reproducible results

Stars align in test supporting 'spooky action at a distance'

Quantum entanglement may appear to be closer to science fiction than anything in our physical reality. But according to the laws of quantum mechanics – a branch of physics that describes the world at the scale of atoms and subatomic particles – quantum entanglement, which Einstein once skeptically viewed as “spooky action at a distance,” is, in fact, real.

Imagine two specks of dust at opposite ends of the universe, separated by several billion light years. Quantum theory predicts that, regardless of the vast distance separating them, these two particles can be entangled. That is, any measurement made on one will instantaneously convey information about the outcome of a future measurement on its partner. In that case, the outcomes of measurements on each member of the pair can become highly correlated.

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

The real questions here are: just how often does Alex haul Maggie in by her shirt/jacket for a kiss; and how did Maggie react the first time?

She seems firmly against pants when they’re home, but Maggie is almost always in some type of shirt. 

Whether it’s Alex’s tee and Alex just wants to feel the material that she so often has felt covering her own skin, this time tinged with Maggie’s body heat, with Maggie’s scent, grabbing her forward just above the hem of the shirt, so her fingers can just barely start to skate across her stomach.

Or whether it’s Maggie’s oversized NCPD windbreaker, hauling her in for a long, passionate make out session that has Winn whooping and J’onn covering his smile with his hand, because Maggie’s hair is windswept and her muscles are corded and her eyes are shining with the tense exhilaration of surviving another firefight, of getting her team out alive, of not having to kill anyone in the process.

Or whether it’s Maggie’s motorcycle jacket and Alex can’t wait until they get into the bar, because she’s just taken her helmet off and she’s got that smile that’s just for Alex, that’s just for the woman she’s absolutely crazy about, and maybe it’s poor dating protocol because aren’t kisses supposed to be at the end of the night, but Alex can’t wait, and god, Maggie doesn’t want her to.

Or whether it’s one of Maggie’s collared shirts, the ones she’ll wear to work under those suit jackets – damn, those suit jackets – or the ones she’ll wear around the apartment, some of them hers, some of them Alex’s, and collars have never looked so enticing to Alex as they do around Maggie’s neck and god, god, the first time Maggie wears a tie around Alex, it’s not just the collar that Alex tugs her forward by.

Whatever the outfit, whatever the context, Alex loves tugging Maggie in for kisses.

Endless kisses.

Kisses that sometimes end in giggles and kisses that sometimes end in making slow, sweet, passionate love and kisses that sometimes end in hard, fast, clothes-ripping, earth-shattering sex.

Kisses that always, no matter what the context, leave them both breathless.

The first time, she was hesitant.

The first time, she was fresh off of Maggie’s gentle explaining to her, of why she always pauses while they’re making out, why she always asks if Alex wants her hands under her shirt, if Alex wants her hand unbuttoning her jeans and touching her over her underwear, if Alex wants to be kissing, if Alex wants to be holding hands.

The first time, she was fresh off of learning about consent, about how deeply Maggie respects her wants, respects her boundaries, respects her body. It was unfamiliar and it was oddly emotional, but it felt like something that felt like love.

So the first time, she was hesitant, because she wanted to show Maggie the same kind of respect, the same kind of consent, that Maggie was always so active about checking in with her.

So when she grabs her lapel, by instinct – like she’s grabbed her arm that first time, that first kiss – she looks at her lips and she licks her own but she forces herself to pause, forces herself to wait. To ask.

“Something you want, Danvers?” Maggie husks, her body pliant under the intensity of Alex’s gaze.

And she’s just learning to talk about things she wants, but Alex Danvers is nothing if not a fast learner.

“I want to pull you in for a kiss, but I want to make sure you want that, that you’d like that, that – “

But Maggie is reaching up to secure Alex’s grip on the lapel of her jacket and she leans up to crash their lips together, and she swoons, and Alex swoons, and thank Rao they both have such extensive balance training because otherwise, they would have come toppling down.

“So you’re saying you like that? Because that’s… that’s what I got,” Alex croaks when they finally part for breath, and Maggie smiles that megawatt smile.

“You’re a scientist, Danvers. See if your experiment has reproducible results.”

And oh, it does.

Some thoughts on TPP 2.10

- Rilla is me when I’m tired, I get so cranky too
- BFF Rilla and Marc is everything I never knew I needed
- Rilla’s rant about reproducible results, I love her
- Rilla going, hey if I go unconscious, note down the symptoms. Remember kids, it’s only science if you write it down.
- ‘that was reckless! … wanna burn it?’ I knew I loved Rilla, but I also LOVE her
- Wait…is she carrying black powder?
- Dampiere is a flirt, I cannot stop laughing
- Marc and Tal break my heart and I love them too
- Smart Marc, gotta love the boy, knight of my heart tbh
- Oh monsters working on ‘bad’ metaphors and following their own physics and logic that defy human ones, I like it
- ‘You’re never too old to get a kiss from your Marc.’ Aww
- Rilla does love Damien and more importantly she really understands him. If someone else got hurt because of him, that would’ve been worse. But ouch was that scene brutal
- but also…was Damien one of the knights that bullied Marc? Or unintentionally hurt him? Because if so, I’m going to fight Sir Damien in a swamp.
- Have I mentioned how much I love Rilla? Not going to stop going into the swamp because people need her, also recording her findings
- ‘Rilla needs sleep. Research log concluded.’ I do love her so much.
- Weird little grub is very important to Lord Arum.
- Love how reluctant he is to kill her and how exasperated at the realisation that he now has to kidnap her
- I want them to bond over science! and properly protocolling your research and awkwardly falling in love
- I need them all to end up in a poly-relationship, run away together, found a giant fungus citadel and make Marc and Talfryn knights of that alternative citadel.

anonymous asked:

Did you watch the P320 drop test video from Omaha outdoors? Thoughts?

I did. I’m waiting for Sig to reproduce the results and watching Sigtalk shit the bed. The conspiracy theory posts are phenomenal. 

Worst case is my gun goes back to Sig for warranty work and I am forced to carry my other Sig again. 

Popular Anti-Vaxx Arguments w/ Rebuttals

Starting with the most popular…

So where did this idea come from? Back in 1998, Dr. Andrew Wakefield released a study stating that vaccinations cause autism. The claim has since been discredited after multiple scientists were unable to reproduce his results. As anyone who works in science knows, the ability to reproduce research is one of the foundations of the scientific method. Therefore, if your research is not reproducible it is not valid. 

Furthermore, even if vaccines could cause autism, the fact that you would rather expose your child to deadly, preventable illnesses versus them being autistic shows that your priorities are way out of line. 

And the next one is…

How could my unvaccinated child get your vaccinated child sick anyway?

Well, that might be reasonable if I only cared for my own child’s health, but believe it or not, as a future physician, I am concerned for everyone’s health. There are children who cannot get vaccines secondary to allergies or deficient immune systems. The fact that other’s find these children unworthy of protection through herd immunity is outrageous. 

Here is a rough example as to how herd immunity protects those who cannot receive vaccinations:

None of these diseases are really that bad anyway. It’s just a minor rash. 

Really? Is that why an estimated 1.5 million children under the age of 5 die of preventable diseases across the world each year? We live in a country in which vaccines are readily available and relatively inexpensive. We are privileged in that fact, yet there are those who act like vaccines are an atrocity.  

And last of all, my favorite…

What proof is there that vaccines even work anyway?

Yes, maybe you didn’t live through the times of smallpox to realize how devastating of disease it was. It’s hard to realize the efficacy of vaccines when we don’t actually see their direct effects. But lets take Syria for example. Syria was declared free of polio in 1999. But the disease re-emerged approximately two years ago after conflict. Less children were vaccinated resulting in the disease affecting 100’s of children.This disease can leave your child paralyzed for the rest of your life. Would you want to carry that burden when you could have easily vaccinated your child? 

The U.S. has been polio free since 1979. We could potentially see polio re-emerge in the United States if people stopped getting vaccinated. We, as a whole, can eradicate these diseases. We are already experiencing a large outbreak in measles due to people not vaccinating. Let’s use common sense and vaccinate!

anonymous asked:

Cowboy man, pls help me. I have a slight crush on a person you might know and i hate it. wut do I do??

Well, my method of choice was to be kinda obvious and overly nice to them, wait for your friends to be jackasses about it in front of them and make it even more obvious, try to dial it back without making it sound like you’re not interested, awkwardly word-vomit poetic compliments into their inbox in reply to a stupid meme, and then wake up with them in your bed the next morning and just kinda roll with it from there.

Unfortunately, I can’t say that’s what Winston would refer to as a “consistently reproducible result”.

kafran  asked:

Hi fellow grad student! I think I might have seen you mention it before, but did you apply for the NIH F31 grant? I know that at least 3 letters of recommendation are needed, but I was wondering if letters of support are needed as well? My PI keeps mentioning it, but when I spoke to the grant office, they didn't mention needing those. Thanks! Also, hope everything is well and that this semester is filled with interesting and reproducible results!

Hi!! And yes I did go through the grueling F31 process and YES letters of support are quite crucial. These are letters of collaborators/sponsors who are willing to advise you and add crucial support to your project. It’s especially necessary if you or your main sponsor (your PI) are lacking specific areas of expertise that are necessary for your project. Examples are: biostatisticians, clinicians, bioinformatics people…

Take a look at your project and training proposal and see whose expertise would add to both.

(Cant tag bc in on mobile) but good luck!!

2

While the perfect soil mix for growing cacti and succulents varies between climates and how you grow your plants, I thought others might be interested in what I use and why I use this particular mix of ingredient. It consists of 50% calcined clay pellets, 30% horticultural grit, 20% loamy topsoil and a bit of time release fertiliser. Using a mix of a porous inert material, a course non-porous aggregate and a bit of humus seems to make a good soil mix for cacti and succulents. 

The porous materials hold a lot of air, which is essential for healthy roots. Even when they are wet the roots will still have access to a good amount of air, reducing the chance of rot significantly. The course aggregates create larger air pockets in the soil mix as well as providing some mass to the mix. They also help to limit compaction over time and will provide small amounts of trace nutrients as they dissolve slightly (depending on the kind of rock). The addition of a little bit of humus improves the ion exchange properties of the soil, particularly kinds with a good clay content. Clay particles can bind and store some nutrients for later uptake by the plant, while also absorbing excess salts in the soil that might cause harm to the roots. While it might seem like this is a lot of thought to put into something as basic as soil, it makes a huge difference to the health of the plants growing in such a medium, and after you’ve worked out what works initially, it’s easy to reproduce the same results repeatedly.

Lilianna, daughter of Marianne and the Bog King. I kind of feel like perhaps, similar to a Queen Bee, certain goblins mature differently and become the leaders–especially those of the royal lineage–thus, Bog and many of his ancestors before him all looked similar–chitin carapace, fairylike, larger than all the others.

Marianne and Bog are the first time a fairy and a….goblin, Bog, boggan, whatever he constitutes as–have reproduced and as a result their children are a new kind of hybrid. Their firstborn twin boys, Rowan and Roman, started out looking somewhat like their father, with the little chitin horns and some dark, harder skin on their arms, but it faded from their limbs as they aged and their hair covered their chitin crowns. Honestly, he was the slightest bit disappointed, because he was hoping there would be a kid who looked like him.

Lilianna is a year younger than her older twin brothers, and she was born covered completely in a soft, squishy carapace that hardened as she got older and, like her father, she molts (the way most bugs do lol) However, she has hair, unlike him, and she also has butterfly wings–the same color as her dead grandmothers’, actually (in my headcanon, Marianne’s mom had blue wings)

She wears the petal tunic by attaching it under one of the external parts of her chest carapace, and her complexion is somewhere between mom and dad’s, but closer to her father’s. She has Marianne’s eyes and hair, though.

Like her father, she is a bit cynical and kind of gruff, and can easily come off as cold and aloof. She’s a perfect blend of both her parents in both appearance and personality, and she is set to inherit the Bog/Dark Forest when her parents die because, like a Queen Bee, she is a Bog Queen.

When she was little, her mother called her Baby Bug or Baby Bog, and her father called her Little Bug.


Sorry the photo is lousy.

The Logical Answer

Phone conversation between Molly and Sherlock.

Sherlock: How do you expect me to answer to that?

Molly: Well, tell her the truth, perhaps?

Sherlock: The truth? You tell her then…

Molly: Come on, Sherlock…you can crack a matter of national security in less than two minutes; this is just a six-year-old’s question.

Sherlock: But she asked me where our baby came from, Molly!!

Molly: (Sighed) Put Sherly on the phone, will you?

Molly talked to Sherly Watson on the phone. The girl got her answer, grinned happily, hung up and handed Sherlock back his phone. He frowned and called Molly back.

Molly: Yes?

Sherlock: What did you tell her?

Molly: The truth, Sherlock, actually part of it.

Sherlock: That you asked me to be your sperm donor and our son was conceived in the lab?

Molly: No…of course not! I told her that Hamish is the product of our love for each other. (Paused) I mean…(sighed) obviously my love for you and your…your…I don’t know, (shrugged) whatever feeling for me.

Sherlock: ‘Whatever’ feeling for you?

Molly: Yes, I don’t really know why you have accepted my request in the first place and have never asked.

Sherlock: No, you haven’t.

Molly: I didn’t dare to. I was afraid that I would hate your answer.

Sherlock: You would?

Molly: Yes, I would probably…if it was because of your pity or compassion for me…

Sherlock: Pity? Compassion? I don’t know how to feel such things, Molly. You of all people should know that.

Molly: Yes…(inhaled) So why then?

Sherlock: It was logical.

Molly: Logical?

Sherlock: Yes, considering the level of my IQ and perfect specimen, together with your pleasant personalities and high EQ. It is logical for us to reproduce. Any longevity results in a species’ genome getting copied more, will be favored by natural selection over time.

Molly: So…It was to fulfill your natural instinct to reproduce then?

….quiet for a mere minute….

Sherlock: You hate it.

Molly: What?

Sherlock: You hate my answer.

Molly: No…I…I…

Sherlock: Don’t lie to me, Molly. You know that I’ll know.

Molly: (Sighed) Yes, I hate it.

….quiet again….

Sherlock: Let’s have another one then.

Molly: What?

Sherlock: (Rolled his eyes) Let’s have one more child, Molly. You and me, together…

Molly: You mean…going through those painful procedures in the lab again? No, no, no way…

Sherlock: Who said anything about our second child being conceived in the lab?

Molly: You…you said you want to…

The pathologist paused briefly to think. Her pupils then dilated widely as the realization hit her.

Molly: (Blushed and blurted out) You mean you want to do it natural way?!! With me??!

Sherlock: (Smiled warmly) Yes, the natural way with our deep affection for each other. What do you say, Molly?

Molly: Our deep affection?

Sherlock: Yes, my intense feeling for you and yours for me.

….quiet again for a mere minute….

Sherlock: Molly? Say something…

Molly: Oh…Sherlock, you don’t know how badly I want to kiss you now.

Sherlock: (Chuckled softly) And I, you, Molly…very much. By the way, I think Hamish really wants to have a little sister.

Molly: Our son is one and a half, Sherlock; all he really wants now is his blanket, your attention and my milk.

Sherlock: (Grinned lovingly) Alright, I really want to have a daughter this time, Molly.

*********
Hello…

I read about a sperm donor and came up with this. Thanks for your support!

You can find more of my ficlets here.

Take care,

xxooxx

Nuchamae

2

Whenever I’ve talked about a DC/Warner Bros. movie, I’ve always jokingly prefaced it with “from the studio that brought you Jonah Hex and Catwoman…” but I wanted to find out whether that was a fair assessment, so I decided to crunch some numbers, comparing the Rotten Tomatoes score of Marvel Studios’ entire motion picture output against the last two decades of Warner Bros. movies based on DC Comics.

[Full Disclosure: I am not a statistician, nor am I any kind of expert. I’m not even 100% certain I’ve calculated the averages properly, though that’s largely down to a sort-of general distrust of my own math skills. I checked everything with a calculator, often multiple times, but there may be errors. Sorry for that.]

Marvel’s movies are limited to movies actually produced by or with involvement from Marvel Studios themselves, and so doesn’t include films like The Amazing Spider-Man or Fox’s X-Men series which were not produced by Marvel Studios. It also doesn’t include Big Hero Six, which was produced by Disney but without involvement from Marvel Studios.

I pulled the list of DC movies from Wikipedia, opting to exclude movies based on DC licenses that weren’t produced or distributed by Warner Bros. in any way. This rather generously excludes The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which has a Rotten Tomatoes score of 17%. It would also have excluded Watchmen had 20th Century Fox actually pulled the trigger on making the movie when they had the license, but they didn’t. Whoops!

I chose to include A History of Violence, as it was produced by New Line Cinema who were merged into Warner Bros. in 2008. The film has an 87% score on Rotten Tomatoes, so that can only help WB’s case.

So. The numbers, then.

Despite a couple of critical stumbles with The Incredible Hulk and Thor: The Dark World, Marvel maintains a strong average of 81%.

Warner Bros., on the other hand, have an average score of 51% for their films released since 1996. That number drops to 44% if you exclude films based on DC imprints (Vertigo, Paradox, etc.), which critically fare a little stronger. Cast a more narrow net to films released since the formation of the MCU in 2008 and that average shifts just a little more - 49% for all DC films released since Iron-Man, 47% if you exclude the imprint-based films Watchmen and The Losers.

But maybe this is unfair. After all, Warner Bros. have been producing movies for much, munch longer than Marvel has, and this list excludes films like Superman and Tim Burton’s Batman. Films people love!

So what if we pull the numbers from as far back as Warner Bros.’ first in-house movie based on a DC Comics property? How does that look? Let’s take a look.

This list starts with the 1979 Superman and not, for example, the 1966 Batman movie starring Adam West because, according to Wikipedia at least, earlier films were not produced with the involvement of Warner Bros., and so I have opted to exclude them for the same reasons I excluded The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen earlier.

This hasn’t given the numbers the boost DC fans might have been hoping for. There’s a slight buoy thanks to the first two Superman and Batman movies, but it’s dragged down again by the low scores for Superman III and IV, as well as Supergirl - Warner Bros.’ worst-performing movie on this list - and the disappointing score for Batman Forever (which sucks for me - I actually rather like Forever). Simply put, half of the movies suck, and half don’t.

Adding these eight movies only bumps the average score up to 52%, or 47% excluding DC imprints.

What does this mean? Well, going by the numbers, Warner Bros.’ DC films are far more divisive than Marvel Studio’s output. Warner Bros. has a 1-in-2 chance of putting out a movie critics will hate, while Marvel’s has a 1-in-5 shot of pissing off critics. Mathematically speaking, Marvel is making movies that critics enjoy, and Warner Bros. is not.

There are a number of ways to interpret this data. Firstly, though the trailer for Wonder Woman looks fantastic, whether or not the film will be any good is a coin-flip. The numbers are not in WB’s favor, and while I really, really want Wonder Woman to be a great film, it’s not looking good. It looks even worse when you consider the average score of the DC Extended Universe films to date is 36%, meaning that under the current DC/WB regime Wonder Woman has a 1-in-3 chance of critical success. Gulp.

I’m sure some bugger out there is going to look at this post and see it as proof of some massive conspiracy against WB/DC, or that Marvel have somehow “bought” critics.

I don’t believe that to be the case. Remember, WB’s lowest critical scores come from films like Catwoman, Supergirl and Batman & Robin, all movies that predate the MCU by a significant amount. The scores for the three current DC Extended Universe films are bad, and point to a serious mismanagement of the DC brands within WB right now, but they’re not as bad as WB’s lowest period during the layte 90s/early 00s. The idea that there’s some kind of conspiracy also doesn’t explain the high score for The Dark Knight Rises (which was divisive even among fans of Nolan’s interpretation of the character) nor does it explain the fact that Man of Steel’s score is, mathematically speaking, not actually terrible. Man of Steel is a mediocre movie from a numbers perspective. Catwoman is objectively and statistically terrible.

Probably the best way to interpret this data, though, is this: Warner Bros. need a massive, massive course correction. What they are doing right now simply isn’t working. If you want my armchair analysis, they learned the wrong lessons from the success of The Dark Knight Trilogy and the failure of Green Lantern. They’ve also learned entirely the wrong lessons from everything Marvel have done over the last decade, and are scrambling to try to reproduce those results in as short a window as possible. They need a major, major regime change over there - Batman, Superman, the Joker, these should all be really easy characters to execute on and to make fun movies in at least the >60% range, but they’re not.

Marvel, on the other hand, has continually taken risks on characters people know next to nothing about - Iron-Man, Ant-Man, the Guardians of the Galaxy - or characters which may have perception issues among the broader public - Thor and Captain America come immediately to mind - and have knocked it out of the park with audiences and critics alike. A decade ago the general public probably couldn’t tell you Iron-Man’s real name, or the name of Thor’s hammer. Now they can. Why? Because Marvel have been very, very smart since day one.

Some additional numbers:

  • The lowest-scoring movie from either studio is Supergirl, with 7%.
  • The highest-scoring movies are The Dark Knight and Iron-Man, both tied for 94% (and both released in 2008).
  • The film most representative of Warner Bros.’ average score is Man of Steel. Its 55% score puts it closest to the studio’s 47-52% average.
  • Marvel’s most representative film is Ant-Man, whose 81% score matches Marvel’s average. Captain America: The First Avenger comes in a close second with 80%.
  • Marvel have never released more than two films a year, though that may be about to change. By contrast, Warner Bros. has that number beat - in 2005 they released five films based on DC Comics or its imprints.
  • Warner’s lowest-scoring movie, Supergirl, has an Audience Score of 26%. By contrast Marvel’s lowest-scorer, Thor: The Dark World has an Audience Score of 78%. [Edit: I wrote a follow-up post about Audience Scores here.]

That’s it! Again, I acknowledge I’m not an expert and it’s entirely possible I’ve royally screwed this all up, so I eagerly await someone else to come along and do this better. Cheers!

I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.

—     Michael Crichton
photograph | clawen
  • WHO: owen grady and claire dearing
  • WHEN: post jw
  • WHAT: in which raptor parents discuss becoming real parents?
  • WHERE: mainland costa rica
  • NOTES: thank you anon for this prompt!! this is honestly so cute, and even though i got your prompt before the one before this, i thought i’d better switch them around to make everything a lil easier for everyone. :-)) thank you ily and i hope ya’ll enjoy! UGH AND WHILST YOU READ THIS PLS LISTEN TO ‘PHOTOGRAPH’ BY ED SHEERAN AND U WILL CRY OK i mean i don’t wish sad tears more like happy tears?? tears of joy!! ALSO i think i drawled this out a lil bit more than i was supposed to?? and i’m having major feelings rn so i think i’m going to go make a clawen mix and then cry for a lil bit :-) i hope all of ya’ll enjoy :’-)

“so you can keep me / inside the pocket of your ripped jeans / holding me closer / till our eyes meet / and you won’t ever be alone / wait for me to come home”

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

One monster ancestor.. Does that mean that monsters and humans can reproduce? How would that work, exactly? How complicated/rare would that be?

I’ve explained this before but here’s the short version…

A human and a monster could reproduce. The resulting children would have a 50/50 chance of being either a wizard or a boss monster. A wizard is essentially a human that is able to wield magic because their soul is a bit more monstery than usual. And a boss monster is essentially a monster whose soul and body are a bit sturdier and more humany than usual. A wizard would seem human by all appearances, but they might have a few superficial traits from their monster parent. A boss monster too would appear the same as any other monster but with some superficial traits from their human parent. For example, if Frisk and Kid were to grow up and have kids, they could have a wizard child with spiky blonde hair, or a boss monster child who looks like a brown lizard with squinty eyes.

The Dreemurrs come from a long line of boss monsters. Boss Monsters came to be revered in monster society because their mixed heritage made them unusually strong. Most of the time, boss monsters were encouraged to marry other boss monsters, because their children would also be boss monsters, and therefore strong. As a result, the Dreemurrs are a mixture of several different kinds of monster… Goat, Fire Dragon, and Lion, just to name a few.

10

Galit Seligmann: Pilgrimage

Artist Statement: The intention of the series Pilgrimage, has been to invert the tourist gaze at two of the most visited sites In the Eastern and Western world: The Taj Mahal in India, and St Peter’s Basilica in Italy. The buildings are described not by their material structure, but rather by the tourists visiting them, and all identifying context has been excluded from these two endlessly reproduced landmarks. As a result of the ease of travel, tourist sites across the world have acquired a sameness about them, and this neutral backdrops symbolise the ubiquity of the modern day tourist trail.