what i mean versus what i say

anonymous asked:

I remember you pointing out that bendy was out of character more often than the other toons because he was a demon and the whole story with joey, tricking the lil devil, etc etc. So i was just wondering how the other toons could be out of character?

Ah.  The term I used is not “out of character,” but “off-model.”  There’s a huge difference.

“Out of character” means what you think it does – a character doing something or behaving in a way that, based on all of their other actions and other context, would never even cross their mind.

“Off-model” is a term used to describe a depiction of a character that is not visually in-line with what the character is supposed to look like.  In animation, games, and other visual media, characters are given “model sheets,” which are basically drawings of them from all angles and with various expressions that show what the character is supposed to look like.  Here’s an example:

Above are drawings that were created for the original model sheet of Sonic the Hedgehog.  He’s got a very distinct look to him, and as you can see there are even notes of how to draw his features included – you may not be able to read Japanese, but some of those notes say things like “don’t give him a brow ridge when his eyes are wide.”

Because of that note, if an artist were to give Sonic that brow ridge when he’s not supposed to have one would make the drawing “off-model,” because it’s not following the character’s model sheet.

Note that different incarnations of a single character might have different model sheets.  Here’s Sonic’s model sheet from Sonic Underground:

See how it’s very similar to the original model sheet of the character?  Now, here’s a frame from the Sonic Underground show where Sonic has gone almost completely off-model due to shoddy quality assurance:

See what I mean?

When I talk about the characters in the Toon Henry AU going “off model,” what I’m referring to is how those characters are supposed to look versus certain expressions they make and things that happen to their anatomy when forced to come face to face with things they would never encounter in their cartoon episodes.  One might say these are things that would be “off-model” for their episodes, and in reaction the toons themselves go off-model.  (You wouldn’t ever use the term “off-model” for an episode plot itself, though – a better term for that would be something like “off-style.”)

For instance, Bendy’s eyes – when he’s stressed to a degree that would never happen in his cartoons, his expression warps to match his mental state, and his eyes bug out in a way that you’d never see on screen.  He may also get kinda drippy, and his entire physical form starts to match the “Bendy” model sheet less and less.

anonymous asked:

So If Aelin and Rowan are mates... and Aelin knew, but didn't tell him...but yet she let him have sex with her and tell her he loved her and blah blah blah... like, doesn't that make Aelin a bit of a bad person. She let this guy be tied to her (even get married) and she didn't tell him

No. He is just as capable (if not more so) of figuring out they’re mates as she is. Dorian and Manon both know, too. And Aedion knows, he just doesn’t know that he knows. He smelt it when he first scented Rowan in the alleyway. Aelin didn’t bring it up because she was protecting him, and herself. He was supposed to have a family with Lyria. Telling him that she, Aelin, is his mate would feel as if she’s ripping that memory away. As if she is discrediting it, or his feelings for Lyria (and their child), as is she’s saying she’s more and Lyria is less. I know that’s not what it means, but that’s what it would feel like. To me anyway, and to me how I read Aelin’s character. She was also protecting herself from him possibly having a negative reaction. She didn’t know if he would have a hard time reconciling how Lyria fits with him versus how Aelin fits with him. He thought she was his mate. That’s a HUGE lie that Maeve worked on him. It would be a HUGE lie to to try to untangle and work through. And at the end of the day, it wasn’t the right time or place for Aelin to do that. 

And honestly, it’s one of the things I agree with her on. I would NEVER want to be in a position to tell the person I loved that they had been lied to in a way that would discredit a memory, or a person, they hold as sacred. She was pregnant with his child when she died. Fae are fussy and territorial and will lay down their lives to protect their family and mates. Rowan has been through a trauma. And I don’t blame Aelin for not telling him, because I sure as fuck would NOT have.

That’s something he would eventually work through on his own and figure out. And it would be better to let him do that in his own time, than to spring it on him. He knows on some level that Aelin is his mate. Everyone can scent it. He can too. His brain was just not putting it together because he was so traumatized by what happened to Lyria and the shame and guilt that came with that. 

Think of it this way: It’s a defense mechanism his brain has put into place to protect him from getting hurt. By not allowing him to put together that they’re mates, his mind is making sure he isn’t vulnerable to what could happen. But once he does accept they’re mates, or realizes it, then he opens himself up/become vulnerable to the possibility of re-experiencing the trauma/what happened with Lyria, which is that he could lose his mate, his family, and the life that should have been his all over again. Sometimes I’m amazed that Rowan even goes outside. That’s enough to make me an anxious agoraphobic who (IM GONNA SAY IT) would beg and plead my loved one never to leave the house and maybe even lock them in with me. (*cough*Tamlin*cough*)

anonymous asked:

i used to be a larry it got a little ridiculous and i couldn't hang anymore. why y'all such conspiracy theorists tho? what if none of this is subliminal like honestly they could have been in love in the beginning but i don't see it towards the end or even now. i'm gay as fuck for larry when i believed they were in love but

“why y'all such conspiracy theorists tho?”

It’s not my fault that whoever is behind this ridiculous cycle of stunts is so bad at their job and so bad at lying that the idea that a 24 year-old man was pushing a doll around in a pram whilst being photographed seemed 100% more likely than the story they told. Seriously. I wrote about it back in January here and I’m not copying and pasting it all, but it outlines what has been presented as “fact” versus what I actually saw with my own two eyes. It’s not even a conspiracy article, it’s words versus actions. Which is what everything comes down to. You’ve heard the whole “actions speak louder than words” saying yeah? Well it’s a good way to go about critical thinking. I prefer to think of what I say and post as “critical thinking” as opposed to “conspiracy”. 

That article isn’t even taking into account that they announced the birth originally on the 20th of October 2015

I mean…it clearly looks like unfinished copy, but why have this story ready to go in October. On the day that One Direction cancelled their first show ever in five years. 

But no, they really covered that up well and didn’t at all shroud the actual birth in any kind of mystery by having some lady announce it on Instagram before having Louis do a slow stroll past a TMZ photographer on his way to go into Sunglass Hut to have a quick look around before deeming their selection aggressively inadequate for his royal highness and walking back out via same pap in case they didn’t get the shot the first time. 

I suppose I can see why people think this is a crazy conspiracy given how it’s covered in the media…


“what if none of this is subliminal”

“like honestly they could have been in love in the beginning but i don’t see it towards the end or even now.

Excuse m-

Now you’ve done it. You’ve brought “hollaback girl” Louis out because he heard that you were talking shit and you didn’t think that he would hear it. 


We’re done here. Good day.

  • what she says: i love agent kallus
  • what she means: Agent Kallus is one of my favorite characters, but his characterization before "The Honorable Ones" versus after "The Honorable Ones" leaves much to be desire. In Season 1, yeah, okay, he's not that different from every other obviously evil, cunning, arrogant villain, but I bought it because not gonna lie, I'm kind of a sucker for cunning bad guys that claim they're just doing their job but enjoy following it to the letter. Plus, I liked how earlier on, it was like the rebels were the hunted while the Empire were the hunters, with the Inquisitors and the 'ordinary' Kallus being the main hunters, and I was interested in how he was gonna fight Zeb and what exactly happened at Lasan. But then, Season 2 got pretty bad with Kallus since he hardly did anything besides standing around in the bridge of an Imperial cruiser, which the LSG had already said in promotional material for the show that they didn't want him doing that. And then "The Honorable Ones" showed that even though it's one of my favorite episodes because we finally get to see what makes him tick, his morality and knowledge of what actually happens is actually CONTRARY to what it seemed up to that point. What would've been better is if they had put more signs of Kallus's grey morality in previous episodes so that it would flow better. While yes, some things can be alleviated through novelizations of scenes, it sometimes isn't an 'expansion' on the scene and instead comes more off as something like a sloppy retcon/excuse, like when he kicked that Stormtrooper down in the pilot and then the novelization said that he was extremely angry so he wasn't thinking straight (though I don't know if the author was let in on what the plan for Kallus's character arc was, so it's possible he was just writing what he knew and assumed, but the SWR writers + LSG didn't say anything against it during editing...). While I also do like the irony with how he basically led like four Imperials who've gone rogue to their deaths, I do recognize that it's only ironic because he's literally become the opposite/antithesis of himself from S1-S2, since he's literally a STATE SEC AGENT so even if he didn't have anything to do with them getting arrested/killed, being a state sec officer that has switched sides + committed treason would've been ironic no matter what (though I'm not sure if this is an actual complaint or if I'm just nitpicking with this one, but regardless, I still like it, even though it's kind of expected considering the circumstances.) (the author for three of those characters didn't know about Kallus's character arc either, but you know who did). I don't like that because of the time skip, we've skipped how Kallus got from the ending of "The Honorable Ones" to where he is in Season 3, meaning they SKIPPED THE CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. I'm torn between if he should live at the end of "Zero Hour", because if he lives, then they have a chance of giving him proper character development, especially so if they introduce the Mercenary/the Fool, and this plotline can also allow for more Zeb coverage that he desperately needs (in addition, we could get more bo-rifle fights, because I also thought that fight back in "Droids In Distress" was cool and that they should do more like that again), but then again, he could die to establish Thrawn's credibility and with that leaked picture, there's a pretty small chance of him trying to make his way out of the mercy of everyone on that ship. I'd still be up for a Kallus novel or comic or short story or something that delves some more into his character, though. So anyway, yes, while I do love Kallus, I wish they had done better with his character arc so that I could say with confidence that the stuff that happens to him was indeed on purpose and say that it is one of the best character arcs I've seen so far.
Satisfied (Hamilton Part Two)

Summary: In which there are two sides to every story and this is Bucky’s (Or, in which Bucky knows he’ll never be satisfied because he can’t have you).

Pairing: Bucky x Reader, Steve x Reader

Word Count: 4,664 (including lyrics)

A/N: I’m sorry for taking so long to post this! Satisfied is my baby and I needed this fic to be as close to perfection as possible. Italics are the past.

Tagging: @marvelingatthewonder, @princess-basket-case@talesoftheimpala, @bovaria

Helpless (Part One)

Originally posted by thewinterbeefcake

A toast to the groom! 

To the bride!

Bucky takes one final swig of the vodka he commandeered from the bar earlier before standing up. In a flash, a microphone is placed in his hands and the commotion of partygoers comes to a standstill. Unused to all of the attention, he tugs on the collar of his navy dress shirt and flashes the crowd a shy, close-lipped smile.

“Well as you all know, I am not a man of many words.” This makes the crowd laugh and murmur some sounds of agreement and understanding.

“But for this night, as best man of my brother’s wedding,” he rests a hand on Steve’s shoulder and gives it a light squeeze. Bucky doesn’t have to see the groom’s face to know that he’s smiling. This is how their relationship has always been. Even after more than seventy years apart, he can still anticipate Steve’s actions almost as well as his own. “I guess I can make an exception.”

Bucky raises his champagne glass in the air and waits for everyone else to do the same. When he does, he makes the mistake of catching your eye. That one look is all it takes for him to be transported to another night. Another time. Another world.

Keep reading

chaosmagetwin  asked:

I'm a male writer, but all of my characters are female because i struggle to write male characters and to make them feel 'real'. I know it's weird, but that doesn't mean I don't want to get better at it. What can I do to get better at writing male characters?

Before I start, thanks to @chaosmagetwin for waiting approx. one million years for me to respond to your question. In any case.

It sounds to me like what you’re dealing with may be something of a mental block. It’s possible you’ve had male characters that just weren’t working out in the past, so now it’s become a big issue you can’t seem to move on from. I say this because, in general, male versus female characters shouldn’t be a huge issue in your writing. My advice is to start by breaking your characters into basics without making male or female an issue.

Yes, being male or female can affect the way someone behaves. Ex. a woman may be more hesitant to go on a midnight run in a strange city than a man. But most of the time if you think too much like this you’re in danger of writing stereotypes. Ex. he’s a guy, so he’s probably going to get really angry or lost because he refused to ask for directions (both overdone and frankly insulting assumptions).

The traits a good character has usually have nothing to do with their gender. It’s a difficult habit to get into, but try not to focus on how readers may expect your characters to sound or behave. I would try building very basic character profiles, and working solely off of those. If you start to question how a character would act or react in any given situation, refer to the character profile you’ve set up. This may help you stay out of your own head about whether your character feels ‘real enough’ or not.

There are lots of examples out there on the internet, but this is my own tried and true BASIC CHARACTER SKELETON. I’ve found it works really well in terms of setting up solid characters, who in future you can alter or complicate further if need be. A skeleton like this is also easy to refer to and keep straight, allowing your characters and their development to stay consistent.


First, give them motivations, external and internal. What real life event is bringing them to action? What personal reasons do they have for doing it?

  • External Motivation: _____________.  
  • Internal Motivation: ______________.

Similarly, give them desires, external and internal. What do they want in the specific context of the story? What do they really need?

  • External Desire: _____________.  
  • Internal Desire: ______________.

Next, two fears. Keep it at two for now. One overarching personal fear that will never be explicitly stated, and one that relates to this larger fear.

  • Fear 1: _____________ .
  • Fear 2: ______________.

Two detrimental flaws (hopefully both of which can actively work against your character in the context of the story).

  • Flaw 1: _____________.  
  • Flaw 2: ______________.

ONE overarching good or honorable quality. Make it big and important.

  • Good Quality: ________________.

When I’ve done all this, I look over what I have and pick three physical qualities. Two that make them unique, or at least easy to picture for the reader, and one that reflects something of the above. This mainly stops me from over describing my characters, and it’s a completely personal choice. Some writers need to know exactly what their characters look like. Ive included this step only in the name of, once again, ABSOLUTE BASICS.

  • _____________,
  • _____________,
  • _____________.

An example! This is an incredibly simple outline of one of the characters from my WIP.


  • External Motivation: Friends and colleagues are going missing.  
  • Internal Motivation: Feels personally responsible for their misfortune.
  • External Desire: Discover the cause of the disappearances.  
  • Internal Desire: To feel as if he has saved someone.
  • Fear 1: Lack of control.
  • Fear 2: Heights.
  • Flaw 1: No sense of self-preservation.  
  • Flaw 2: Easily frustrated.
  • Good Quality: Selflessness.
  • Unruly, tangled hair,
  • Wide, round eyes,
  • Incredibly clean (fingernails, clothes, etc).

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

Is it possible that one is unable to fly and won't ever be? I've tried for years, did what other witches describe to make it work, also what you mentioned, but all I do is I sit with my eyes closed or just imagine I'm out of body. Could it be that this door is closed for me?

Here’s the thing with traveling and flying; no one can teach you it. 
They can guide you, give you inspiration and an idea of what it is, give you what they do to fly, but it’s ultimately up to you. 
You have to know how to let your bliss carry you out. You have to know how to unhook the spirit from the body. You have to know how to let yourself go. 
I understand that it’s very difficult. Flying can be one of the most frustrating times you’ll ever do. I know a witch who has been trying for years, and just recently they’ve managed to get something to happen. 
It’s not something you can force yourself to do. It’s to allow your spirit to fly; allow it to be released from the body. 
For some people, it’s like the snap of a finger. For others, it’s very difficult. Both are normal. 

Do I think that some people will never know what it is to fly? Indeed. 
What that means to you versus what it does to me may be different. 
Don’t stop trying, though. Make sure that you can say that it’s not for a lack of trying.

Heat (1995) Starters
  • "You know, you can ball my wife if she wants you to. You can lounge around here on her sofa, in her ex-husband's dead-tech, post-modernistic bullshit house if you want to. But you do not get to watch MY FUCKING TELEVISION SET!"
  • "Ain't a hard time been invented that I cannot handle"
  • "And all I know is... all I know is there's no point in me going anywhere anymore if it's going to be alone... without you."
  • "Because she's got a...GREAT ASS!"
  • "Bon voyage, motherfucker."
  • "But I tell you, if it's between you and some poor bastard whose wife you're gonna turn into a widow, brother, you are going down."
  • "Don't let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner."
  • "Don't waste my motherfucking time!"
  • "For me the sun rises and sets with her, man."
  • "He knew the risks, he didn't have to be there. It rains... you get wet."
  • "I ain't lying. You're a hot dog. A regular rodeo rider. And this was the monster fuck of my young life."
  • "I ain't your cousin, you rat motherfucker."
  • "I am never going back."
  • "I don't even know what I'm doing anymore."
  • "I don't want to wear the blue ones. They don't match!"
  • "I gotta hold on to my angst. I preserve it because I need it. It keeps me sharp, on the edge, where I gotta be."
  • "I have one where I'm drowning. And I gotta wake myself up and start breathing or I'll die in my sleep."
  • "I know life is short, whatever time you get is luck."
  • "I love you. I love you fat, bald, money, no money, driving a bus - I don't care."
  • "I may be stoned on grass and Prozac, but you've been walking through our life dead."
  • "I mean - is this guy something, or is he something?"
  • "I say what I mean, and I do what I say."
  • "I told you, when we hooked up, baby, that you were gonna have to share me with all the bad people and all the ugly events on this planet."
  • "I'd like to know what's behind that grim look on your face."
  • "I'm alone, I am not lonely."
  • "I'm angry. I'm very angry, _____."
  • "It's like risk versus reward, baby."
  • "So you never wanted a regular type life?"
  • "That's pretty vacant, you know."
  • "Well I am... over-fuckin' whelmed."
  • "Well ya know, for me, the action is the juice."
  • "What am I doing? I'm talking to a blank telephone, cause there is a dead man on the other end of this fucking line..."
  • "What are you, a monk?"
  • "When are you gonna get a lady?"
  • "Where's your empathy, brother? It's a substance abuse problem."
  • "Who? Who? What are you, a fucking owl?"
  • "Why'd I get mixed up with that bitch?"
  • "You do what you do, and I do what I gotta do."
  • "You know, we are sitting here, you and I, like a couple of regular fellas."
  • "You see me doin' thrill-seeker liquor store holdups with a "Born to Lose" tattoo on my chest?"
  • "You're proud of me? What the hell're you proud of me for?"
  • "You want to walk? You walk right now. Or on your own... on your own you choose to come with me."

Sam doesn’t have a big coming out. There are no tears, there’s no yelling, no one breaks anything or slams any doors or says anything they regret later on.

He gets home late one night - later than he’s technically supposed to, but Dad’s on a hunt and Dean doesn’t care as much about his curfew as he does about the fact that Sam has a date - and is rummaging around in the kitchen looking for something to eat when Dean sneaks up out of nowhere and scares the holy shit out of him.

“Boo,” Dean says, amused, and Sam glares.

“Hilarious.” Sam says, tingly adrenaline feeling just starting to fade from his limbs.

“How was your date?”

“Wasn’t a date, dude.”

“Shut up, you went out for food and a movie, it was totally a date. When do I get to meet her? When are you gonna tell me about her? Come on man, you gotta give me something here.”

Sam rolls his eyes, decides on a sandwich cause some not-quite-expired turkey and a lone rubbery kraft single are about the only things in the fridge. He’s pretty sure there’s bread somewhere.

It’s not like he’s been hiding from Dean, really. He just. Never really had any reason to tell him, before. Now though… it was sort of a date. And he likes Ryan - his name is Ryan and he’s a year older than Sam and he’s smart and funny and doesn’t ask too many questions and wraps his arm around Sam’s waist and kisses his face and holds his hand like he doesn’t care who sees - enough that there’s another sort-of-a-date happening in a couple days, and yeah. Maybe Dean should know. Maybe it’s time.

“You don’t get to meet her ever. There is no her.” Sam spreads mayo on the slightly crusty bread and doesn’t look at Dean and tries to will his heart to stop racing. He doesn’t know why he’s nervous. Dean. Dean won’t care. Dean’s open minded. Supportive. For all his annoying little personality quirks, he’s Sam’s big brother. A good big brother. The only one Sam’s got, yeah, but secretly Sam’s pretty sure he couldn’t have asked for a better one.

The legs of the chair opposite him scrape on the cracked linoleum and Dean sprawls and says, “It’s not a date if you take yourself out, Sam.”

Sam piles turkey on his bread and looks at Dean, raises an eyebrow.

Dean frowns, his eyebrows furrow, trying to figure out what he hasn’t figured out and then he gets it. “Oh. Oh! Wait, what? Since when?”

Sam can’t help smiling a little as he slaps his sandwich together and takes a bite. “I dunno, Dean,” he says with his mouth half full, swallows, “there’s some debate about nature versus nurture, but-”

Dean kicks him under the table. “Shut up, asshat, you know what I mean.”

Sam shrugs and takes another bite of his sandwich. “Like a year, I guess. I mean. I think maybe always? But I figured out what it meant like a year ago.”

“Huh,” Dean says, thoughtfully.

Sam stares at him and Dean stares at the ceiling, rubbing his chin absently like he’s some sort of tv detective sussing out the hidden details of a case. “Seriously, Dean? I tell you I’m dating a boy and all you can say is ‘huh’?”

“Ah-ha!” Dean says, gleefully, pointing an accusatory finger in Sam’s direction. “It was a date!”

“Oh my god. You’re impossible.”

“But it was a date.”

Sam rolls his eyes, but can’t help smiling a little. “It was a date. But seriously, Dean. I need something other than 'huh’. This isn’t like… it’s not a phase, or whatever.”

Dean shrugs, looking Sam in the eye. “I don’t care if you like boys or girls or both or neither, Sam. I’m just - it makes sense.” Sam scowls and Dean holds up a hand, eyes widening just a little, “Not like that! No, I just mean. I don’t know. I think I knew, on some level? And I’m not sure why it took you this long to tell me, but really, Sammy. As long as they treat you right it’s fine in my book.”

Sam lets out a breath and nods, a little ball of tension he didn’t even know he’d been carrying around loosening in his belly. “It’s both, by the way.”



Dean grins. “Do I get to meet your boyfriend?”

“Absolutely not. And he’s not my boyfriend.”

“You’re dating though.”

“Shut up. No.”

“Saaam, come onnn. You have to let me meet him.”





It’s not a big deal. There are no tears, no yelling or misunderstanding or disbelief. Sam’s luckier than a lot of people, he knows, and he’s grateful that even though his life seems to be one ridiculous crisis after another, this is simple. This is easy. That Dean will still grin and call him bitch and shove him into things just to laugh at him, still ruffle his hair and spar with him and not treat him any differently than he did before.

“Hey Dean?”


“Thanks. For. You know.”

Dean smiles. It’s soft and fond and the kind of smile that Sam only really sees directed at him, and it makes him all warm on the inside and he kind of wants to hug Dean, would, even, if there weren’t a table in the way. “You don’t have to thank me, Sammy. You’re my little brother.”

“Yeah, I know,” he shrugs, “still. Thanks.”

“You’re welcome,” he flicks a crumb at Sam across the table, “bitch.”

Sam flings a piece of turkey in Dean’s direction, grinning.


Written for Queer!Sam week Day 5: Headcanons

dude, it’s not just this heist, this job;
dude, this is forever

and ever and ever
until we fragment and break against
ourselves and our self-destruction, against
the edges of your world versus mine


bleed out like beach glass not yet weathered,

inexperienced and small,
sharp but not quite so

dude, don’t you see?
we were never meant for anything
except radiance and death i mean,

or till tomorrow.
or the day after,

it’s not like we were ever meant to live!

listen what i mean to say,
what i never told you,
my dude,
my love,

i mean,

(for @slaughtervoid)
We’re spoiled and silly and have no sense of what we need versus what frivolous bullshit we demand we should have a right to have. There’s just too much propaganda pushing brain junk food as a means of identity management in a virtual world where truth is just as scarce as originality. those hot-pink nikes don’t tell me you’re the trailblazer you think you are. You aren’t “just doing shit.” They just say you need attention and are willing to pay a lotta money to get it. I could go on and on, and I’ve got plenty of ideas that I’m 100% sure aren’t all that popular with the masses. No one likes a mirror held up to reflect their hollow insides.
—  Excerpt from Elliot’s journal, Mr. Robot

anonymous asked:

My friend and I are always arguing over whether or not dinosaurs could fly and swim. I tell her that the only things that are technically 'dinosaurs' are the land-only ones (brachiosaurs, raptors, etc) but she says that the ones that could fly (pterodactyls, etc) and swim (mosasaurs, pliosaurs, etc) were all dinosaurs too. I keep telling her that although they're related, they're not 'dinos' but she won't believe me :/ can I get your opinion? What's technically a dinosaurs and what's not?

Well I answered this in my FAQ page, but okay 

You’re sort of right in terms of land versus air versus ocean. I mean typically when we think of animals from this time period (the Mesozoic), we don’t think of things like crocodiles, lizards, mammals - the other land dwelling creatures that lived alongside dinosaurs. But it’s still not an accurate way of defining dinosaurs because plenty of other things lived on land… and dinosaurs eventually lived in the air (a la birds, which are dinosaurs). 

We define organisms nowadays in terms of how they’re related to one another, and not by their physical traits. I know, this is kind of confusing, but it’s really not that hard to understand when you wrap your mind around it. 

Of course, you figure out how organisms are related, evolutionarily speaking, using physical traits, but it’s very hard to define groups based on traits alone rather than relationships, because things can often be evolved multiple times in groups not even remotely related to one another - for example, both whales and sharks have the ability to swim… doesn’t make whales sharks, or vice versa. 

Dinosaurs are now defined as the group of animals that includes Iguanodon, Megalosaurus, their most recent common ancestor (MRCA,) and all of that ancestor’s descendants. Holy crap, right? How the hell are you supposed to know what those descendants are like? 

Well Iguanodon and Megalosaurus aren’t very similar at all - the only thing they have in common is that they are dinosaurs. Iguanodon is an Ornithischian, meaning a group of animals that consist of Eocursor, Triceratops, their most recent common ancestor, and all of that ancestors descendants - okay yeah now I can see you’re saying “HOLD UP, how do you KNOW all these animals are related?” 

We can track fossil forms and see how different traits evolved over time in these groups. So dinosaurs typically have their legs directly under the body - they also are at least mesothermic (somewhere between cold-blooded and warm-blooded) if not fully endothermic (warm-blooded); they ancestrally had protofeathers, a structure like fur (though it evolved from a different part of the epidermal layer - the skin - wooo convergent evolution again) that would serve as the starting point for feathers like we know them today; the common ancestor for all dinosaurs was bipedal, meaning it walked on two legs, though many types of dinosaurs re-evolved quadrupedalism; dinosaurs were all archosaurs, a type of Sauropsid (reptile) that is the group that consists of birds, crocodiles, their MRCA, and all of its descendants - archosaurs are typically characterized due to the presence of having their teeth in sockets, unlike other reptiles, as well as some skeletal features that are kind of complicated to explain; and there are a variety of skeletal features that are also complicated that are unique just to dinosaurs. 

But here’s the thing - a lot of features we think of as distinctive to dinosaurs were then lost by dinosaurs who didn’t need them anymore - for example, no living bird has teeth, but they’re all dinosaurs, meaning they’re all archosaurs, which is characterized by the tooth socket thing - see the pain of defining groups of organisms based on traits? 

Ornithischians and Saurischians are two basic groups of dinosaurs that diverged pretty much at the beginning of dinosaurian history - they had very different hip bones. Ornithischians had the pubis pointing backwards: 

And Saurischians, the pubis is pointing forwards: 

But that’s just in the common ancestor for both of those groups - the thing is, the pubis pointing backwards like in Ornithischians actually evolved three separate times in dinosaurs - in Ornithischians, in Therizinosaurs (a group of Saurischians,) and in birds (a group of Saurischians) - but the last two aren’t Ornithischians because we can see how they’re related to other dinosaurs based on the general trends of evolution in each dinosaur group and place them in the Saurischian group - do you see why we don’t define groups based on characteristics anymore? 

So basically, dinosaurs are what I said above - and every single one we know conclusively is in one of those two groups, though there are some animals that are under debate whether they’re true dinosaurs or animals closely related to the first dinosaur, but not quite the first dino themselves - if that makes sense - like, if the MRCA is the dinosaur “parent,” then these guys could also be “parents”, or they could be “aunts and uncles,” if that makes sense? 

The best way to determine if a singular animal was a dinosaur is just to… look it up. Go online, see its classification. For example, these are all dinosaurs: 

Iguanodon, Megalosaurus, Triceratops, Apatosaurus, Brachiosaurus, Stegosaurus, Protoceratops, Ankylosaurus, Bald Eagle, Edmontonia, Kentrosaurus, Kulindadromeus, Argentinosaurus, Diplodocus, Plateosaurus, Maisaura, Parasaurolophus, Massospondylus, Heterodontosaurus, Tianyulong, Coelophysis, Velociraptor, Troodon, House Sparrow, Tyrannosaurus, Allosaurus, Emu, Crow, Dilophosaurus… etc. 

Some dinosaurs evolved the ability to glide - like Microraptor. From those, some evolved the ability to fly - aka, birds (there’s some debate as to whether certain dinosaurs very closely related to birds could fly, and there’s similar debate on whether some early birds could actually fly or just glided, but the point is some dinosaurs do reside in the air.) Some other dinosaurs have evolved aquatic abilities - Spinosaurus was semi-aquatic, as are animals like penguins. All of these things are dinosaurs. 

So for other animals - like the ones your friend is confusing with dinosaurs - let’s, once again, stop with the characteristics, and start with the relationships. 

Pterodactylus, or what is typically thought of as a “flying dinosaur” (those things with the membraneous wings) was a type of Pterosaur - a group of animals defined as Anurognathus, Preondactylus, Quetzalcoatlus, their MRCA, and all organisms descended from that MRCA. Pterosaurs in general were actually very closely related to dinosaurs - they’re all part of the group Avemetatarsalia, which is a group of archosaurs. Meaning, pterosaurs weren’t dinosaurs, and birds aren’t a group of pterosaurs, but the most closely related group of animals living today to pterosaurs are birds. 

Deinosuchus was a huge type of crocodile - which is a kind of archosaur - but crocodiles aren’t Avemetatarsalians… so they’re not particularly closely related to dinosaurs, much less actual dinosaurs. 

As for the aquatic reptiles of the Mesozoic Era, they weren’t even closely related to dinosaurs. Plesiosaurus and Pliosaurus were members of the group Plesiosauria, which is a group of Pantestudines, which is part of the even bigger group Archosauromorpha. This means that plesiosaurs & pliosaurs weren’t archosaurs, but they were more closely related to modern archosaurs on the whole (so equally closely related both to crocodiles and birds) than they are to other reptiles like lizards. But you know what their closest modern relatives are? Turtles. Yup, Pantestudines includes Plesiosaria, but another branch, Testudinata, is turtles! Turtles are also a group of Pantestudines, which means they are also Archosauromorphs. We actually found this out using genetic research - turtles lost a lot of the same characteristics as not only archosaurs, but also lizards and snakes - meaning they seemed to be a very primitive type of reptile, rather than a member of one of these more derived groups. 

Lizards and snakes (and the Tuatara) are part of the other major grouping of reptiles other than archosauromorphs - the Lepidosauromorpha. You know what else is a Lepidosauromorph? That’s right, mosasaurs. Mosasaurs are a subgroup of Platynota - which are a group of lizards! Meaning Mosasaurs were lizards!! Not anywhere near closely related to dinosaurs. 

Now, Icthyosaurs - you didn’t mention them, but I’m sure your friend will ask - they were also reptiles (Sauropsids - which includes Lepidosauromorphs, Archosauromorphs, and some other closely related groups) - they were one of those closely related groups. Icthyosauromorphs diverged from the organisms that would evolve into both Leps and Archos before those two groups diverged from one another. Meaning, all modern reptiles - birds, crocodiles, snakes, lizards, turtles, and tuatara - are equally closely related to icthyosaurs. 

Here is a REALLY HANDY DIAGRAM showing all of this: 

Source: speaksforthebreeze! (Diapsida is a group of Sauropsids). 

Now - some other animals, right? Because people mix up stuff all the time. 

Dimetrodon is often mixed up with dinosaurs… but it wasn’t even a Sauropsid! In fact, Dimetrodon lived a long time before dinosaurs and even archosaurs evolved. Dimetrodon was a type of Synapsid - a group of animals that contains every Amniote (organism that lays hard-shelled eggs… or at least, the first organism that did so and all of its descendants - including mammals, yes, even the ones that no longer lay eggs) that is more closely related to mammals than to reptiles (sauropsids). Meaning, Dimetrodon was a type of animal, that looked superficially like a reptile… but wasn’t… that was on the lineage of animals that would eventually evolve into mammals. Not closely related to dinosaurs… at all

Same goes for Wooly Mammoths and Saber-Tooth Cats (like Smilodon) (they are not tigers) - they’re MAMMALS, which means they are no where near closely related to dinosaurs… meaning they’re not dinosaurs. Same for the Mastodon. Same for the Glyptodont. All mammals. 

As for Megalodon… Megalodon was a type of shark. Sharks are Chondrichthyes, or cartilaginous fish. You know what was the last group that sharks and dinosaurs had in common was? It was Gnathostomata - all jawed vertebrates - that is the last group that they’re both a part of, that they have a common ancestor in. After that, sharks go off to Chondrichthyes… The other group alive today after that is the Teleostomi, which is all bony fish. All bony fish include lobe-finned fish… which includes tetrapods (amphibians and all other land-dwelling vertebrates)… which includes amniotes, which includes mammals as well as Sauropsids. Meaning, dinosaurs are Teleostomis (and so are we,) but they’re not sharks, at all, meaning Megalodon is not a dinosaur, nor is any other type of shark

Dunkleosteus, that huge monstrous looking fish with the armored head, was a type of Gnathostomata, but wasn’t a shark OR a bony fish - it was a Placoderm, another group of Gnathostomatans which went extinct a long time ago. Meaning it, just as much as any shark, is not a dinosaur. 

As for animals that are made up by our collective imagination - such as Godzilla, Barney, and Indominus rex… well, they aren’t dinosaurs, because they aren’t part of that evolutionary group. I dunno what you would classify them as, as they aren’t part of any evolutionary group technically… but they aren’t dinosaurs. 

So… I know this was very long, and confusing, but hopefully this helps. 

TL;DR: Dinosaurs are a very specific group of animals. You can use many different definitions, here’s another one: Dinosaurs are the group of animals that includes the House Sparrow, Maiasaura, their most recent common ancestor, and all of that ancestor’s descendants. If an animal isn’t in that group, it’s not a dinosaur. Plain and simple. 


So today we’re going to highlight the significant differences between the past Pines twins’ and the present Pines twins’ relationships. And nowhere do I think the contrast is more defined than in the two scenes that, ironically, people seem to believe are reflections of each other. In reality, it’s the exact opposite. Rather than provide a point of comparison, they reveal to the audience just how much different the two twin relationships are, and ultimately why Dipper and Mabel have a fundamentally healthier relationship than Stanford and Stanley ever did.

So let’s really break this down and have a look-see:

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

For some reason, Crystal added a bit where Eudial appears to be trying to make out with Rei. I don't really know what to say about it, but I found it came across as a bit 'creepy'. Especially if you replace Eudial with a guy. I mean I love Rei, but it really bothers me how she doesn't react at all to what is essentially being physically assaulted.

I can’t comment! I haven’t watched Crystal since before the end of the first arc, and reading the manga now, I have precisely zero interest in trying it again. If anyone’s seen it and has thoughts, here you go.

anonymous asked:

alla the Mesopotamian and Arabian allah are they of the same origins . how is alla render in Sumerian versus allah ? what is the meaning of all . appreciate it

This is a great question!  Unfortunately, my answer is going to be a bit uncertain, because arguing about the origins of the names of deities is a hallowed tradition of scholars, and any concrete answers are usually lost to history.  However, here’s what I can say:

1) I’m not sure exactly what you mean by “alla the Mesopotamian.”  I think you may be talking about the word “ilu,” which meant “deity” in Akkadian.  It’s the same root word that appears in the Canaanite god Ilu/El and the Israelite god El/Eloah— a basic term referring to any divine being.

2) In Arabic, “Allah” means “the one God.”  (Thus Arabic-speaking Christians refer to God as Allah, just as Muslims do.)  The current scholarly theory about the word’s origin is that it comes from “al-ilāh,” shortened into a single word.  “Ilāh” is that same word root as in Akkadian, a word for a deity. “Al” is a particle, the equivalent to “the”; you can see it elsewhere in the network name “Al-Jazeera,” “The [Arabic] Peninsula.”  Together, they mean “the God,” emphasizing monotheism.  So yes, Allah is probably derived from the same root as ilu.

3) Sumerian is not a Semitic language (unlike Akkadian, Arabic, and Hebrew), so it has a totally different word for deities.  In Sumerian, “dingir” is the term for a deity, and the cuneiform sign for it looks like a star, thus connecting deities to the sky.

what i know about RvB from tumblr, having never watched any of this show:

  • there are 2 teams (red and blue)
  • except there’s a dude that wears orange so im not so sure…
  • fight fight fight (kiss kiss kiss)
  • someone called church? he might be dead though
  • donut wears the pink but it’s actually lightish red
  • i think there are robots?? or AIs?? something like that
  • idk what it means but people say project freelancer a lot 
  • everyone seems to be named after a state
  • except grif who might have invented grifball but im not sure
  • everything is happy and then suddenly its sad
  • capture those flags
  • they live in a place called blood gulch which doesnt sound like a very nice place to live
  • ur favs will die

snp-pttr  asked:

I think this is a Idek, but I have an odd question. Do you think that translations to other languages affect how people see the characters? I was watching this Vox video talking about how translators from around the world had to work around the word play, puns, etc to fit the spirit on the books into their own cultures, and Severus's name had different forms to fit the connotations of a snake, as in literally, which is not something so blatant in his actual name but for the sound "S"

I think this is a pretty fascinating question; there’s certainly a little bit of culture that doesn’t easily translate between English readers, let alone adding in the translation issue for other languages.

Alas, my efforts at other languages are absolutely dire - but if anyone wanted to chip in, I’d be interested to compare what I perceive a passage as saying versus what a translated passage says.

@lordhellebore - would you be interested in looking at this with me?  I’m definitely interested in looking more at how different translations can skew perspective, and/or add/remove/change meaning from the original text.