This (on the right of the illustration, of course) is Zhuchengtyrannus, a “tyrannosaurid”.
I wrote previously about the puzzle of the function of the comparatively small forearms of tyrannosaurs such as T. rex, and how feathered forearms might have been useful in sexual or aggressive signalling.
Marc Nobleman continues his good work, interviewing Carol Seligson Fabi, who was the girl by the indoor pool (with the towel around her head) in an iconic music video.
“I remember that I loved the footage of Charlie and Claire running on the beach in the opening shot of video. The imagery was beautiful!”
Yes, it was. Here is the video:
“Claire” is the girl running on the beach, athletic but feminine. I hope Marc Nobleman finds her to interview, especially because she had more time on screen than Carol Fabi, good as she was.
Birds on the Line
and go online
with their wings;
The Jesuits have made numerous significant contributions to the development of science. For example, the Jesuits have dedicated significant study to earthquakes, and seismology has been described as “the Jesuit science.” The Jesuits have been described as “the single most important contributor to experimental physics in the seventeenth century.” According to Jonathan Wright in his book God’s Soldiers, by the eighteenth century the Jesuits had “contributed to the development of pendulum clocks, pantographs, barometers, reflecting telescopes and microscopes, to scientific fields as various as magnetism, optics and electricity. They observed, in some cases before anyone else, the colored bands on Jupiter’s surface, the Andromeda nebula and Saturn’s rings. They theorized about the circulation of the blood (independently of Harvey), the theoretical possibility of flight, the way the moon effected the tides, and the wave-like nature of light.”
The Jesuit China missions of the 16th and 17th centuries introduced Western science and astronomy, then undergoing its own revolution, to China. One modern historian writes that in late Ming courts, the Jesuits were “regarded as impressive especially for their knowledge of astronomy, calendar-making, mathematics, hydraulics, and geography.” The Society of Jesus introduced, according to Thomas Woods, “a substantial body of scientific knowledge and a vast array of mental tools for understanding the physical universe, including the Euclidean geometry that made planetary motion comprehensible.” Another expert quoted by Woods said the scientific revolution brought by the Jesuits coincided with a time when science was at a very low level in China.
The (very long) list of Jesuit scientists:
And, most recently, a Jesuit brother has won the Carl Sagan Medal from the American Astronomical Society. Here he is, Guy Consolmagno:
All this should make one reconsider all those claims that the Catholic Church missed out on “the Enlightenment” and did not value science.
Do they deliberately design women’s pants to wrinkle near the crotch like that?
I have always wondered.
As far as I can tell, this seems to be a problem with women’s pants in particular. Here is an image from this site:
I assume that these are both women. The person on the left is clearly a woman, and the person on the right is presumably a woman, as evidenced by her lack of a belt and her polished fingernails.
“Audrey Rouget” from “Metropolitan” (1990) defends the character of Fanny Price from Jane Austen’s 1814 novel Mansfield Park.
More recently, here is a silly modern attempt to “defend” Fanny Price because “Fanny isn’t moral or upright because she wants to be, but because the role—along with a whole host of so-called middle-class values—is forced upon her.” This is typical modern moral relativism and social determinism, but what can one expect from such a piece, which also states that “Fanny Price’s story is less about her individual virtue, or her richer relatives’ lack thereof, but about class, about privilege in its most insidious form—before the term ever cropped up in contemporary social justice discourse”? This is simply reading modern, fashionable notions into a book written by a woman, Jane Austen, who did not share the current obsession with “privilege” but was interested in the less contemporary idea of personal morality.
The whole essay by Tara Isabella Burton is not long, but it manages to include one thumping factual error, when she writes: ” Even C. S. Lewis—in the voice of his demon Screwtape in The Screwtape Letters—let loose a vitriolic rant about Austen’s most priggish heroine, calling her “not only a Christian, but such a Christian—a vile, sneaking, simpering, demure, monosyllabic, mouselike, watery, insignificant, virginal, bread-and-butter miss … A two-faced little cheat (I know the sort) who looks as if she’d faint at the sight of blood, and then dies with a smile … Filthy, insipid little prude!” “. As I noted in a comment at the site of the article, this description was not of Jane Austen’s Fanny Price, but of the hero’s girlfriend in Lewis’ famous work. I am mystified as to how anyone could imagine he is referring to Fanny Price.
Whit Stillman, the director of “Metropolitan”, recently tweeted this in response to the piece by Tara Isabella Burton: