This is an interesting question but I don’t think it is restricted to green. Isn’t the same true of purple, blue and red? I’m not talking about just reddish like human hair or a red panda but truly bright red like a cardinal. I would imagine it has something to do with our evolutionary history. Complete speculation here but laced with a few facts I picked up. I hear the common ancestor of mammals emerged around the time the dinosaurs became extinct and was basically a tiny rodent like a shrew. I wonder if as a small animal that can’t fly or swim it had to hide a lot and basically just came in shades of brown. So maybe any genes for other colors were lost before that common mammalian ancestor emerged and although mammals have lots of patterns they don’t have many colors.
Best I’ve got is sloths. And they’re only green because algae grows on them. And I know it sounds like cheating because they aren’t intrinsically green but before you completely discount it there are animals that wouldn’t be the color they are in a different environment. For instance, flamingos are only pink because of the seafood they eat. If fed a different diet they can be almost white.
Shouldn’t athletes expecting to medal just want to skip the competition and go straight to the podium? I mean, that’s the reward, right? It is pretty easy to come up with many other analogs where there is a reward/goal that would feel hollow without whatever experience precedes it.
The branding is very consistent and the about page mentions US Congress funding. You can stop now.
Don’t count on it.
Bring me everyone.
I like that name a ton and also “Paranoid Android” is a Radiohead song from the album OK Computer. Now I’m realizing there is no comma in that title. I always thought it was “OK, Computer” because the speaker is addressing the computer. Nope, it is “OK Computer” like a label at an antique shop letting you know the computer is not Poor or Excellent but just OK.
The app is Covenant Eyes. https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/11/mike-johnson-republican-speaker-interview-covenant-eyes.html
It gives you a blurred view of the porn the other person is viewing in a near-realtime feed https://www.covenanteyes.com/how-it-works/#activity-feed
It is exactly as bad as it sounds unless they choose to claim to not be using this feature and we choose to believe them.
Yes. (See what I did there?)
As a legal matter, maybe not. As a practical matter I’m pretty sure it is evident.
He won’t seek consent for either and he’s already drafting a bill that that look you’re making… yeah, that look… is implied consent.
This man looks like he’s always about to kiss you full on the mouth but you know what he really wants to do is make a jacket out of your skin. 0 stars.
I know a bunch of these do the annoying YouTube thumbnail thing that is very much adjacent to your complaint but I would argue they do a pretty good job of being excited about the topic but not overly dramatic in the presentation during the actual video.
General topics:
https://www.youtube.com/@Wendoverproductions
https://www.youtube.com/@halfasinteresting
Science
https://www.youtube.com/@SciShow
If you just want to learn about astrophysics. Many build on each other so you might want to consider watching a bunch of the early ones first.
https://www.youtube.com/@pbsspacetime
Engineering. This guy’s voice annoys me but some of the videos are still quite interesting so I linked this specific one about exactly how train wheels/tracks work. Never would have guessed the level of design involved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nteyw40i9So
I don’t know much about politics but given the situation it sounds to me like he’s just hoping to get someone with a weaker hand into that already extremely tenuous position. Democrats shouldn’t be fooled thinking “but they’re more reasonable”. That person will automatically have a weaker position than McCarthy just because they are the second choice so it won’t matter much who the speaker is just the fact that they have zero room to maneuver. What might make it worthwhile despite this? I wonder whether Democrats can extract some binding commitments like non-reversible rule changes that survive at least for the session in order to secure their votes to oust McCarthy.
Which makes it extra funny because they’re on a space station not a ship like the other treks. I choose to believe it was foreshadowing that they were going to move the space station to the wormhole and there would be sloshing and turbulence when that happened. It’s just solid planning.
Pog mo thoin! I only remember the rude stuff. Literally read a bumper sticker like one time and it never left after over 20 years.
I’m imagining him switching his VP pick to be the dead worm. Do I still need to read the article?