ilovegodwyn:

your-dragondads-hoard:

blenderweaselhasopinions:

hollowedskin:

prokopetz:

Trainability in cats is a funny thing.

My cats understand and will obey a number of verbal commands, one of which is “go away”. I don’t use it often, but if they’re bugging me and I’m trying to work or doing something that could be dangerous for cats, I can tell them to go away, and off they go - they’ll only keep pestering me if there’s a serious problem they need me to look at.

That said, their idea of a serious problem that requires my attention is somewhat eccentric. Previous instances have included:

• There was an unfamiliar car parked across the street
• Their water bowl was four inches to the left of its usual position
• One of them had puked on the stairs and they didn’t want to walk past it
  
• It was raining
• One of them saw a weird bug

These are all very important things that required your attention. They’re doing a good job.

Dogs really aren’t much better.  I teach all my dogs the command “show me”.  How it works is if the dog needs something but I’m having trouble understanding what exactly they’re trying to tell me, I say “show me” and they lead me to whatever the problem is.  Usually they lead me to a real problem (like a toy that got stuck under the couch, their water bowl is empty, etc).  But sometimes they want me to fix things like this-

• They pulled the covers off my bed and now they want me to put the covers back
• They put their ball on top of the ottoman but the ottoman won’t throw it for them
• The cat is sleeping and won’t chase them
• A flower fell off the potted plant
• The cat is sitting in a box and they don’t like it
• One of them lost their bandana
• The cat won’t take the toy they’re trying to give her
• The cat DID take the toy they gave her and now they want it back

These are all very important things that required your attention. They’re doing a good job.

rosetyler42:

movie-watching-monster:

write-on-world:

I adore this story. The end.

This^^^^

egowave:

dontletthishappentoyou:

egowave:

unfortunate that the united states has been very successful at controlling narratives around word war 2 and positioning itself as the polar opposite of nazism and the main force fighting fascism when america was complicit in the holocaust. not only did american press report positively about hitler and the nazi party up until the end of the 30′s, some publications cooperated with nazi germany, american companies had investments and connections to nazi germany that they maintained until american involvement in the war, and companies like ibm in particular gave nazis the technology necessary to make the holocaust possible in the first place. some company owners themselves had nazi sympathies like henry ford and others just saw it as a business opportunity. the us denied entry to european jewish refugees and deported jewish refugees back to germany, many senators and other government officials during the 1930s openly supported nazism and worked to prevent the us from taking a side in ww2, and during the 30s large pro nazi rallies were held across the us. american eugenics movement, american race laws and american genocide set the model for the holocaust and there shouldnt be any discussion of nazism and the holocaust without also discussing including the extent of american complicity in it. 

anyways heres some material on it

ibm and the holocaust

hitlers american friends

ap press cooperation with nazis

hitlers american model

general motors and nazi germany

operation paperclip

This is the kind of thing I’d like someone else to fact check for me. It seems interesting and believable, but also seems like the kind of thing people are very capable of pulling out of their ass holes. 

then click on the fucking links

augustdementhe:

i-have-approximately-4-bones:

i-have-approximately-4-bones:

i-have-approximately-4-bones:

bogleech:

thetinybutimportantthings:

aviculor:

thellamamongler:

aplpaca:

aplpaca:

That rabbit/hare post is messing me up. I’d thought they were synonyms. Their development and social behavior are all different. They can’t even interbreed. They don’t have the same number of chromosomes. Dogs, wolves, jackals, and coyotes can mate with each other and have fertile offspring but rabbits and hares cant even make infertile ones bc they just die in the womb. Wack.

These

are more genetically compatible than These

and that’s why morphology-based phylogeny has Issues

@aviculor

The problem is perspective. People always think dogs are the ‘standard’ animal, the metric to use for whether or not two organisms “look like” they’re related. When in fact they’re a massive outlier due to the fact that we fucked up this lineage of wolf beyond recognition with selective breeding. It’s why people always say “breed” when they mean “species”, especially when talking about groups like lizards which can’t even be defined cladistically since some of them are closer to snakes than each other. To say nothing of fish.

I once read an article that emphasized there is no such thing as a fish. Sharks and rays, lamprey, lobe-finned fish like lungfish and coelacanth, bichir and sturgeon, and of course the multiple infraclasses of more “modern” fish groups are all only very distantly related to one another. They’ve maintained semi-similar body structures only because there are limited ways to efficiently move through water as a vertebrate. 

This

And this

Are more distantly related from one another than you and I are from a lungfish

Which is absolutely fuckin wild.

Not only that, but all of us air-breathing land vertebrates, all the lizards and chickens and people and frogs, are closer to one another than those three “fish” are to one another as well.

these

are genetically closer than these

and…

these

are genetically closer than these

and my personal favorite, it really fucks with people…

these

are more genetically similar than these

COOL.