1. wildcat2030:

    The recent release of Susan Greenfield’s new book and the film Lucy, both of which are dependent on tired misconceptions or dubious theories about the brain, suggest one worrying conclusion: we are running out of myths about the brain. So here are some new ones, to keep things ‘mysterious’
    One of the best things about being a neuroscientist used to be the aura of mystery around it. It was once so mysterious that some people didn’t even know it was a thing. When I first went to university and people asked what I studied, they thought I was saying I was a “Euroscientist”, which is presumably someone who studies the science of Europe. I’d get weird questions such as “what do you think of Belgium?” and I’d have to admit that, in all honesty, I never think of Belgium. That’s how mysterious neuroscience was, once. Of course, you could say this confusion was due to my dense Welsh accent, or the fact that I only had the confidence to talk to strangers after consuming a fair amount of alcohol, but I prefer to go with the mystery. It’s not like that any more. Neuroscience is “mainstream” now, to the point where the press coverage of it can be studied extensively. When there’s such a thing as Neuromarketing (well, there isn’t actually such a thing, but there’s a whole industry that would claim otherwise), it’s impossible to maintain that neuroscience is “cool” or “edgy”. It’s a bad time for us neurohipsters (which are the same as regular hipsters, except the designer beards are on the frontal lobes rather than the jaw-line). One way that we professional neuroscientists could maintain our superiority was by correcting misconceptions about the brain, but lately even that avenue looks to be closing to us. The recent film Lucy is based on the most classic brain misconception: that we only use 10% of our brain. But it’s had a considerable amount of flack for this already, suggesting that many people are wise to this myth. We also saw the recent release of Susan Greenfield’s new book Mind Change, all about how technology is changing (damaging?) our brains. This is a worryingly evidence-free but very common claim by Greenfield. Depressingly common, as this blog has pointed out many times. But now even the non-neuroscientist reviewers aren’t buying her claims.

  2. asapscience:


    I’m an artist with a molecular biology degree from the University of Washington, and I’ve been working on making science infographics for several months now. 

    This week I made an animated identification chart of North American butterflies. You can check out the full sized GIF here or pick up a poster for your room here :)

    This rules! 

    (via whats-out-there)

  3. oliviawhen:

    Hello I’ve been super busy doing things I can’t share yet, so in the mean time please enjoy this self portrait gif.

  4. boomerstarkiller67:

    Leonard Nimoy, George Takei, DeForest Kelley and James Doohan at the space shuttle Enterprise rollout ceremony on September 17, 1976

    (via sofarocker69)

  7. arkitekcher:

    The Courtyard House  |  Studio Junction
    Location: Toronto, ON, Canada

    - The Courtyard House was inspired by an ancient form of architecture and a new form of North American urban thinking - infill housing as an alternative urban typology. By converting a contractor warehouse in a mixed-use industrial neighborhood, the ambition was to create a modern, affordable home and studio for a family of four - one which could successfully adapt to a mid-block or laneway situation, where there is no typical front or back. The design of the house is generated by an emphasis on the views and activities of the interior courtyards, where all the windows look inwards.

  8. wildcat2030:

    A Complicated Question
    A child asks, and war answers.

    go see all of it.. brilliant!

    (via A Complicated Question - Issue 16: Nothingness - Nautilus)

  9. animadetv:

    The perpetual babbit machine - play the web game here

  10. Jamiri - Home