19th schuyler place
the city of saints and mad men
(Source: thespoonmissioner, via impure-lace)
Astounding Tilt-Shift Perspectives of World Monuments!
Anyone who’s traveled to popular touristic sites knows the feeling of being caught in the crossfire of countless camera lenses—the annoyed (and annoying) jockeying to capture the perfect shot…which in most cases looks exactly like everyone else’s. When we stumbled across Richard Silver’s photographs of iconic monuments, we were shocked—caught in the same tourist hustle, Silver manages to give us a new perspective on famous landmarks we didn’t think possible. Read more!
http://www.inglotcosmetics.com/nails/products/141
this retailer sells a halal nail polish. this allows for oxygen and water to go through the nail, which makes it acceptable to wear during prayer. spread the word.
“Being a relatively modern creation, nail polish remains obviously unaddressed by early Islamic sources. But the general consensus in the Islamic community is that praying with nail polish is impermissible because of the waterproof barrier it creates on nails, which prevents the wudu ritual from being completed five times a day.” (source)
(via oscarswilde)
Problems with the palaeodiet discussion (or lack thereof) and why I scream internally every time something pops up on my dash
- Different people have different ideas about what constitutes the palaeodiet so people are often arguing about apples and oranges instead of discussing the same topic.
- The discussion is most often black and white. I hear that it’s either all rubbish or that it’s the most healthful diet ever. There’s little constructive criticism regarding which aspects of a palaeodiet may be healthful for a modern human and which may not.
- There’s insufficient discussion of nutrient intake and the fact that we can get our nutrients—vits, mins, the lot from a variety of food sources. Were we unable to do this, we wouldn’t have been able to colonise the planet.
- Lack of informed discussion. How many people arguing about it have spent any time actively researching palaeodiet? Not those who are doing the black/white arguing cos those of us who have recognise that, as with most aspects of Palaeolithic lifeways, there’s still much we aren’t certain about and we can’t make blanket claims or assert anything with 100 per cent confidence.
- Claims that make inferences from extinct hominid taxa. It doesn’t matter what our earliest ancestor ate. It doesn’t matter what Neandertals ate. We’re not australopiths. We’re not Neandertals.
- Social politics. People get defensive when you criticise their eating habits. They feel their diets are being policed. Many automatically feel that they are being fat-shamed, or that everyone has a metabolism problem or that no one has a metabolism problem and that those who are fat, are somehow lesser. Value judgements regarding a person’s societal worth are muddled in with science when in reality a person’s worth isn’t defined by his or her body size or diet, regardless of whether or not that individual suffers from a medical condition that results in extreme weight loss or gain. Just because facts offend you, doesn’t mean they cease to be facts.
- Failure to realise that there are conflicting studies about the modern human body, modern human diet and modern human health in general, that some studies are inaccurate, that some data are poorly supported and that just because a study gets published (and happens to support your particular agenda) doesn’t mean it’s correct. Furthermore, a study can present both correct and incorrect information simultaneously.
- People are getting their information from Fox News, CNN, the BBC, the Huffington Post and tumblr instead of having informed discussions about their diets with medical doctors that specialise in human nutrition and exercise.
- Worse yet, people with PhDs in irrelevant fields are pontificating about palaeodiet in the way that Jared Diamond, an ornithologist who specialised in biophysics and physiology, habitually sticks his nose in anthropology. I’m not saying that people can’t be legitimate cross disciplinary scholars, so stop. I’m saying that having a PhD or an MD doesn’t mean that a person is a specialist in the field about which she is speaking.
- Using genetic mutations that permit the consumption of dairy, for example, to argue that anything we want to eat is fine because we’re omnivores. Edible does not equal healthful and all dairy is not alike. Just because we can digest it, doesn’t mean we should. You can a teacup of sugar a day but that doesn’t mean that Homo sapiens adapted to heavy sugar consumption in antiquity.
- Failure to acknowledge mutations that permit the consumption of certain foods. Our bodies have changed and will continue to change until we go extinct. We are not our Palaeolithic ancestors. We are omnivores but we are not obligate omnivores. Much of what was consumed in antiquity was opportunistic. You took what you could get in an environment wherein your next meal might be uncertain. I practise a strict vegetarian diet because I can but that doesn’t mean my diet is anymore healthful than an omnivore’s or even less damaging to the environment. But I guess this goes back to issue #6.
What I’m trying to say is, there is a lot of information out there and it can get messy. Choose your sources wisely. Actively participate in learning about your own health. Actively participate in your own education and recognise that many issues cannot be addressed in black and white terms. Learn to differentiate fact from fiction and when you can’t do so, seek out reputable sources for consultation.
(Image: Archaeology Info)
These are by http://bloochikin.deviantart.com/
(Source: ravenclaw20401, via ihopeitrainsthereallthetime)
