ucresearch:

Seeing a supernovae within hours of the explosion

For the first time ever, scientists have gathered direct evidence of a rare Wolf-Rayet star being linked to a specific type of stellar explosion known as a Type IIb supernova. Peter Nugent of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory says they caught this star – a whopping 360 million light years away – just a few hours after it exploded.

Hear more about this discovery →

astrodidact:

There’s a reason why I find it incredibly difficult to trust the validity of things that were said, or events that had occurred thousands of years ago; even today with our ability to fact-check and the wealth of information at our fingertips, we are bombarded with lies and misinformation. Continuously. If we’re not being lied to, we’re not always told the whole truth, which is still deceptive. I’ve become one cynical motherfucker over the years, I really can’t help it. Maybe that’s why ignorance is bliss…


asherogue:

natalieminor1:

I just came. Holy library. 😍

I want all of these.

(Source: kumandaninkayiptusu)

rosariummm:

p0kemina:

severmylimbs:

p0kemina:

satanic-b00ty:

rosariummm:

You can’t find it because I reported you and had tumblr remove it lol wow guys check out this disrespectful jerk! Please report him PLEASE!!!

I get so angry when people are like “if you don’t want it reblogged then don’t post it” uhm no, its the fact that you are dehumanizing ME, a person with feelings, and sexualizing me at the same time. All I’m seeing from him in this is that he does not give two fucks about womens feelings and how they feel when someone dehumanizes them. If she wanted her picture on your nasty ass blog then she would have submitted it herself. Disgusting piece of shit.

"I’m a perv and sexualising you against your will because you do not own your own body and decide whether or not I can collect images of you in an image bank that I use to stimulate me sexually. I am a selfish pig and I don’t understand personal boundaries. Something something freedom of speech lets me invade your privacy."

Am I the only one who thinks this chick Is overreacting ?

You shouldn’t be because

  1. The girl in question has in her blog description very clearly that she does not want any blogs that contain pornographic content as their main content (i.e. porn / fetish blogs) to follow her or reblog her pictures. This blog, as many other porn and fetish blogs do, explicitly ignored this request and did it anyway, demonstrating, as many other porn and fetish blogs do, a lack of care for other people’s personal comfort and boundaries
  2. In case he did not reblog it directly from her, she’s also kindly asked he removed her photograph. Look at the sense of entitlement this man has over this girl’s image. You may not think it’s that big of a deal but it is extremely telling of society’s attitude towards women and their bodies and especially their right to not want to be viewed in a sexual context
  3. It is really REALLY wrong for someone to sexualise someone else against their will. Being featured on a blog with heavy, pornographic content can not only be detrimental to someone’s own mental health, but it can even impact their social relationships and future job prospects, if found by others in the wrong context. Not everyone knows how tumblr works and will understand that there are porn blogs who basically don’t give a shit about other people’s boundaries and provided sexual contexts before collecting images of them
  4. It should be that someone needs to say yes to be consenting to be viewed sexually, contrary to the popular “it’s not bad unless they say no.” In any case, the girl DID say no and was blatantly refused by this man, who has access to a multitude of other (hopefully consensual) sexual images but is so adamant about his right to sexualise this girl he thinks it is some kind of moral / free speech issue. If this isn’t downright disregard for consent, people’s boundaries and just plain fucking compassion for other people’s wishes I don’t know what is

TL;DR It’s not what you’re technically ‘allowed’ to get away with according to a website’s terms of service or the ‘rules’ of the internet, it’s about respecting people’s boundaries and especially respecting people’s wishes about their own sexual context. Nobody has any right to simply place someone in a sexual context with out their consent. And while some argue this is inevitable in people’s ‘heads’ or ‘imaginations’, the least they can do is not do it publicly. How much of a fucking baby do you have to be, to be genuinely upset / insulted about someone asking you to not display their image in your precious aggregation of sexually stimulating photographs?

Thank you👏👏👏👏

sweetwhatsername:

thepoliticalfreakshow:

#JusticeForMichaelBrown: Renewed Calls For Justice in Ferguson From Community Leaders & Michael Brown’s Family

FERGUSON, Mo. — Community activists and local clergy on Tuesday renewed calls for the arrest of the officer who fatally shot an unarmed teen, in a case that set off days of riots and violence in this St. Louis suburb.

The parents of Michael Brown, the slain 18-year-old, stood with members of the Ferguson chapter of the National Action Network, the family’s attorney and local clergy at a news conference outside the Ferguson Police Department to echo the earlier demands by the Rev. Al Sharpton that Officer Darren Wilson be arrested and indicted.

Representatives of the groups said Wilson should be arrested, charged, photographed and indicted based on new witness statements and evidence in the case. They are calling for the St. Louis County Police Department to make the arrest because they took over the investigation from the Ferguson police.

"We believe there is enough evidence to arrest Officer Darren Wilson," said the Rev. Carlton Lee, NAN chapter president. "If probable cause is enough to arrest civilians, then it is enough to arrest police officers.

"We’re wondering why Darren Wilson has been granted immunity. He is a criminal. He killed an 18-year-old, college-bound, unarmed young man."

Brown was unarmed when Wilson, 28, shot him on a street Aug. 9. Witnesses in the area said Brown had raised his hands to surrender when he was shot. The shooting and police response drew racially charged protests that have sometimes turned violent.

Anthony Gray, the Brown family’s attorney, said based on the accounts of six witnesses, who said Brown had his hands raised before Wilson shot him, the officer should be indicted.

"With the overwhelming weight of the evidence, that step should not be skipped," Gray said.

Adolphus Pruitt, NAACP St. Louis County Branch president, said requests for the arrest of an officer in the shooting of an unarmed civilian is not unprecedented. He pointed to a USA TODAY report that indicated that nearly two times a week in the United States, a white police officer killed a black person during a seven-year period ending in 2012.

"This time it is not going to be status quo," Pruitt said. "We insist that the prosecutor does what he should do. We are not going to be satisfied with a non-indictment."

Brown’s parents, Lesley McSpadden and Michael Brown Sr., did not speak at the news conference but Lee said their presence reflects their agreement with the calls for Wilson’s arrest.

"The parents have asked for this arrest since Day One," he said.

Keep talking about this. It is still real. It is still relevant.


realitista:

It’s nice to get some positive news sometimes.