A recent study from the Pew Research Center found nonpartisan support for strengthening environmental laws.
A new nonpartisan research study found that the majority of Americans, including Republicans, believe that "stricter environmental rules and regulations are worth the cost".
Just a regular reminder that climate change and environmental protection are not nearly as controversial or partisan as some powerful folks would like us to believe. There has been similar research findings that the majority of people in every country support policies to address climate change and also that people consistently underestimate how many other people care about climate change.
Jaxson Dart can support whomever he wants. That’s not the problem. The problem is that who you support is often attached to what you support, and if who you support has policies that hurt POC, how can your teammates trust you to support them?
A Tim Drake × Reader Pairing (CEO Tim fake dating reader)
A holiday gala, a slow dance that lingers, and a shared drink that feels dangerously intimate. When Gotham’s society pages take notice, what was meant to be nothing more than proximity starts to look like something steadier — and far more tempting. Neither of you intended to be seen like this… but the city is already watching.
✨Return to Story Master List✨
The Wayne Enterprises Christmas party is not designed for warmth.
It’s designed for reassurance.
White lights drape the atrium in careful symmetry. Evergreen arrangements soften the edges of steel and glass. A string quartet plays something recognizable but unobtrusive — culture without demand.
Money behaves itself here.
Tim moves through the room with practiced ease, greeting donors, answering questions, absorbing commentary that pretends not to be evaluative.
He’s aware of eyes on him. He always is.
What he’s not prepared for is how quickly those eyes shift when you arrive.
You don’t make an entrance. You never do. You simply appear — coat checked, posture composed, presence registering like a familiar chord struck again.
Tim spots you across the room and feels the subtle click of alignment.
Relief is an inconvenient emotion.
“You didn’t have to come,” he says when he reaches you, voice low enough to stay private.
“I know,” you reply. “I wanted to.”
That lands harder than it should.
The evening unfolds around you.
You move together easily — not because you planned to, but because it’s efficient. You intercept questions he doesn’t need to answer. He redirects conversations before they turn sharp. Between donors and board members, you exchange brief, murmured debriefs.
“This one’s fishing.”
“Noted.”
“Careful with that offer.”
“Already declined.”
It feels… natural.
At some point, the music shifts. Slower. Warmer. Less ceremonial.
Tim glances toward the dance floor, then back to you.
“You don’t have to,” he says again.
“I know.”
You step onto the floor anyway.
It’s not dramatic. No pause. No audience hush. Just two people moving together in the space available to them. His hand rests at your back — steady, respectful. Yours settles at his shoulder, light and deliberate.
People notice.
They don’t stare.
It reads as appropriate. Comfortable. Reassuring.
Later, you’re standing at the bar, sharing a drink because it’s easier than shouting over the music. Your laughter is quiet. His smile is softer than it’s been all night.
It feels like a moment stolen rather than staged.
You don’t see the camera.
You don’t see the way the scene frames itself: close enough to suggest intimacy, distant enough to invite interpretation.
But Gotham does.
—
The photograph runs two days later.
Not loudly. Not on the front page. Just enough to settle.
Wayne Heir Spotted at Holiday Event with Elegant Companion — A Season of Stability?
The language is kind.
Tim reads it between meetings.
By afternoon, the subtext has arrived.
A donor thanks him for “setting a good example.”
A board member remarks on how “grounded” he seems lately.
No one asks questions.
They don’t need to.
—
You see it that evening.
Your phone buzzes while you’re halfway through reheating leftovers.
Your mother’s message is brief.
📱 This is… encouraging.
Encouraging. Eye roll.
Another text follows, this time from an Aunt.
📱 People feel better when things look settled.
You set the phone down and stare at the counter for a long moment.
—
You don’t text Tim right away.
Neither of you does.
When you finally do, it’s careful.
📱 You: I think the city has decided something on our behalf.
Three dots. Pause. Then:
📱 Tim: It appears so.
📱 You: Are you alright?
A longer pause this time.
📱 Tim: It’s… efficient.
You close your eyes.
📱 You: I’m sorry.
📱 Tim: Don’t be. No one’s said anything unkind.
That might be the most unsettling part.
📱 You: My family seems… relieved.
📱 Tim: So does my board.
Silence stretches — full, not empty.
Neither of you names what’s forming in the space between the words.
But the shape is there now.
Waiting.
Neither of you suggests anything yet.
But the problem has been identified.
And both of you are very good at solving problems.
The Battle for the Truth: Science, Rhetoric, and the Public Sphere
Reality is nothing but a collective hunch. — Lily Tomlin
The pursuit of knowledge is marked by a paradoxical dynamic where systems embodying the principles of scientific inquiry, acknowledging their own incompleteness and embracing the provisional nature of truth, are frequently attacked by counterparts that proclaim absolute certainty yet often lack a foundation in empirical evidence. This phenomenon raises a profound question about why rigorously scientific systems, aware of their limitations, incur criticism from unscientific systems that claim completeness. The underlying reasons for this critique are rooted in epistemological, psychological, and sociological factors that drive this seemingly counterintuitive conflict.
At the heart of scientific systems lies an inherent humility, an acknowledgment of the complexity of the subject matter, and a willingness to revise or even overturn existing theories based on new evidence. This openness is not a sign of weakness but a hallmark of the scientific method, which thrives on skepticism, peer review, and empirical validation. However, this selfsame openness can be misconstrued by critics from closed systems as indecisiveness or uncertainty, providing a perceived foothold for attack. In contrast, closed systems often present themselves as comprehensive and definitive, eschewing the nuanced uncertainties of scientific inquiry for the comforting simplicity of absolute truths. This appeal to certainty resonates deeply with a public frequently overwhelmed by the intricacies of modern life, seeking clear, uncomplicated answers to complex questions.
A significant portion of the critique stems from a fundamental misunderstanding or deliberate misrepresentation of the scientific process. The iterative nature of scientific inquiry, where theories are refined or revised based on new evidence, is often portrayed as flip-flopping or lack of conviction. Critics from closed systems may fail to grasp or choose to obscure the distinction between the provisional nature of scientific knowledge and the method's robustness in approaching truth. Beneath the surface of these critiques often lie power dynamics and ideological differences. Closed systems may perceive scientific findings as a threat to their influence, audience, or worldview, prompting a defensive stance that manifests as attacks on the scientific system's legitimacy. Philosophical disagreements over the nature of truth, the role of empiricism, or the balance between consensus and dissent also fuel these conflicts, highlighting the deeply entrenched nature of these disputes.
To address this paradox, education and awareness are crucial. Enhancing public understanding of the scientific method can foster a broader appreciation for its strengths and the inherent value of acknowledging complexity. Scientists and science communicators must effectively convey the provisional nature of scientific knowledge, highlighting its adaptive and refining aspects as strengths rather than weaknesses. Encouraging respectful, open dialogue between proponents of different systems, while challenging, can facilitate mutual understanding and, in some instances, reconciliation of viewpoints. Strengthening science education and promoting clear communication are key strategies to navigate this paradox, ultimately fostering a more informed, critically thinking society.
The critique of scientific systems by unscientific counterparts underscores a profound misunderstanding of the scientific endeavor. Rather than a vulnerability, the acknowledgment of incompleteness is a badge of honor, reflecting the scientific community's unwavering commitment to the pursuit of truth, no matter how complex or provisional. Embracing education, clear communication, and engaged dialogue becomes paramount, not only for the integrity of scientific knowledge but for the fostering of a society that values critical thinking and the pursuit of knowledge. By navigating this paradox with awareness and strategies aimed at enhancing public understanding and dialogue, we can work towards a future where the scientific method is valued for its strengths, and the provisional nature of truth is seen as a catalyst for continuous learning and improvement.
Marjorie Shapiro: Supersymmetry, Extra Dimensions and the Origin of Mass - Exploring the Nature of the Universe Using PetaScale Data Analysis (Google Tech Talks, June 2007)
String Theory isn‘t Dead (Sabine Hossenfelder, December 2024)
The Problem With Sabine Hossenfelder (Professor Dave Explains, October 2024)
No, Sabine, Science is Not Failing (Professor Dave Explains, November 2024)
Lawrence Krauss: God, String Theory, and the State of Physics (Robinson Erhardt, March 2024)
Sabine Hossenfelder Can’t Stop Acting Like a Complete Fraud (Professor Dave Explains, February 2025)
Lil Nas X’s Arrest: A Reminder to View Public Crises Through a Mental Health Lens
In late August 2025, rapper Lil Nas X, whose real name is Montero Lamar Hill, was arrested in Los Angeles under felony charges including battery with injury on a police officer and resisting an executive officer. Videos circulating from the incident show him wandering nearly naked through the streets, interacting with bystanders, and exhibiting behaviors that many would recognize as symptomatic…
In recent weeks, the entertainment industry has been rocked by news of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) strike in 2023. While the actors involved in the strike have their reasons and concerns, it's essential to critically examine whether this strike is truly necessary or if it might be, in fact, quite pointless.
Economic Impact: One of the most immediate consequences of the SAG strike is the significant economic impact it has on the industry. Thousands of jobs, from actors to crew members, are being affected. Production companies are losing millions of dollars every day the strike continues. Given the economic hardships that many people have faced in recent times, including the COVID-19 pandemic, one must question the wisdom of causing further financial strain on the industry and its workers.
Demands and Priorities: The demands put forth by the striking actors are not unreasonable. However, one could argue that these demands might not be the top priority in a world grappling with more pressing issues. With global crises like climate change, social justice, and healthcare disparities, is a higher salary for already well-paid actors truly the most critical concern? Many people struggle to make ends meet, and it's hard to sympathize fully with actors making exorbitant salaries, especially when so many others are struggling.
Timing: The timing of the SAG strike is questionable, at best. It's happening in an era when the industry is still recovering from the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Many people in the entertainment business are just getting back on their feet after months of uncertainty and unemployment. Striking now seems insensitive to the plight of others in the industry.
Alternative Solutions: Are strikes the only way to resolve disputes and negotiate better terms? In an industry that thrives on creativity and innovation, one would hope for more imaginative and collaborative solutions. Negotiation and dialogue could lead to more mutually beneficial outcomes without causing widespread disruption and financial loss.
Public Perception: Lastly, it's worth considering the public perception of the strike. In an age where people are increasingly disillusioned with celebrities and their lavish lifestyles, a strike like this may only further alienate the audience. The entertainment industry depends on the support and admiration of the public, and a strike that seems self-serving could harm its reputation.
In conclusion, while the actors participating in the SAG strike 2023 may have legitimate concerns, it's crucial to weigh the impact of their actions on the broader industry and society as a whole. In a world facing numerous pressing issues, this strike may indeed appear pointless to many, given its economic consequences and the perceived priorities of those involved. Perhaps there are more constructive ways to address the concerns of actors and create a fairer and more equitable entertainment industry.
There are times the ones people call "Heroes" are, in fact, not heroes at all, but very vain, unkind, self-centered individuals who hog glory. There are also times the ones people call "villains", are not villainous at all, but in fact, are kind, gentle, souls just trying to help, and sometimes having to make very hard choices to save the most lives possible. -- Anon Guest
Mathilda Moonsky wore golden armour and rode a white steed. She had a cloth-of-gold cape and plume in her helmet. She had a magic sword and shield. Everywhere she went, there were stories of her magnificent deeds.
She also left a trail of bodies and injuries in her wake. So long as the biggest evil was destroyed, defeated, or diminished, all was well. Victory could be claimed and the hero moved on without a single look back.
Two months later, the Cleric came. Her name was Endurance Hamlin, and she always arrived in a hurry. She had recipes in a big book and a pack full of medical supplies. She had some small druidic talents, enough to encourage holly and mistletoe, then use it to create magical berries that could take the place of a day's rations.
