like our domestic carrots) super common wild plant, and the flowers make a jelly that tastes kind of like pink lemonade?? It’s /delicious./ but make 100% sure you have a correct identification as water hemlock and other toxic species look similar.

Rose!!! Rose flavoured things taste exactly as they smell. So scrumptious!

Same with lavender and lilac, and violets! The list goes on! 🤩✨🌱

[heatherwitch]

Here are some of my local (PNW) favorites:

[X] Big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) blossoms are excellent in fritters.

[X] Dandelion (Taraxacum offinale) is also excellent in fritters, or my favorite is separating the petals and mixing them into pancake batter.

[X] Miner’s lettuce (Claytonia sibirica) flowers have a delicate, lettuce-like taste.

[X] Oregon grape (Berberis/Mahonia aquafolium) flowers are delightfully sour. I like to pick off a few small flowers from the cluster!

[X] Wood sorrel (Oxalis sp.) also sour (from oxalic acid).

[X] Red clover (Trifolium pratense) is mildly sweet.

When eating wild plants, you should be completely certain in your identification and aware of any lookalikes. Be sure you are allowed to harvest and that the area has not been sprayed by any chemicals. Many of these plants are also medicine, so you should be sure that you can safely ingest them (do your research before putting things in your face pls). This was just intended to get them on your radar!

Resources for plant identification.

[sillysatyr]

Your religion is your own. Nobody can change it or take it from you. You’re entitled to your own interpretations of your faith.

[fishd0g]

Im unsure if these fandoms collide, but I had fun :D

Although I cant tell if kinger is cute or horrifying

[czech-hunter-reject]

Teeheehee, off to do my little schemes 😜

[czech-hunter-reject]

Teeheehee, on my way back home from doing my little schemes 🤪

[sevensmallgummies]

Sphinx employee slash bodega cat that blocks the door and asks riddles, the owner has the answer of the day on a paper taped to the door.

it never notices.

[sevensmallgummies]

important addition from a friend:

everyone thinks REALLY hard and regulars makes two bad guesses so it feels like it's doing a good job

[sevensmallgummies]

Sphinx employee slash bodega cat that blocks the door and asks riddles, the owner has the answer of the day on a paper taped to the door.

it never notices.

[sevensmallgummies]

important addition from a friend:

everyone thinks REALLY hard and regulars makes two bad guesses so it feels like it's doing a good job

[vacuously-true]

You know how there's like some mathematician or something, who like did some useful stuff but is primarily known for overshadowing that work by going to great lengths trying to convince people to blow up the moon or something?

I wanna be like that but the hill I'm dying on is that the moon should be considered a planet

[vacuously-true]

Stop tagging this about the Unabomber it's not about the Unabomber, it's about time we give the other fucked up mathematicians some recognition, it's about this fucking guy

[hereticalteapot]

OP you're right and you should say it. There are 9 planets in the solar system and two of them are in a binary planetary system. I will die on this hill.

[vacuously-true]

EXACTLY. EARTH-MOON IS A BINARY PLANET SYSTEM. AND I WILL BECOME NOTABLE FOR MY FREQUENT POSTS TO VARIOUS TUMBLR BLOGS AND MY ADVOCACY FOR THE RECOGNITION OF THE MOON AS A PLANET.

[hereticalteapot]

Now, dear reader, you might say: "But three of the Jovian moons and Titan are bigger than the Moon!". And to that I say yes, but two of those are bigger than Mercury also and people aren't usually upset about that. Plus all of those are satellites of bodies that are completely incomparable in scale.

Ganymede, the biggest moon in the solar system, is 0.008% the mass of Jupiter. The Moon is a bit over 1.2% of Earth's mass and a solid 27% of its radius. There's no other planet* in the solar system with a satellite anywhere close to the kind of similarity in size that the Earth-Moon system has.

You might also say "Fine but it's literally called 'The Moon' so that's a bit silly". To which I say that I've been calling it that to be more easily understood but it would be extremely easy to switch to calling it "Luna" which is what most people do when they encounter situations where saying "The Moon" creates ambiguity - like when writing sci-fi or a nontrivial amount of astronomical research.

In conclusion, lumping Luna in with the satellites of other bodies is unhelpful because it is geophysically distinct from most of them, and orbitally distinct from all of them. Luna is a planet and it's rad that we can see one so clearly in the night sky.

[*No, Pluto is not a planet, but yes Pluto-Charon is totally a dwarf planet binary]

[kazoracht]

I'll integrate this into my belief system but only because it's funny

[asdfjasklfjdkla]

hello???? hello??????????? have we walked into the twilight zone or something??????????? yes, the moon is a percentage (a percentage almost exactly) of earth’s mass, but that doesn’t magically make us a binary system! the barycenter is still well within the diameter of earth! what next, are you going to say that since deimos and phobos orbit mars, they’re actually a trinary planetary system?? you fucking better not!

[hereticalteapot]

Hi, I'm an astrophysicist, I am well aware of the IAU (International Astronomical Union) definition of a planet. It is a definition that is relatively controversial and doesn't really make a lot of sense - it was mostly written to prevent the list of planets from getting too long as we discovered more dwarfs. This definition does not include anything to do with barycentres - I'll get back to that.

The IAU definition of a planet has 3 parts:

1. Object in orbit around our Sun

2. Object has reached hydrostatic equilibrium (i.e. it's a sphere, not a potato)

3. Object has cleared its neighborhood around its orbit

Both Earth and Luna satisfy 2. I will accept that 1 is debatable, but the crux of my argument is that Luna is the size of a terrestrial planet (yes, ~1% of Earth's mass, but still huge and of roughly the same order of magnitude as Mercury, which is a mere ~5% of Earth's mass) and exceptionally large relative to its orbital partner compared to any other "satellite", a factor the IAU does not account for.

It's important to note that 1 literally does not permit binary planets - even if both bodies are identical, one must be the "moon". This is major criticism of the IAU definition. It also doesn't account for exoplanets or rogue planets, but that's another story.

3 is where this definition falls apart. You could easily argue that most of the planets in our solar system fail depending on how you interpret it, because it's so fuzzy. The Earth fails, because there's a planet-sized body chilling out in its orbit (Luna), Jupiter fails because it has huge quantities of asteroids trapped in its Lagrange points, etc.

In the latter case, we say that because Jupiter is determining the motion of these bodies, it still counts. For the Earth we simply ignore Luna and say that the rule is more about stray bodies than orbital partners. But by the same logic we can say that for Luna we ignore the Earth, and Luna passes.

So I would argue that the IAU definition is bad, but if you fixed it so that it allowed binary systems to exist, it would readily define Luna as a planet in my view (if you deleted the Earth from the solar system and left Luna, it would unambiguously meet the criteria).

Now let's talk about barycentres.

The barycentre of two bodies in orbit is just their overall centre of mass. People often point to the external barycentre of the Pluto-Charon system to indicate that they are binary dwarfs. However, this is a poor metric in my view, because it's highly dependent on orbital distance.

The centre of mass of the Earth-Luna system is inside the Earth at present, but if Luna simply orbited further away, the barycentre would be in the empty space between them, with nothing about the two bodies individually, or the qualitative nature of their orbits, having changed. In fact, given enough time and pretending the Sun won't consume both bodies in a few billion years, Luna would actually drift far enough away due to tidal interactions for this to happen - it would be silly for it to suddenly be a planet one day when it wasn't the day before.

To answer your question, no. I would under no circumstances argue that the martian moons are planets. They are minuscule space potatoes that are not even large by the standards of asteroids. If Mars were close enough in mass to them for the system to be considered plausibly trinary, it would be far too small to even qualify as a dwarf planet (and there's no way such a system would be gravitationally stable to perturbation by Jupiter regardless).

[vacuously-true]

@hereticalteapot Thank you so much for laying this all out! I totally agree. Something that's motivating to me is the fact that Luna is more gravitationally attracted to the Sun than to Earth- and by that definition is orbiting the Sun, not the Earth. This is not true of any other "moons" in our solar system except some which are not even large enough to become spheres- so this is another way in which it is different from the moons in our system.

It's really frustrating to me when people lash out and say "You're wrong because there's a definition, for the love of god look up the definition" about a topic where I think it's clear my point is that I KNOW the definition and I disagree with it. And that's allowed! Definitions are made up! "Planets" are made up, and I think we should make them up differently!

All the things in our solar system are just different kinds of rocks dancing to each other's gravity- they're all affected by each one's gravity, even in tiny ways. They do not fall neatly into subcategories "planet" and "not a planet" - we made this distinction up because we wanted it. We noticed that some of the bodies in our solar system seemed much more important and dominant than others and we wanted a name for that. But the planets don't know that- they don't have an inherent major distinction between them, nor are they obligated to. When we wanted to come up with a way to clearly decide which bodies were planets, we had to make something up.

What we made up is a little bit vague, and even if it were extremely clear cut, we could still debate whether it was a reasonable or intuitive or useful definition.

In science we have lots of definitions, and they aren't handed down by god, they're made by people, and they are made to be useful, and when they aren't useful or reasonable, they can be and should be and are changed. Knowing which things fit which definitions is part of science, but another part of science is thinking critically about whether things SHOULD be defined, how they should be defined, whether definitions need to be changed, and other things like this- and that's messier than just knowing facts. But that's science.

[vacuously-true]

I hate to say it folks, but my fondness for the "Luna is a planet" argument might not just be because it's silly and I like to be silly. It might be a really convenient training ground for thinking about definitions which are social constructs in other contexts. Like race, sex, gender, disability, economics. These things, like planets, are made up. They are very real, don't get me wrong! They are real because we made them up! But what, exactly, they are... we decided it. And we could decide differently. We have that power. If you don't like something because it doesn't fit a definition- that's not really an argument against it. Because the definition could be changed. Should it be?

[pig-lota]

This is all great points and you're so right.

Also for any barycenter definition fans - the barycenter of Luna and Jupiter is within Jupiter. I think we can all agree Luna is not a moon of Jupiter.

[meme-space-nine]

Something else to note is that IAU bylaws require a new definition to be voted on to be circulating for at least a year in the scientific community. The one voted on in 2006 was drafted the same day. Also, the vote was specifically and carefully planned such that most of the planetary scientists who were only there for specific parts of the conference relevant to their fields had left already. It was rigged and in violation of their own bylaws, so I think its well past time we stop listening to this absurd definition.

[vacuously-true]

What the absolute fuck I can't believe election rigging is part of this story lmfao

[vacuously-true]

Alexander Abian blogging from the dead

[vacuously-true]

Prev I would really like you to explain what you meant by some of this because I think I'm not aware of some physics you're referring to. But. On the other hand. I am SLIGHTLY afraid to ask.

[t-rexdescendant]

i am Incapable of putting things into words in any reasonable manor so instead i have drawn a handy diagram

[vacuously-true]

Well. I guess that helps.

[homunculus-argument]

 Hey btw, another worldbuilding thing: You can, and actually should have weird and impractical cultural things. They’re not inherently unrealistic, for as long as you address the realistic consequences as well.

 Let’s say you’ve got a city where there’s tame white doves everywhere. They’re not pests, they’re regarded as sacred, holy protectors of the city, and the whole city cares for them and feeds them like they’re pets. They’re so tame because it’s a social taboo to hurt or scare one. Nice pretty doves :)

 Then someone points out that even if they’re not seen as pests, doesn’t having a completely unchecked feral pigeon population - that not only isn’t being culled, but actively fed and cared for - mean that there would be bird shit absolutely all over the place?

 A part of you wants to say no, because these are your nice, pretty doves. To explain that there’s a reason why they’re not shitting all over the place, maybe they’re super-intelligent and specifically bred and trained to not shit all over the place. The logistics of how, exactly, could anyone breed and train a flock of feral birds go unaddressed.

 An even worse solution would be to not have those birds, editing them out of the world. No, they spark joy, you can’t just toss them out!

 Now, consider: Yes, yes they would, but the city also has an extensive public sanitation service that’s occupied 90% of the time by cleaning bird shit off of everything. One of the most common last names in the area actually translates to “one who scrapes off dove shit”, and it’s a highly respected occupation. And thanks to the sheer necessity of constantly regularly cleaning everything, the city enjoys a much higher standard of cleanliness, and less public health issues caused by poor public sanitation.

 The doves do protect the city. By shitting fucking everywhere.

[moonybyte]

While I absolutely love your idea, I just want to say that you can easily reduce public bird shitting from Pigeons by offering them comfortable lodgings where they can sleep and feed. Sure, you need to clean THOSE, but the pigeons shit a lot less all over town.

The Augsburg concept has one big pigeon house every 500m in which wild pigeons are fed, protected from weather and have nesting opportunities. Cities doing that have WAY less uncontrolled populations (since they can take out eggs if they feel they need reduce the population), way less shit AND a healthy population since it’s easier for veterinarians to notice and get to sick animals.

So I’d say one can of course still keep your general idea……but there’s also those MASSIVE palace-like pidgeon houses and only the most worthy are allowed to enter and directly interact with the pigeons (feed them, heal them, clean their lodgings). One big entrance for the human servants (priests??) and millions of small holes for the pigeons.

In fact, one could potentially turn your idea around IN THE PIDGEONS FAVOR. So your world is like ours and most major cities have a big feral pigeon population. And most of those cities HATE the pigeons and try to fight them and stuff. And they think that pigeon worshipper town is frigging cuckoo. BUT when comparing, then pigeon worshipper town is ridiculously clean and beautiful. No bird shit everywhere, no ruined house facades and statues from erosion through bird poop. Pigeon haters go “how tf are you so clean, you have birds EVERYWHERE???” and the worshippers shrug and show their little bird temples spread around town that keep their precious birdies AND their town pretty.

[plucky-passerine]

I think this is a really good example of how research can greatly improve your worldbuilding! You don’t have to be perfectly accurate - it is fantasy after all - but the real world is so much more clever and beautiful than any of us know

[curlicuecal]

advice that’s stuck with me: you don’t have to work inwards to justify a premise (e.g., ‘how would it ever be plausible to use snakes as currency’) as long as you work outwards in interesting ways from that premise (e.g., ‘how would a society that used snakes as currency look different? what would they use for wallets?’)

[gholateg]

I love this idea that OP thought there wasn’t a town that had already handled it’s “We fucking love birds you guys, like for fucking reals” problem already through sheer human chutzpah.

Humans are THE pack binding specie. A way will be found.

[shaudo-of-a-doubt]

For anyone else interested in or looking for more information about pigeon houses, the traditional word for them is dovecote.

[dreamsy990]

i saw someone say nobody needs to know what a .txt file is anymore. what the fuck is the world coming to

[dreamsy990]

unironically i think we need to bring back computer labs because APPARENTLY some people WERENT taught basic computer literacy and internet safety in school

[dreamsy990]

things about computers/the internet i think kids should be formally taught in schools because theyre important to know and the amount of soon to be grown adults i know who know NOTHING about any of these is quite frankly almost all of them (and resources to learn if you dont know these things, because its never to late to get better with computers)

how to troubleshoot by yourself when you have a technical problem

what common file types are

some very basics on how to use ""developer tools"" on your computer (because i cant think of a better way to refer to them) like task manager and command prompt (and their mac equivalents, terminal and activity monitor ofc)

how to read and understand a privacy policy and what your personal data is, as well as what it being collected actually means and steps you can take to keep it private

how to understand terms of service (hey. if you have trouble with reading legalese and worry about being able to understand these policies anyways, here's a site that gives basic summaries of privacy policies and ToS)

what a cookie actually is

internet privacy and your digital footprint!! seriously i dont know why we stopped teaching people that they shouldnt be putting their entire real identity online in a world where your online actions can ruin you irl

basic safety measures like antivirus software (and why you should use it or if the built in one on windows or mac is enough for you) and backing up your computer (also a mac guide)

common keyboard shortcuts (and on mac)

as an additional note: things i think everyone should know on computers and the internet but schools may bit hesitant to teach about for whatever moral/legal standards schools pretend to operate on

vpns and adblockers! (btw for most of these where you can pay for things im purposefully not recommending any specific software but seriously just use ublock origin for an adblocker)

how to not get a virus while pirating something

what a temporary email is and when to use one

red flags that you shouldn't trust a website (and how to quickly check the security of a site)

what javascript on a website does and how to disable it to get around paywalls

[dreamsy990]

ok one last addition! if you want to take it one level higher, i think learning the very basics of at least one programming language is good for people. it makes computers less scary and it makes you feel very cool, and a lot of people get discouraged about it because it seems overly complicated and hard to learn outside a formal classroom setting, so heres some resources for learning the very basics of python (because i consider it the easiest language to learn and knowing one language will make it easier to learn others)

an online compiler so you dont need to download anything or worry about running code directly on your computer if that makes you nervous

a basic video guide to introduce you to python and walk you through beginner steps

a guide to some syntax and commands you should know (this was literally my lifeline in my first CS class)

some performance tasks to give you things to code to practice and assess yourself

[bisexualcreature-deactivated202]

lvl 1: the plural of octopus is octopuses because the plural version of a word is the word with an s at the end

lvl 2: the plural version of octopus is octopi because if a word ends with "us" the plural version replaces the "us" with "i" e.g. cactus -> cacti and fungus -> fungi

lvl 3: actually, that rule is only for latin words. octopus is a greek word and the correct plural is octopuses or octopodes

lvl 4: actually, language is descriptive not prescriptive. since enough people over time have used octopi as the plural for octopus, it's a valid plural

lvl 5: the plural of octopus is octopeese, like geese

[asteroidtroglodyte]

Lvl 6: My Marine Biology professor told me it was technically “Octopods” to bring it in line with “Cephalopod,” but that if the class is falling asleep you can call them “Octopussies”

[igneousbody]

"In the 1960s, after his seminal work on barn owls, Roger Payne switched his attention to whales. In 1971, he published two historic papers. (...) The second showed that fin whales—the second-largest animals after blue whales—make extremely low-pitched calls that can be heard across entire oceans. It nearly destroyed Payne’s career.

That controversial paper was born of the Cold War. To listen for Soviet submarines, the U.S. Navy installed chains of underwater listening posts in the Pacific and Atlantic. This network, known as the Sound Surveillance System, or SOSUS, picked up a deluge of oceanic noises. Some were clearly biological. Others were more mysterious. One especially enigmatic sound was monotonous, repetitive, and low, with a frequency of 20 Hz—an octave below the lowest key on a standard piano. This hum was so loud that people doubted it could be coming from an animal. Did it have a military origin? Was it produced by underwater tectonic activity? Did it come from waves crashing on some distant shoreline? The actual source only became clear when Navy scientists started following the sounds to their sources, and often found a fin whale at the end.

Human hearing typically bottoms out at around 20 Hz. Below those frequencies, sounds are known as infrasound, and they’re mostly inaudible to us unless they’re very loud. Infrasounds can travel over incredibly long distances, especially in water. Knowing that fin whales also produce infrasound, Payne calculated, to his shock, that their calls could conceivably travel for 13,000 miles. No ocean is that wide. Together with oceanographer Douglas Webb, Payne published his calculations, speculating that the largest whales “may be in tenuous acoustic contact throughout a relatively enormous volume of ocean.” The response was brutal. Leading whale researchers told him that his paper was pure fantasy. Colleagues hinted that critics had been questioning his mental health behind his back. “When you get to distances like that, people just refuse to believe that it’s true,” Payne tells me.

Payne’s work made a more positive impression on Chris Clark. A young acoustician and former choirboy, Clark was recruited by Roger and Katy Payne to be a sound technician on a 1972 trip to Argentina to study right whales. It was a thrilling and formative time. Camped on a beach beneath the Southern Cross, with penguins bumbling past and albatrosses wheeling overhead, Clark began listening to whales. He placed hydrophones in the water to eavesdrop on their songs and found ways of assigning specific recordings to individual whales. He went on to compile libraries of whale calls, recorded all over the world, from Argentina to the Arctic. And all the while, Payne’s idea of giant whales talking over oceans stuck with him.

In the 1990s, with the Cold War over and the threat of Soviet subs diminished, the Navy offered Clark and others a chance to observe real-time recordings from their SOSUS hydrophones. Amid the spectrograms—visual representations of the sounds that SOSUS picked up—Clark saw the unmistakable signal of a singing blue whale. On his first day, Clark saw that more blue whale vocalizations had been recorded from a single SOSUS sensor than had been described before in the entire scientific literature. The ocean was awash with their calls, and those calls were coming in from enormous distances. Clark calculated that one individual was 1,500 miles from the sensor that recorded it. He could listen to whales singing in Ireland with a microphone situated off Bermuda. “I just thought: Roger was right,” he says. “It is physically possible to detect a blue whale singing across an ocean basin.” (...)

Although blue and fin whale songs can traverse oceans, no one knows if the whales actually communicate at such ranges. It’s possible that they’re signaling to nearby individuals with very loud calls, which just happen to extend further afield. But Clark points out that they repeat the same notes, over and over again, and at very precise intervals. A singing whale will stop calling when it surfaces for air, and come back on the beat when it submerges. “That’s not arbitrary,” he says. It reminds him of the redundant and repetitive signals that Martian rovers use to beam data back to Earth. If you wanted to design a signal that could be used to communicate across oceans, you’d come up with something similar to a blue whale’s song.

Those songs might have other uses, too. Their notes can last for several seconds, with wavelengths as long as a football field. Clark once asked a Navy friend what he could do with such a call. “I could illuminate the ocean,” the friend replied. That is, he could map distant underwater landscapes, from submerged mountains to the seafloor itself, by processing the echoes returning from the far-reaching infrasounds. Geophysicists can certainly use fin whale songs to map the density of the ocean crust. But can the whales do so?

Clark sees evidence in their movements. Through SOSUS, he has seen blue whales emerging in polar waters between Iceland and Greenland and making a beeline—a whaleline?—for tropical Bermuda, singing all the way. He has seen whales slaloming between underwater mountain ranges, zigging and zagging between landmarks hundreds of miles apart. “When you watch these animals move, it’s as if they have an acoustic map of the oceans,” he says. He also suspects that the animals can build up such maps over their long lives, accruing sound-based memories that lurk in their mind’s ear. After all, Clark recalls veteran sonar specialists telling him that different parts of the sea had their own distinctive sounds. “They said: If you put a pair of headphones on me, I can tell you if I’m near Labrador or off the Bay of Biscay,” says Clark. “I thought that if a human being could do this in 30 years, what could an animal do with 10 million years?”

The scale of a whale’s hearing is hard to grapple with. There’s the spatial vastness, of course, but also an expanse of time. Underwater, sound waves take just under a minute to cover 50 miles. If a whale hears the song of another whale from a distance of 1,500 miles, it’s really listening back in time by about half an hour, like an astronomer gazing upon the ancient light of a distant star. If a whale is trying to sense a mountain 500 miles away, it has to somehow connect its own call with an echo that arrives 10 minutes later. That might seem preposterous, but consider that a blue whale’s heart beats around 30 times a minute at the surface, and can slow to just 2 beats a minute on a dive. They surely operate on very different timescales than we do. If a zebra finch hears beauty in the milliseconds within a single note, perhaps a blue whale does the same over seconds and minutes. To imagine their lives, “you have to stretch your thinking to completely different levels of dimension,” Clark tells me. He compares the experience to looking at the night sky through a toy telescope and then witnessing its full majesty through NASA’s spaceborne Hubble telescope. When he thinks about whales, the world feels bigger, stretching out in space and time.

Whales weren’t always big. They evolved from small, hoofed, deer-like animals that took to the water around 50 million years ago. Those ancestral creatures probably had vanilla mammalian hearing. But as they adapted for an aquatic life, one group of them—the filter-feeding mysticetes, which include blues, fins, and humpbacks—shifted their hearing to low infrasonic frequencies. At the same time, their bodies ballooned into some of the largest Earth has ever seen. These changes are probably connected. The mysticetes achieved their huge size by evolving a unique style of feeding, which allows them to subsist upon tiny crustaceans called krill. Accelerating into a krill swarm, a blue whale expands its mouth to engulf a volume of water as large as its own body, swallowing half a million calories in one gulp. But this strategy comes at a cost. Krill aren’t evenly distributed across the oceans, so to sustain their large bodies, blue whales must migrate over long distances. The same giant proportions that force them to undergo these long journeys also equip them with the means to do so—the ability to make and hear sounds that are lower, louder, and more far-reaching than those of other animals.

Back in 1971, Roger Payne speculated that foraging whales could use these sounds to stay in touch over long distances. If they simply called when fed and stayed silent when hungry, they could collectively comb an ocean basin for food and home in on bountiful areas that lucky individuals have found. A whale pod, Payne suggested, might be a massively dispersed network of acoustically connected individuals, which seem to be swimming alone but are actually together."

- Ed Yong, An Immense World : How Animal Senses Reveal the Hidden Realms Around Us

[heedra]

not to oversimplify an extremely complex discipline but if i had to pick one tip to give people on how to have more productive interactions with children, especially in an instructive sense, its that teaching a kid well is a lot more like improv than it is like error correction and you should always work on minimizing the amount of ‘no, wrong’ and maximizing the amount of ‘yes, and?’ for example: we have a species of fish at the aquarium that looks a lot like a tiny pufferfish. children are constantly either asking us if that’s what they are, or confidently telling us that’s what they are. if you rush to correct them, you risk completely severing their interest in the situation, because 1. kids don’t like to engage with adults who make them feel bad and 2. they were excited because pufferfish are interesting, and you have not given them any reason to be invested in non-pufferfish. Instead, if you say something like “It looks a LOT like a tiny pufferfish, you’re right. But these guys are even funnier. Wanna know what they’re called?” you have primed them perfectly for the delightful truth of the Pacific Spiny Lumpsucker

[akiragatr]

I was in martial arts for years, and in particular I kinda specialized in working with the younger kids.

The two Big Rules when instructing younger students was- 1. Compliment before Critique 2. Don’t say ‘but’, say ‘now’

Praise kids on what they get right first, especially if they are struggling. Like OP said, kids don’t like to engage with people who make them feel bad. They need encouragement when learning new things.

Number two boils down to this. If you tell a kid a compliment, then say “but you need to fix this”, that ‘but’ completely negates your compliment. It’s gone. It was canceled out like adding a negative to a positive. Using “hey, that punch is looking great, now let’s focus on your stance” doesn’t verbally cancel out the progress they’ve made. It’s like they’ve checked off something on their list of stuff to work on.

Wording can absolutely make or break a child’s motivation and interest.

[problemedic]

Rebloggling as it’s relevant in a Medical Education context

[lizziedoesvetpath]

Honestly I use all of these to teach vet students too. I think people in general respond better to positivity in teaching. Not coddling, but acknowledging when a student got part way to the right answer, or had a good thought process, is something I’ve found keeps students engaged and builds confidence, which encourages them to keep going instead of shutting down and just “getting through” a lab or a rotation

[upthewitchypunx]

My autumn equinox kitchen altar built with things that grow in my garden: hops, Alyssum, nasturtiums, sunflower, vervain, rosemary.