Whatthehell? Kids are so delicate these days.

smh

The kids aren't delicate, it's parents and lawmakers not allowing kids to experience things we did every day.

Media bias. At least one take on it, your mileage may vary. :D

Non-partisan doesn't mean right. :facepalm:

If Brazil were China, that would be pretty close to the correct location.

This also sort of works for Charleston or Savannah.

New Republic has tilted that far? Death of a fine rag, used to be taller and more center.

The Atlantic can't share space with Vox and Slate and the Nation. It's better than those

The Enquirer, strictly inaccurate/fabricated unless reporting about John Edwards, which just goes ta show ya, if the top of the heap doesn't do their job, it will be left to the bottom.

I find myself clicking on The Hill quite a bit. They seem level-headed, technically proficient, and they skew a little to the Right, which I intentionally seek out to counter-balance my implicit hard-Left opinions. NPR, BBC, The Economist are good choices, too.

Happiness report: Finland is world's 'happiest country' - UN

Attachment 63439

And the first four places go to the Scandinavians.
You know, those tall, blond(e) and perfect people? No wonder they're happy.
I have some Danish ancestry and have inherited the Scandinavian tall gene.
The blond(e) and perfect genes seem to have been allocated to someone else.

American Dwellars will be pleased to know that while you are only 18th in the Happiness Index, you're still one notch above us plucky Brits.
We've got broad shoulders. ;)

World Happiness Report 2018

BBC

I've been reading a fair amount of The Hill and Politico and listening to NPR. I still maintain that the format kills 24 hour cable news. It can't be decent because counting eyeballs is more important than the story.

Oh, I know. Just trying to be cheeky. ;)

Wanting some peace and quiet?
The interactive version of this map will tell you the road less traveled in each state.

They chose the Dalton Highway in Alaska as the best, but be warned that road is no casual Sunday drive, it goes to the North Slope oil fields.

What they have marked in green as Route 2 in NH is absolutely not Route 2. They had the right intentions and the pictures are accurate...

How popular is Donald Trump?

When you see an article that says, "Trump's approval rating is up/down" just ignore it--
Trump's approval/disapproval has been a straight line (+/- 2 points) for the last 12 months.

This is a detailed breakdown of how they (fivethirtyeight.com) compile these numbers.

An interesting article at Scientific American about outcomes vs the age old mantra of early detection.

The US internet. This is a map of the long haul fiber cables and junctions.
This was all built by private companies which are not exactly forthcoming with this information.

Denver is a bit of a choke point.

And yet Frontier can't get me a reliable connection.

Oh they can, just don't see why they should. :(

It's really misleading to show 360 in Nevada using the US route symbol when in fact it is a state route. I've been on that road before - lost a tire due to a rock in the road.

It's clearly labeled a State Route, as are most of the roads on the map.

Fucks given...

That's pretty funny. I wonder if previous elections have had the same phenomenon. No matter what, half the country is always unhappy with the result...

What it takes...

Spring sprung...

Oof.

One-bedroom condo here.

It may be conformational bias but I find these three charts easy to accept...

Yep.

We're afraid of the stuff we mostly can't control. Cancer, terrorists, murder, etc.

We know how to prevent heart disease, but it's no fun to eat a dry salad for every meal.

On Friday night’s supper tray there was a note that they were withholding Romaine lettuce because of a federal recall, so salad isn’t always safe either.

Cancer does take a broader age spectrum, though--very few heart attacks happen in your 30s, but we all know people who have gotten cancer in their 30s. It's scarier to think about dying young.

Similar signs here, but, salmonella doesn't kill you.

It just makes you wish you were dead.

Wazzat? Some kind of fish spread?

If you've been eating fish.

In spite of Libertarians...

The never ending analysis speculation about the USA.

The main job of all individuals, in all species, plant and animal, is to pass along their DNA.

In humanity, more females pass along their DNA than males. In all human history, there are twice as many women in the DNA record than there are men.

So half the men are out. Some men don't care for sex with women. Some men don't pass along their DNA on a voluntary basis. (But historically, it hasn't been so much of a choice; arguably, we didn't even understand the exact relationship between sex and pregnancy until recently in human history.) Some men don't care for sex at all.

But the biggest reason men don't get to pass along their DNA is that they are rejected by the women. For whatever reason, they don't do the mating dance well, and are not selected.

Today, sometimes, we can see why those men are rejected. Prehistorically, we're not so sure. Here is the most amazing graph on this topic, ever.

On the left, the number of men reproducing their DNA. On the right, the women.

http://cellar.org/2017/men-women-reproducing.jpg

8,000 Years Ago, 17 Women Reproduced For Every One Man

It turns out that, after the advent of agriculture, human behavior suddenly and radically changed... on every continent. Rather suddenly, the women became highly selective. Suddenly it was really rare for a man to qualify.

(It's like middle school all over again...)

If you read the article you will find that they have theories about why this is so, but nobody really knows!! All they know is that it's the first marker that human culture affected evolution.

I don't buy the notion that women were more selective. This looks to me like a man-vs-man issue, as it almost always has been throughout history. Harems, for example, were not an example of women being selective; they were an example of one man having more power than the rest. Same with the sister-wives in traditional Mormon culture. Evolutionarily, women seek safety and food for themselves and their children before sexual satisfaction. So if one man beats all the others into submission--either physically or economically--the women don't really have a choice. They're already completely beaten both physically and economically (we don't know for sure about 8,000 years ago, of course, but I think it's fair to extrapolate from the last 2,000 years of recorded history).

The answer, of course, is to give the women all the money and power. Then you would see the most egalitarian sexual distribution possible.

See they're all gold diggers, it's in their DNA. :p:

Could be -- but -- the frustration resulting from male involuntary celibacy would lead to a lot of regular challenges to the amazing level of dominance hierarchy that would lead to a 17:1 ratio

Chimps are interested in fairness. When things seem unfair in the chimp world, the top chimps get their ass beat by a cooperative group of lesser chimps.

So, this ratio may require the cooperation of lesser males, in some fashion...

It looks like the end happens with civilization, and the end of tribes

Ideally, sure. But not if the involuntarily celibate had been bamboozled into believing it was the women's fault. Then they just stew in anger until they kill a woman they've decided should be theirs, or else drive a van into a crowded sidewalk.

When viewed from such a zoomed-out resolution that all men appear to be nothing but pussyhounds, sure. :thumbsup:

Gosh, 400 months in a row could almost be called a trend...

So...

Urrwhurr but the Eastern U.S. and Eastern Canadia is getting warmer, and we're getting cooler?

Works for me.

That's because you're thinking weather instead of climate.

The opposite (gonna learn to read digr) Almost: during the month of April, the eastern US and Canuckia was way cooler than the average at the same time of the year as determined between 1951-1980.

'member when we had snow last month, that was that happening

How does the "400 months in a row" work into that?

Is it "400 months in a row", or is it April?

Or, is it 400 Aprils in a row?

And what does the temperature of my gis have to do with anything?

That's weather, not climate.

Fuck weather vs climate...

What does the goddamned chart indicate?

Fiukkit, Im too pissed to learn anything rfn.

The climate is changing to warmer and that's not good.

The "400 months" is that this is the 400th month in a row that overall world temperatures have been higher than average.

But IMO that's a silly way to look at the data, since the number would be higher than the 1951-1980 average for 400 months if it rose a teeny bit 400 months ago, and then stayed constant.

Also, the 1951-80 data is weaker and is missing large parts of the earth. And I believe it's land-only? I think, I dunno.

The best way to look at it, again IMO, is to consider only the post-1980 temperatures, as they are much more accurate than anything pre-1980, because that is when the satellites took over the job.

The best way to watch those temperatures is by following the UAH6.0 lower troposphere reported temps, a graph of which currently looks like this (an interesting graph, so it's pertinent to the thread):

http://cellar.org/2017/UAH6-April2018.jpg

That way you are only looking at satellite numbers and comparing them to satellite numbers. The satellites do make mistakes (they drift), and some of this data has been corrected for, but it's considered pretty accurate.

The "anomaly" here, the number being graphed, is the temp versus the 1980 average. So, in April 2018, the planet lower troposphere of the planet was considered to be 0.21 degrees C hotter than it was in 1980.

It looks like 1980 was a high point of a cycle, and the graph ends on a low point. So the low point of a roughly +/- 0.2 degree cycle now is 0.2 degrees over the high point of the cycle 40 years ago. It would be easier to see what's happening if there were a trendline plotted through the datapoints.


edit accuracy: high point of probably 1981 was closer to 0.1 than 0; current low point is 0.1 degrees higher than that.

What does the blue over eastern North America indicate?

Democrats. See, it's a political map. Democrats are blue and Republicans are red.
:3eye:

Well thar's m'prollum right thar!

Weather.

The best chart on this topic:

https://xkcd.com/1732/