Fellow newsian Your title might not match the title of the article you linked! Could you please double check, and edit your post title if it indeed does not match? article title: “Trump indictment: Shush emojis and orders from the boss - charges in full” (Similairity: ~79%).
BING BONG this action was performed automatically by a bot approved by the mods (:
I've been having to start taking showers in the morning because I wake up sweating, and I've only been going outside when I absolutely have to. These triple digits are suffocating me. Like I know I should expect it due to the area I live in, but jesus christ, I can't wait until September.
I had someone earlier today tell me, "Don't worry! We'll be in the low 90s by the end of August!" I don't think that's any better T-T
It's 1°C on average. That means every molecule of air has AT LEAST 1°C extra thermal energy. And I'm not sure if anyone has noticed, there's a lot of air molecules. So while taking one cubic centimeter of air and increasing it by 1°C isn't a ton of energy. Do that for roughly all 109 tredecitillion molecules and you get about 2.2 zettajoules of energy. Annual US energy consumption is just 0.094 zettajoules. So one degree increase is equal to more energy than the US uses in 23½ years. The biggest nuclear bomb humans ever made, that pulls in at about 0.00021 zettajoules. So one degree is roughly 10,500 Tasr Bombas going off and then the resulting heat just never leaving.
All of that energy. It has to go somewhere. Sometimes it makes ice turn to water, sometimes it increases the speed at which some wind is moving, sometimes it increases the surface temperature of land, sometimes it evaporates water leaving an area very dry. But it has to go somewhere. And it cannot just radiate back out into space, it hits a CO₂ molecule, bounces off of it, and flies right back down to Earth. And the more CO₂ molecules we put out there, the more often that happens.
Huh this is the first thing I’ve read that puts it into a sort of understandable perspective (eternally recovering from my conservative raised childhood, maybe sane people explain it better in general)
With a global mean temperature increase of 1 C since 1970 there was an increase in peak temperatures (avg) of about 2 C. So till 2050 it will be somewhere around 3 C for the average peak in summer. If we look at the ramp up since 2008 we can expect more like 5-6 C higher temperature records than today. So in the 2050s there will be some summers with 45 C records and the average hottest day every year around 35-37 C
Edit: and not to forget that this is only talking about how high the peaks every year are. The length of heatwaves will also increase by a few days. So where it was maybe 32 for three days and then 35 for one day, followed by a cooling thunderstorm it will be more like five days of 35 followed by a day of 37 and then a much more intense thunderstorm than what we know today.
It's been stifling in my area, too. 80F+ even late at night.
It's not supposed to cool down until this weekend, at best. It's scary to think this may be our new "state of affairs".
I feel bad the kid he had a privileged shit life. But going out into the middle of the Alaskan wilderness to survive with no formal training was punching way above his weight…
The thing that dawned on me when I watched it as an older adult was his sheer selfishness. Smug, cliched little prick. His father’s violence aside, what about the rest of his family?
The movie was not presented as a cautionary tale. The theme of the movie was his romance with the wild and his romance with being a bitter hermit. Blame the producers.
More like a cautionary tale to not be an idiot and be better prepared. He didn’t even have a map with him. We’ve lived off grid as a species for far longer than this pampered society we live in now. If people choose to live this way, they should be free to. That’s basically what communes are, and as climate change gets worse, we’ll likely start seeing many more of them across the country.
Except he dies alone at the end, so it was definitely a cautionary tale.
If the last recent years has taught us anything, it’s that how you present a thing matters a lot more than what the thing is that’s actually being presented. Unfortunately.
Pretty much, which is why I consider the Fight Club movie a complete flop, maybe not financially, but it fails at its own message so hard that only the dudebros it mocks like it.
or, hear me out, movies don’t need to be lectures and is ok to just do something for the entertainment/artistry/visuals/storytelling of it.
I can tell you that I’m the opposite of what the movie depicts, I’m fragile, never been in a fight, I sincerely hope that will never be in one, I cried like a baby in ET or the time traveles wife, the Schindler’s list broke my heart, I dislike the dudebro dynamics, and I adore that movie. I also like horror movies as a genre and I don’t go around killing people.
It’s fine that you use movies as lectures of life and ethics, or that you don’t enjoy them if they don’t have a message that you agree with, but some people like them for other reasons, so please try not to profile people for what they like to watch.
It’s not that I dislike Fight Club for “not having a message”, but for the fact that it’s meant to have a message according to the director and the writer of the book, but the movie doesn’t depict what that message is very well.
sorry I wasn’t clear, my criticism wasn’t towards you not liking the movie, anyone have their own taste and there is nothing wrong with it, we all just want to enjoy things :-)
My problem was about you profiling people that do like the movie as “dudebros”, that wasn’t very nice IMHO
There are many things in Fight Club that are enjoyable, snappy dialogue, clever moments (I wonder if beating the shit out of yourself in a CEO’s office just as security arrives to create an awkward situation has any chance of working irl)
However, the film has attracted a rather toxic cult following that seem to think Tyler Durden’s the good guy… and sadly the film’s most vocal fans are from this group.
I personally have seen the flick twice and did not much care for it myself, just for the record (So you don’t get the impression I judge the film’s quality solely on this subgroup)
thanks for the clarification, I appreciate it :-) . I have quite the opposite experience, as people I know like it are mostly cinema enthusiast and like it mostly for its cinematic features, definitely not a teaching film.
Maybe is a geographical thing, although to be fair I would never have a friend so full of himself as Tyler, so I may have a selection bias.
For me was the presentation of Marla that I remember the most, such interesting way of introducing a character.
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.