refresh my broken mind
-
Holy mother of curb theory those are GOOD
See what happens when we do things for disabled people? We get shot like this that’s just better for *everyone* AND accommodates for wheelchair users
The hoodies are $59. That is straight up a normal hoodie price that is AMAZING
(via prosodi)
-
-
nosferatu? no. tuferatu. no es mi problema.
momentos despues de escribir esto vi otro post con el misma chiste pero en frances joder mi estupida baka vida.
(via ash-and-starlight)
-
-
Astrology doesn’t seem to work.
Some highlights:
- Astrologers helped design the study
- No one did better than random chance, even though they only included people in the study who are experienced with astrology and stated that they expect themselves to do better than random chance
- They gave every astrologer a set of 50 things about a person and 5 birth charts to choose from. They weren’t even coming up with the chart themselves!
- After taking the test, most thought they nailed it. Zero out of 152 did better than 5 out of 12. None nailed it
- Astrologers who rated themselves highly experienced (“world class experts”) did the same or worse as those who said they have limited experience. Both performed the same as random chance
- This is hilarious
No lie, this is a really great example of experimental design, explained in simple language.
In particular, it highlights something that science-illiterate folks don’t get, which is the extent to which is it a scientific norm to load the dice against the result you’re expecting to get.
In this experiment, the researchers are not subjecting astrology to rigorous debunking, intended to investigate and expose ways that astrologers’ claims about their abilities are overblown, or other possible explanations for what they claim to be doing.
Instead, this experiment is looking for any evidence, even weak evidence, that some astrologers may be able to do any of what they say they can do.
- Astrologers were asked, in both the planning stages and the actual experiment, to evaluate whether the task is something they think they can do. (They were given a questionnaire filled out by a volunteer, and 5 astrological charts, of which 1 was “real” and the other four were generated based on randomly-selected birth information–date, time, and place. The task was to pick out the chart that was based on the volunteer’s real birth information.)
- They were asked, in planning, what information they would want to have, in order to do their best at the task, and the experiment was designed to provide that information.
- After doing the task, they were asked again whether they thought they’d done well–so that, if they decided during the task that it was too different from normal astrological practice to be a fair test of their abilities, they would have an explicit opportunity to raise that objection.
- The researchers set two different (yet compatible) success conditions: if, as a group, the astrologers’ average performance on the task beat random chance by any statistically significant amount–even if very small–or if even one astrologer did a lot better than random chance. This design allows for the possibilities that astrologers overstate the amount of insight that they can gain from the practice (but there is some insight), or that a lot of practitioners are mistaken about their skill level (but a few people actually are good at it). Either of those results would suggest there’s something happening when astrologers do astrology–but neither result occurred.
- They also compared the astrologers’ answers to the questions to one another, and to a control group of people who were randomly guessing–so, if a lot of the astrologers matched the same chart to a questionnaire, even if that answer was wrong, that would show up as something the astrologers were seeing, but the control group wasn’t. It didn’t happen.
(via sweetfirebird)
-
-
-
-
-
-
dave k: and jopson is the steward with the prettiest blue eyes and the saddest backstory and he’s the only person aboard that crozier doesn’t hate and he’s secretly really good with a gun and the most loyal and he’s so good and trustworthy and smart and brave that he gets to be a lieutenant even tho the navy would never ever approve of promoting a steward like that but crozier loves him so much and all the other officers like him because he is so handsome and clever and nice and THEN he gets very sick so sad but he is so noble and brave about it and his captain comes into his tent to comfort him specifically and personally BUT THEN crozier is kidnapped but jopson doesn’t know that because he’s too sick :c so when the other men abandon him to die he thinks it’s HIS CAPTAIN abandoning him and he crawls out of his tent and gets the most tragic death scene in a show of nonstop tragic death scenes wherein he hallucinates his captain ignoring him even though his captain loves him the MOST because he’s the BEST BOY and he DIES and he leaves behind the most perfect beautiful skeleton and an archaelogist finds the skeleton and instinctively knows how strong and brave and handsome and wonderful he was in life and also this archaeologist is me :)
(via shadesofbrixton)
-
-
-
“i don’t like kids because they’re loud and they can scream and they don’t always follow social norms and they do weird things i don’t understand”
hi. autistic adult here: i’d like to play a game.
in front of you is a disabled adult who also displays some of these traits and always will. how do you feel about and treat them?
your have five minutes to answer before the bomb lodged in your dickhole—
-
FMK: Dragon Age Edition
Turns out Dragon Age as a series has a looooot of characters. This wheel contains 115 characters, both memorable and not, and is not exhaustive.
(via baddywronglegs)
