Kanine Eleven.

»

annabellioncourt:

plz-no:

Simultaneously the worst and best movie ever made

Actually one of my teachers watched every single version of Romeo and Juliet with the original text in front of him to prove that this was the worst version, but to his great dismay its the most accurate film adaptation of it, with the lines closest to the original text and most similar stage direction and relayed emotions.

He proceeded to show it to us in class.

19 minutes ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE
22 minutes ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE

sarkyfancypants:

Uuh… it’s hard to explain, it’s a burden that just appears out of nowhere and fucks you up for days. Ignoring it is not easy. It takes over you and even tends to distort your perception of reality turning it into a living nightmare. It’s awful and terrifying.

5 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE
Reading the responses to your opossum situation just floor me. I either see "Call animal control" as if they've been any freaking help in the first place or "NO DON'T KILL IT :(" as if that will suddenly fix the problem of you suddenly having an invasive species as a pet. It feels like the woman just dumped this critter onto you, expecting you to magically fix the problem.


naturepunk:

I think the woman was expecting me to kill it and use the hide for taxidermy. I’d have been happy to do so except that I don’t like to kill things unless it’s for food, or unless the target species is something like a coyote which causes huge problems in this area. Opossum do cause problems occasionally - they eat chicken eggs, which is why I was opposed to releasing it anywhere on this side of the swale - my side is the side which has a lot of farms that raise livestock, chickens included.

I figured releasing it on the opposite end of the county would reduce conflict with animals, especially with a body of water to aid the divide. I have no doubt that it will eventually get shot or trapped by a farmer if it sticks around out there for too long, but it seems that opossums are generally nomadic and will not establish permanent territories.

In any event, I have certainly learned my lesson about being certain that my customers clarify whether or not their deliveries are dead or alive before they drop them by. 

On a related note, I appreciate the input from people who begged me not to kill the bugger, but it seems that many of you are ill-informed when it comes to veterinary care for wildlife. I cannot take animals like this to just any vet, and in fact, even local rehabilitation centers will not accept opossums because they’re not native to the area. There is a HUGE difference between vets, wildlife rehabilitators, and animal control, but it seems that a LOT of folks here assume they’re all the same exact thing. 

Here’s the breakdown: Vets are licensed to work with domestic animals - generally dogs and cats. Out here, we do have large animal vets that work on cows, horses, goats, llamas, etc. If we wanted to bring one of the chinchillas to a vet, we’d have to drive all the way up to Portland, as that’s where the nearest exotic animal vet is located. All three of these vets are still vets, but have different licenses and experience levels when it comes to working with different species. I would not take Cabal to a large animal vet for surgical matters, just as I would not take Blackjack to a vet that specializes in exotics. 

So what vet would one bring an opossum to? 

NONE. 

You could try to bring it to a wildlife rehabilitation center. Wildlife rehabbers are state licensed to take care of wildlife specifically. They’re not usually vets in the traditional sense of the term, but they do have basic medical skills for treating sicks and injured wildlife. Their goal is to nurse the animals back to health and release them in appropriate places once they are strong enough to survive on their own again. But since opossums are not a native wildlife species in this area, most rehabilitation personnel will not accept them for treatment. 

Animal control is the place you’d call if you found an infestation of raccoons in your attic. Lots of them claim to be ‘humane’ by using things like live traps. People are happy to see them leave with live animals, thinking that they will release them a safe distance outside the city, but depending on where you live, state law actually requires them to kill any and all wildlife that may be a carrier of rabies. I know this first-hand because I have gotten pelts before from animal control. There is even one in New York which has it’s own furrier so that the hides are not wasted, which I appreciate immensely. 

So while the opossum was released this time, bear in mind that this kind of thing cannot happen in the future. I released it because I didn’t want to kill it just for the sake of taxidermy, but if this happens again, I’m going to have to look at the bigger picture here: Opossums are not native. They cannot be taken in to vets, wildlife rehabs, or animal control. Releasing them in farmland with lots of livestock is not an option. Releasing them in the deep woods is not an option. Keeping it as a pet is not an option. That leaves me with few choices: I can either drive it out to city limits and put a .22 through its ear to end the animal’s life in a quick and humane manner; or I can release it into a field far from livestock where it will no doubt eventually become someone else’s problem, get mauled by farm dogs, eaten by a hawk, or hit by a tractor. 

5 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE

viviku:

vandigo:

redsuns-n-orangemoons:

shybairnsget-nowt:

americas-liberty:

Students Fed Up With Michelle Obama’s School Lunch Overhaul — Menu-Item Snapshots Spell Out Why

Wow that is depressing. 

okay but is that michelle’s fault for pushing for healtheir lunches or is it school districts’ faults for cutting corner by cutting calories but not making lunch any healthier?

let’s look into it.

Yes, thank you. Because yes she is pushing for a healthier lunch, but the schools still value football over feeding their students, which means that instead of providing enough healthy food to keep their students from starving, they are cutting down the amount of food available to fit within the caloric requirements … while then taking the money they saved to re-sod the football field for the third year in a row. Maybe new uniforms.

thank you for adding that. i really really doubted michelle wanted this to happen.

5 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE
trillgamesh:

braiker:

Are you fucking kidding me? Did we all just wake up in 1938?

Remember how everyone thought it was so ridiculous and uneducated of Tumblr users to think that those people were Nazis and now it looks like they might very well be nazis, amazing

trillgamesh:

braiker:

Are you fucking kidding me? Did we all just wake up in 1938?

Remember how everyone thought it was so ridiculous and uneducated of Tumblr users to think that those people were Nazis and now it looks like they might very well be nazis, amazing

5 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE

wethatkindoforc:

catsbeaversandducks:

Snow Leopards And Their Giant Nommable Tails

"BEHOLD, DOGS! We have achieved that which you cannot!"

Via catfuse zum

This is exactly what I would do if I were a snow leopard. 

5 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE
Could you take a look at the North Georgia Zoo's 'wolves' on their wolf encounters page? At least one is almost definitely a malamute, a couple appear to be mid to low content wolf dogs. Only one actually looks like a high content wolf to me.


non-wolfdogs:

Wolf Encounters page

"The story starts with 3 little wolf pups and a Basset Hound. Now growing up these little wolf pups tower over their beloved Basset Hound friend and have made touched the lives of many."

What kind of zoological facility raises 3 “wolf” pups with a Basset Hound?

Now check out these “wolves” (I just posted one of each, but there are lots more photos in the link):

image

image

image

image

I don’t think any of these are “pure” wolves, for one. Secondly, I don’t even think most of them are high content wolfdogs.

The first one looks like it’s mostly (if not all) Malamute. There are very few photos of it, but I suspect it’s probably a low content at best.

The second one also has quite a bit of dog (though it does grow up to look pretty wolfy). I would say around a mid. (Dog traits: ears that aren’t well-furred, a curved tail, large, thick muzzle, etc.)

The black one is probably around an upper mid to a lower high (some pink in the ears).

I have no idea what the white one is, seeing as there aren’t any good photos of him (or her?). At least a mid would be my guess? (Its muzzle looks a little short and thick to be a “wolf” muzzle, but it’s hard to tell since there aren’t that many good photos).

You can see what actual wolves look like here.

5 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE

carry-on-my-wayward-butt:

guceubcuesu:

hey

image

Watchu got there

image

a skull that connects to my spine hbu

8 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE

Bran, Lord of Winterfell by David A. F.

Bran, Lord of Winterfell by David A. F.

10 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE
834,002 plays

wildhyaena:

morethanasharklovesblood:

hallucinists:

i think about this video almost every day and i am so frightened of it

what the actual fuck

This has to be the tiniest kid’s meal I’ve ever seen…

Is that even safe to eat?

10 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE

holynipples:

if the purge was happening in real life you would see murders and rape and then you’d see me like

image

10 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE

theolduvaigorge:

Is it ever acceptable for museums to lie?

  • by Jack Ashby

"I ask this question to our Museum Studies Masters students every year, and last month put it to our new Bachelor of Arts and Sciences students. Despite the difference in the age, background and interests of these two groups, the reaction is the same – anger and horror. I am playing devil’s advocate in these debates, but my own opinion is yes, there are circumstances when everyone benefits from museums lying.

The lectures I discuss this in focus on object interpretation, and I use a tiger skull as a prop for discussing how to decide what information to include in labels. The choice of a tiger isn’t important – I just need something to use as an example I can attached real facts about natural history and conservation to, but I spend the two hours talking about tigers.

At the end of the lecture I reveal that the skull is in fact from a lion. Everything else I told them about tigers is true. Did it matter that I lied?

Lying about what objects are?

Museums surely can’t lie about an object’s identification, right? But if a museum didn’t have any tigers, is it reasonable that they can’t talk about tigers? Let’s say a museum was putting on an exhibition about Indian wildlife. It would be absurd to run that exhibition without a tiger*. Why not just use a lion skull and label it “tiger”?

There are anatomical differences between tiger and lion skulls, but they are slight. Any normal visitor reading labels about tigers wouldn’t know the difference, or need to know. There is no question that a museum shouldn’t deceive an academic researcher studying the specimens, but in a display for the general public, could this lie be acceptable?

My students say that this calls into doubt everything they have been told – how can they trust anything? “Museums are supposed to repositories of knowledge” (however old fashioned you might think that notion to be). Think of it another way. Some skulls in the Grant Museum are labelled gibbon, but we don’t know which species.

In an exhibition about Indian wildlife, would it be lying, or wrong, to use one of these gibbons to represent hoolock gibbons (an Indian species)? It probably isn’t a hoolock gibbon, but it doesn’t seem as wrong as the tiger vs. lion “lie”, does it? But it’s the same as if that skull was just identified as “big cat”. The students say that you can still tell the facts about tigers, but at the bottom of the label say “this is actually a lion”. I think that would look very weird and confuse the visitor.

I asked this on Twitter and two responses said “If you need to lie about the object to tell the story, the story isn’t true.” I disagree” (read more).

(Source: UCL)

10 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE

fuckyeahifightlikeagirl:

samflow:

The SCAR Project: Breast Cancer Is Not A Pink Ribbon

The SCAR Project is a series of large-scale portraits of young breast cancer survivors shot by fashion photographer David Jay. Primarily an awareness raising campaign, The SCAR Project puts a raw, unflinching face on early onset breast cancer while paying tribute to the courage and spirit of so many brave young women.

Dedicated to the more than 10,000 women under the age of 40 who will be diagnosed this year alone, The SCAR Project is an exercise in awareness, hope, reflection and healing.

Read more here

Now HERE’S a good goddamn glimpse at breast cancer.  Fuck your “save second base” bullshit.  -C

10 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE
catsteaks:

gaypee:

animalsandtrees:

"Very important. General rule for English speakers - if you don’t do it in the human context, don’t do it in the nonhuman context.
Just make a little effort to say “she or he” or “her or him” if you don’t know the sex. It’s a little effort with a very important social message.
Nonhuman animals are *persons*, not *things*. Therefore, we should refer to a nonhuman animal as a “she” or “he,” never as an “it.””



chickens dont understand english, idiot
they will mindlessly peck out the eyes of other chickens for no reason. like theyre literally just brainless dinosaurs. the last thing on their mind is whether or not theyre called “he” instead of “she”. give me a fuckng break.

catsteaks:

gaypee:

animalsandtrees:

"Very important. General rule for English speakers - if you don’t do it in the human context, don’t do it in the nonhuman context.

Just make a little effort to say “she or he” or “her or him” if you don’t know the sex. It’s a little effort with a very important social message.

Nonhuman animals are *persons*, not *things*. Therefore, we should refer to a nonhuman animal as a “she” or “he,” never as an “it.””

image

chickens dont understand english, idiot

they will mindlessly peck out the eyes of other chickens for no reason. like theyre literally just brainless dinosaurs. the last thing on their mind is whether or not theyre called “he” instead of “she”. give me a fuckng break.

10 hours ago on April 17th, 2014 |J |VIA -SOURCE