I recently read this and was surprised at how good it was. I loved Orwells Animal Farm, but didn’t like 1984 that much, so I wasn’t expecting to enjoy it; I read it more to get some insights of the war. But the book is not just informative, it is also really funny at times, and the story is just wild.
I second this recommendation.
Thanks for answering! It looks great!
In my experience (Dutchie living near the German border) the car culture of Germany isn’t that big; it is mostly the industry. Yes, there are many cars and a few more people driving in big BMW than the Dutch average, but there are quite a few people on bikes too. Also, transit in Germany is quite decent, despite the governments efforts; and, contrary to the Netherlands, it is affordable. Meanwhile the UK cancelled part of their HSR system and the prime minister claims it is a “country of motorists”.
Deutsche Bank I don’t know about, so you may still be right.
Looks great!
Some questions out of curiosity: how long ago did you convert your lawn to this (if it was a lawn before), and how hard was it to beat all the grass?
If you have objectively proven that atheists are wrong, that means that you must have proven that God exists right? I do not think that is possible without God showing himself, and not just to you, but to others too. If these atheists have not seen God, you have in fact, not proven that they are objectively wrong.
Also, there are many arguments that atheists use. For example, some atheists believe that the Bible can not be right because parts of it were written long after the events that they describe (for example gospels written maybe 50 years after Jesus’ death, meaning most if not all eyewitnesses have died).
As a Christian myself, I do not believe you can objectively disprove atheism. And to claim not liking God is the only reason for their beliefs is ignorant, if not worse.
One of Bob Dylans greatest achievement was understanding the importance of the Wiggle in music and he has incorporated it into many of his songs, most notably in his magnum opus, “Wiggle Wiggle” from 1990. Experts and scientists are still in disagreement as to whether or not the song “Wilbury Twist”, from a band Dylan was in, is the greatest song of all time, but they agree that, as James Joyce noted, “the Wiggle is strong in that one.”
Because of these songs Bob Dylan is the only songwriter in history to have been rewarded the Nobel prize for the literature. In his speech after receiving the prize Dylan could not stop talking about Moby Dick. Personally I think the genius that is Bob Dylan used Moby Dick as an inspiration for his music because the movement of the whale when swimming is a Wiggle: with this speech he once more showed the world that the Wiggle is what “keeps music moving forward”.
Ah, the whale! What a beautiful metaphor for music! Oh man! Admire and model thyself after the whale!
Yeah it is definitely bittersweet, but if you compare it with the Children of Húrin, it is a very happy book. Boromirs death may be the saddest part of LOTR, but it would be the happiest part of The Children of Húrin, just because that whole book is so dark.
I didn’t know about this, so thank you! To raise more awareness I feel like we should rebrand “flat adverb” to “flatverb” or “fladverb”. This would sure be an improvement over the current brand.
Fair point. You probably could still build a metro, but because it would not be worth the cost it for a city of this size. But no soil should stop a tram from being built, only the VVD and co may do that.
Good luck! It seems to me like Eindhoven would be perfect for trams: a lot of major destinations, like the university, football station, ASML in Veldhoven and the airport. Add to this that the region will definitely grow a lot in the future and trams (or even a metro) should be a no brainer. The fact that the much smaller city of Enschede is actually going to look at trams potentially in the future, but Eindhoven doesn’t, is absolutely crazy. Hopefully they’ll change their minds.
In the Netherlands we always outperform you stupid Belgians. As you can see, we are higher than you on this map too!
I know I am in the right, because the only ones arguing against the truth I have revealed do not bring forth arguments, but use “ad hobbitem” instead. No sense, no respect, just blindly following Bilbo’s lies!
Although I’m happy to read that you are open to the truth, your comment also shows just how effective Bilbo’s propaganda has been. Don’t you understand that you base your comment on a book written by Bilbo himself? They didn’t want it, you say? How do you know?
The sad truth is that we cannot make an objective reconstruction of what happened when Bilbo returned. It is however obvious that Lobelia moving into Bag-End was absolutely logical and that if she was angry, that can easily be understood. It also is obvious that Bilbo greatly disliked Lobelia. With this information we must try to understand what really happened. It is a hard battle we must fight, but in the end, I am convinced that truth shall be victorious.
going by your theory
You misspelled “truth”.
Exactly! You can see that even Frodo and the boys, the ones most corrupted by Bilbo’s indoctrination, admire her courage. Frodo even gives her Bag-End at last, probably after he found out about what really happened. And while Lobelia was seen as a hero, Bilbo was literally the most controversial Hobbit of his time!
The only pay I need is justice; the only food I need is truth; the only drink I need is apple juice. Lobelia is just a Hobbit, a widow even late in her life! Nowhere in the books is any mentions of women working in the Shire, nor of any pension funds. It is fair to assume that the poor woman was in deep poverty. On top of that she was robbed of her inheritance, Bilbo making Frodo his only heir just to spite her. And here are you, talking about paying someone to defend your name ages after your death! Sometimes even a platform as glorious as Lemmy can make you lose your faith in humanity.
I know it’s just a meme, but when I see anti-Lobelia propaganda of any kind, it fills my veins with rage. Therefore I now spread the truth that Lobelia did nothing wrong, but that Bilbo framed her as a thief. Here is why:
Once upon a time, the hobbits lived peacefully in the Shire, never needing to leave their paradise, therefore never leaving it. However, one day Bilbo suddenly disappears with a wizard and some weird beard-dudes. Then he does not return.
Obviously, he is dead. So his family inherits his estate, among other things, and Lobelia moves into Bag-End.
Now Bilbo is returning from his adventure in the Hobbit. While vibing with Gollum, he had taken the ring of power, and now he comes back to his home. What he sees here horrifies him: His own home is being taken by Lobelia! This fills him with rage.
To understand matters fully, we must understand the power of the One Ring, as well as Bilbo’s psychology. The power of the ring, as is clear in the LOTR books, lies in corrupting the mind. However, we can point to a specific type of corruption: possession. This is logical, as Saurons goal was to possess all of Middle-Earth. You can see this influence of the ring with Frodo becoming paranoid, being mad at Sam for taking the ring.
Now Bilbo. He never went outside the Shire, the only place he calls home. He is continuously among strangers and obviously longs for home. Now when he finally comes home, he sees that this home is taken from him. With the ring already corrupting him he cannot think clearly and therefore doesn’t see how it is logical that others would think he is dead.
But the ring doesn’t stop corrupting Bilbo’s mind. He spins a fake tale to justify his possession of the ring and doesn’t even trust his best friend Gandalf.
Now the question is: why would he only care about posessing the ring? The rings power can’t solely lie in this, for then it would be useless to Sauron. The only logical conclusion is that he became more paranoid every day and started justifying himself in all his possessions.
Now to the point: Bilbo, paranoid as he was, tried to attack Lobelia in every way. She was a selfish person, always trying to get Bilbo’s house and his furniture and what not. Most notably, he said that Lobelia took his spoons, without providing any evidence.
The only thing that we can really say about Lobelia personality is her conversation with Frodo and the second-to-last chapter. The conversation with Frodo does put her in a bad light, but we must remember that Frodo was heavily influenced, or rather indoctrinated, by Bilbo, so this can’t be seen as an objective source. This means the only thing we know about Lobelia is that she was the most courageous of all Hobbits in fighting Saruman and his gang.
If you have mad it this far, I am sure you have been convinced of this truth, and if not, I invite you to give your arguments so that I can crush them.
Tl;dr: Lobelia was right
The study used social media and photo-sharing websites
I am curious what kind of pictures they used; I could imagine that if you see a hermit crab with plastic you would take a picture of it, which could lead to misleading results. On the other hand, if the crabs were just in the background, this would not be the case.
But It’s sad news.
Of course you need lighthouses at the coast of Wyoming, also called ‘The Great Rectangular Sea’. The lighthouses of this sea are so good that there have barely ever been any casualties in this sea. However, because of Dutch migration to this sea, parts of it have been colonised (ingepolderd), meaning that new lighthouses at the new coastline have been built.
I am studying something related to biology, so I know something about this stuff. However, i am no expert either and there is some speculation in this comment.
Fish populations can grow at a certain rate. When there are very few fish, there are not enough fish to breed effectively. On the other hand, when there are too many fish, there is not enough food for everyone, leading to a smaller growth. Somewhere between this is the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). This is the point where the growth in population is the highest. If you want to do fishing sustainable, you need to make sure that at the end of the season, there is exactly as much fish as the MSY needs. This way, there will be more new fish next year than otherwise.
However, if you catch too many fish, rhe population will drop below the MSY-treshold. This means that next year, there will be less newborn fish, which means you can’t catch nearly as much. If you continue overfishing, the population will very quickly die out. So after a few years of overfishing, there will barely be any fish left, which means that fishing sustainably leads to more fish in the end. It is a bit more complicated than this, and fish population depends on more factors, but this is the basic idea. This is what I know fairly certain.
I think the big difference between farming and fishing in this case is that with farming, you have less risk of the population dying out. Fishing is more like hunting: if you hunt too much Bison, they will die out. But with breeding cattle, the risk of cattle dying out is small.
There are a few other things though. If you farm crops unsustainably, the soil will lose its fertility, meaning you will in the end not farm as many crops, or you will need a lot of manure, which is not sustainable either.
On top of that, I believe I have heard some time ago, that sustainable farming does lead to better meat, but I may be mistaken I’m this.
In this NYT article they say that 55 percent of NYC households have no car, and this site claims a modal share of 30% for cars. So most NYC residents already use sustainable transportation, but not all of them.