This is kind of like time travel in a way. If one were to go back in time, you would mainly need to worry about the diseases and parasites you bring back with you. You are descended from those who learned to survive the diseases of the past so you are likely to have some resistance to it. You wouldn't be perfectly safe of course, but not likely at more risk than if you stayed in your own time.
On the other hand, if you travel forward in time, like this nematode did, you are entering a realm that is full of virus, bacteria, and even fungus that have had decades to learn new tricks to survive that you would have no inherent resistance to.
The chance of there being some sleeping time bomb in the permafrost seems low to me since everything alive today is descended from those who survived that germ or parasite in the past.
Good point. I never thaught about it this way. Maybe these nematodes will not introduce diseases. But will they suppress recent fauna? Will these worms displace current worms or other species on a microbiological level? Or maybe these worms have a cure for recent diseases?
They could have also just been endemic to that area, and a host’s resistance possibly linked to a recessive gene. (like sickle cell and malaria in Africa) Following their period of removal from the environment, and with the traveling and immigration of humans and other animals, those genes could be dominated by another form or missing altogether.
I think something like this would make U.S. citizens feel better about taxes in general, since it can sometimes feel like you’re throwing a large portion of your hard-earned money away.
The data to create this is essentially public with budget bills right? It would just take building a percentage tree and categorizing them appropriately. I might look into how complex this would be to build.
its basically just proportioning out the nations budget against the amount of tax paid,assuming you had access to how much was spent where by category, it would be a peice of piss to make
Most in Australia don’t read where the money goes. Taxes aren’t too bad (IMO) and the system is so easy that once you submit you don’t really go back to see where it went. Or maybe I live in a bubble.
Mind you the largest chunk of that is the elderly with the unemployed being one of the smallest ones. I’m very much in favour of both by the way.
If you think your taxes are too high then it’s not because too much is going to welfare; it’s because too much is going to tax breaks (which won’t show up on a chart like this) for fossil fuel companies and the wealthy.
I remember one of our dogs got mixed puppies too. All the same father but apparently genes can jump back to the original breeds our breed came from (poodle pointer, and we got a few pointer pups). Very rare, and a financial loss :)
The whole thing is basically a wall-clad hill. heaping one stone onto another is something they managed even thousands of years ago. And the climate (it is an oasis in the desert) is dry enought to keep it from eroding.
So it’s not walls then I suppose. Just the slopes of a flat topped pyramid like thing. I mean, it still provided a height advantage, but it feels like they have lesser cover from arrows than they would have if it was like a conventional wall.
Pure speculation - a typical siege strategy was to dig under walls to cause them to collapse. First, the earthen mound would make the tunneling to collapse a much more labor intensive effort. Second, if an enemy was at the base of the wall it could actually be easier to hit them with projectiles at this angle rather than leaning over and aiming straight down.
Again, I have zero evidence to support these points, just spitballing here.
The tunneling issue makes sense. The wall will be much more stable because of the greater base area, and the sappers will need to dig a much bigger cavity under the wall for all the additional material to fall into - if the holes too small the wall might not collapse well enough for the ground forces to have a good opening to assault.
The second point is less convincing though. Forts and castle walls had mitigation for that extra issue - machicolations are an example. Often, arrows wouldn’t be used for killing the people right at the base of the wall, instead rocks or hot sand would be used to fuck up their day. These also took out armored units - rocks just, well, crushed them, and hot sand got in the gaps and visors and burned the shit out of them. They could also often not get rid of it without taking off the armor, so they just burned till the sand cooled down.
Also arrows were a manufactured commodity. Rocks were just taken from the land, or could be waste from quarries etc, and sand is rough, coarse, and everywhere.
Well clearly it’s because the castle defenders of that era were quite sophisticated, but simply don’t dance they just pull up their pants and do the rockaway.
You’d think there’d be a reason beyond construction requirements, though—otherwise someone in the past 1,500 years would have replaced it with a more conventional wall.
10% of Tennessee is so high on hillbilly heroin they don’t know which question they got asked and just said “yes” on the off chance it was “would you like some free oxy?”
13% of Tennessee West Virginia is so high on hillbilly heroin they don’t know which question they got asked and just said “yes” on the off chance it was “would you like some free oxy?”
I bet you that 10 percent are the people who are in the very northwest corner of TN so it would make some sense for them to answer yes given that they’re not far from Missouri.
In all likelihood, it’s rated for direct food contact on both sides, like the stickers on fresh fruit; you’re meant to be able to safely eat them (although you may not want to).
I graduated in 2003. My DARE teachers basically taught drug abstinence and telling an adult about people offering you drugs. The really didn’t talk about gateway drugs and what it does to your brain. This was in Illinois.
mildlyinteresting
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.