Photo 18 Jan 495 notes

(Source: onsomething)

Photo 18 Jan 6 notes dendroica:

Bonaparte’s Gull by Jonathan Mays on Flickr.
Photo 18 Jan 16 notes valscrapbook:

koi by At Swim-Two-Birds on Flickr.
Photo 18 Jan 6,674 notes flora-file:

pairings (by flora-file)


pairings (by flora-file)

Photo 18 Jan 2,265 notes Beautiful cast iron over an open fire.

Beautiful cast iron over an open fire.

(Source: thisnicelife)

Video 18 Jan 3,923 notes




Planted Aquarium Design Contest 2013

oh fuck

The first and second one… how?!

Photo 18 Jan 106 notes just-breezy:

Lake Rossi by Mike Schaffner



Lake Rossi by Mike Schaffner


Link 25 Jan 91 notes fauna: Look Tumblr, I can put up with a little fandom stuff and a lot of...»


Look Tumblr,

I can put up with a little fandom stuff and a lot of inane personal crap on people’s blogs, but one thing that will get me to immediately unfollow or ignore someone…

some stereotyping racist bullshit masquerading as “post-racist” humor, even if its just a reblog.


Totally agree.

via fauna.
Quote 11 Jan 12 notes

Back in 2010, a memo leaked from Fox News in which its managing editor informed his staff that they couldn’t even report on basic temperature measurements without noting they were subject to controversy in some quarters, even if those quarters are out past the fringes of the scientific community. That directive is apparently still in force. Just days after NOAA released its reading of last year’s US temperatures, Fox responded with a report in which it questions whether NOAA is producing accurate temperature readings.

The report is a classic example of what’s been termed “false balance.” It presents experts with relevant experience and the official word from NOAA, but it simultaneously surrounds them with quotes from several people who aren’t scientists—as well as one scientist who is a notable contrarian about other fields of science. In many ways, the self-labelled skeptics contradict each other in their haste to condemn NOAA. But the Fox article doesn’t point any of this out, and it actually ends with a veiled hint that we might consider throwing NOAA scientists in jail for their “manipulations of data.”

At issue are the historic US temperature records. These are generated from stations maintained by the US government. Over the course of 100-plus years, many of these stations have been moved to new locations or had their equipment replaced. These events create a break in the record. To generate its historical analysis, NOAA has to identify the breaks and perform an analysis that matches up the two end-points, creating a single, continuous record.

Apparently it does a good job. When the Berkeley Earth project examined temperature records, they used a statistical method that didn’t repair the breaks. Instead, they treated the two sides of the break as independent temperature records. Yet that team came up with a temperature reconstruction that was nearly identical to ones made using NOAA’s data. Since that time, NOAA has gone back and updated their records further, identifying additional breaks that had gone undetected and updating its algorithms to take advantage of advances in computing power. If anything, its current data is even more reliable.

Video 11 Jan 37,099 notes

Design crafted by Prashanth Kamalakanthan. Powered by Tumblr.