Fuck the free world

Ohaithar. I'm Matt, turned 16 in June. I've noticed people put things here that explain what their blog is about. Who needs to really explain though? Just look at it. Its a bunch of random stuff that I wanted to reblog or post. So yeah. 1 2 3 4 Next Page

4 hours ago
22 May 2013
Reblog

12393

954 notes
5 hours ago on
22 May 2013

96,707 notes
11 hours ago on
22 May 2013

paulisglamorous:

Just admit it this was the most intense scene in your childood

23 hours ago
21 May 2013
Reblog

7823

we-are-star-stuff:

Who says North is up?
Upside Down maps (also known as South-Up or Reversed maps) offer a completely different perspective of the world we live in.
Technically speaking, even referring to the earth with words like “up” or “down” or comparing places with words “above” or “below” is flawed, considering that the earth is a spherical body (it’s actually slightly “fatter” at the equator) and flying through 3 dimensional space with no reference of up or down. However, the issue of “up” and “down” does become an issue when viewing the surface of the earth projected onto a flat piece of paper (a map). And the effect of the orientation of a map is more significant than you might realize.
As all maps require orientation for reference, the issue of how to layout the map orientation is as old as maps themselves. As map orientation is completely arbitrary, it is not surprising that they differed throughout time periods and regions.
The convention of North-up is usually attributed to the Egyptian astronomer Ptolemy (90-168 AD). Justifications for his north-up approach vary. In the middle ages, East was often placed at top. This is the origin of the term “The Orient” to refer to East Asia. During the age of exploration, European cartographers again followed the north-up convention…perhaps because the North Star was their fixed reference point for navigation, or because they wanted (subconsciously or otherwise) to ensure Europe’s claim at the top of the world.
In modern times, reversed maps are made as a learning device or to illustrate Northern Hemisphere bias. Different from simply turning a north-up map upside down, a reversed map has the text oriented to be read with south up.
The famous “Blue Marble” photograph of the Earth taken from on board Apollo 17 was originally oriented with the south pole at the top, with the island of Madagascar visible just left of center, and the continent of Africa at its right. However, the image was turned upside-down to fit the traditional view.
While the orientation of a map might seem harmless, it can have a significant effect on one’s perception of the world, and the relative importance of the different place in it.
In speech, we often refer to places being “above” or “below” others. Think of how you would say you’re about to travel to the state or country to your north or south (to go “down” to Kentucky from Indiana, or “up” to Canada from the US). Without even mentioning geography, ask any grade school student whether Mexico is “above” or “below” the United States. We’re all familiar with the “land down under”. As we often correlate importance to relative height (think how a citizens of a country will fly their flag higher than all other flags), the north-up convention reinforces the idea that northern bodies are more important than their southern neighbors. Suddenly, traveling “down” to the South might have an inference much deeper than geographic location.
After looking at the map more closely, you may realize that the South-Up orientation may change your perception of the relative status of different places. For example, South America suddenly looks to have more prominence, and Africa and the Middle East completely dwarf Europe. Likewise, tucking Northern Europe, Canada, and Russia away at the bottom of the map, subconsciously takes away their status.
To summarize, unconditionally accepting the north-up map convention without at least appreciating the effect stands at odds with viewing all people and places within the world equally. x x

423 notes
1 day ago on
21 May 2013

electricspacekoolaid:

Stephen Hawking’s Eventual Goal of Science

- To Provide a Single Theory that Describes the Whole Universe -

Most scientists separate this problem into two separate parts

1. Laws tellings us how the universe changes over time

“If we know what the universe is like at any one time then these laws can tell us what the universe is like at any later time”

2. Question of the Initial State of the Universe

“Some scientists believe that science should only be concerned with the first part, regarding the second part as a matter of religion or metaphysics.”

”Science separates all these problems into partial theories describing and predicting a certain limited class of observations - It may be that this approach is completely wrong. If everything in the universe depends on everything else in a fundamental way. It might be impossible to get to a full solution by investigating parts of the problem in isolation.”

18,283 notes
1 day ago on
21 May 2013

“If you could fight anyone who would you fight?”

(Source: tylerdrrdn)

15,389 notes
1 day ago on
20 May 2013

doctorwhodoctorstu:

pleatedjeans:

jelly vampire

Pretty much.

10,289 notes
1 day ago on
20 May 2013

yep

105,971 notes
2 days ago on
20 May 2013

theamericankid:

Googled cartoons all grown up

> Popeye’s workout is finally reveled!

2 days ago
20 May 2013
Reblog

1053

epikhi:

Ghibli Poster for Calgary Comic Expo 2013