erindizmo:

fictional-history:

(Source)
Name: Maria HillBirthdate: April 4, 1982Sun Sign: AriesAnimal Sign: Water Dog


Happy birthday, Maria!

So, in the last 24 hours I’ve learned that Maria Hill and Natasha Romanov are both younger than me. This disturbs me, in a “when Mozart was my age” sort of way.
On the bright side, at least I’m still younger than Steve…

erindizmo:

fictional-history:

(Source)

Name: Maria Hill
Birthdate: April 4, 1982
Sun Sign: Aries
Animal Sign: Water Dog

Happy birthday, Maria!

So, in the last 24 hours I’ve learned that Maria Hill and Natasha Romanov are both younger than me. This disturbs me, in a “when Mozart was my age” sort of way.

On the bright side, at least I’m still younger than Steve…

(Reblogged from erindizmo)

sqbr:

More fun with the scrying workshop: Red iridescent/sunshine shimmer/sunshine underbelly, in both snapper and ridgeback. Midnight tiger/midnight shimmer/aqua crackle female fae.

(That’s it for the evening I’m going to bed. Probably ;))

EDIT: Oops wrong blog! Um. Well, sqbr readers, aren’t these dragons pretty?

They are pretty dragons.

And I like how the first one isn’t having any truck with traditional standards of feminine presentation. I mean, not that a dragon has any reason to care about human ideas about feminine presentation anyway, but it’s nice to see that affirmed from time to time.

(Reblogged from sqbr)

Anonymous asked: Do you know the muffin man?

copperbadge:

The one who lives on Drury Lane? 

No, I’m afraid not. 

Miss Farjeon knows the muffin man:
His name is name is Alfred Payne;
His daughter’s name is Mary Ann,
His wife’s is Sarah Jane.

(And his Mary Ann’s a wonder at the mixing of a muffin, but if you want to know more I should get out of the way and let Eleanor Farjeon tell it in her own words.)

(Reblogged from copperbadge)

dwellerinthelibrary:

hestmord:

I’m told the finnish epithet for prescriptivists is “pilkunnussija” ie “comma-fucker” which is 100x better than the lazy “grammar nazi” that gets thrown around in english imho and i propose translating and adopting this term immediately

Dammit - if Google Translate can be relied upon (never guaranteed), it only means “nitpicker”, not literally “comma-fucker”. Even if true, this doesn’t stop us adopting the translation. >:)

Google Translate is good enough at finding equivalencies that it’s absolutely unreliable for literal translations. (I’ve had several frustrating experiences trying to find the literal translation of a book or movie title and just being served up the completely different title the work was given when published in English.)

You might get better results trying “pilkun” and “nussija” separately.

(Reblogged from dwellerinthelibrary)
justice-turtle:

maliciastarling:

ellievhall:

TOM HIDDLESTON IS A SINGING PIRATE AND NOTHING ABOUT THIS IS OKAY. [VIDEO]


I’m afraid to click on the link and reignite my Tom obsession… ngl I’m not sure the thirst ever went away.

wait wait in what show is tom hiddleston a singing pirate?

The Pirate Fairy, the most recent of the direct-to-video Tinkerbell movies. (It’s not actually out yet; next month, I think.)

justice-turtle:

maliciastarling:

ellievhall:

TOM HIDDLESTON IS A SINGING PIRATE AND NOTHING ABOUT THIS IS OKAY. [VIDEO]

I’m afraid to click on the link and reignite my Tom obsession… ngl I’m not sure the thirst ever went away.

wait wait in what show is tom hiddleston a singing pirate?

The Pirate Fairy, the most recent of the direct-to-video Tinkerbell movies. (It’s not actually out yet; next month, I think.)

(Reblogged from justice-turtle)

linnealurks:

pedanther:

linnealurks:

trevsplace:

The question, “Doctor Who?”
restated.   

Um, check your math.

It’s a quote from Douglas Adams’ The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, in which — to cut a very long story perhaps a bit too short — “What do you get if you multiply six by nine” is proposed as the Question to which the Answer is “Forty-two”. The fact that 42 is not actually what you get if you multiply six by nine is a plot point, not a mistake being made either by the author or by anybody quoting from the story.

(There’s a small band of nerdy fans who persist in the belief that Adams was making an extremely pedantic joke in base-13, but Adams always denied it.)

Ah, no, but as I said in my original tags, the question in the book is “what do you get when you multiply six time EIGHT”, not nine.

Pedantry is still my middle name, though maybe “check your math” wasn’t a very good response.

Because we have the same middle name, I checked a copy of the book, and also the original radio series and the TV adaptation, before I responded, and it was “six by nine” in all of them.

I dunno. Maybe it’s different in the American edition of the book for some reason.

(Reblogged from linnealurks)

linnealurks:

trevsplace:

The question, “Doctor Who?”
restated.   

Um, check your math.

It’s a quote from Douglas Adams’ The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, in which — to cut a very long story perhaps a bit too short — “What do you get if you multiply six by nine” is proposed as the Question to which the Answer is “Forty-two”. The fact that 42 is not actually what you get if you multiply six by nine is a plot point, not a mistake being made either by the author or by anybody quoting from the story.

(There’s a small band of nerdy fans who persist in the belief that Adams was making an extremely pedantic joke in base-13, but Adams always denied it.)

(Reblogged from linnealurks)

heroofthreefaces:

Often when I want to comment on such an absurdity as this original post that shows up on my dash after many generations of reblog from a string of tumblrers of which I know few or only the last, I go back to the original post to reblog because reasons. In this case, as sometimes happens, the original post has been deleted by the poster. Got out of the kitchen, apparently. I hope he still gets notifications of reblogs, though, so he goes on knowing just how far afield he’s being embarrassed.

But you didn’t take the extra step of checking to see whether he’d apologized for posting it? Because he has, you know. I think he probably already knows how far afield he’s being embarrassed, and I don’t see wisdom in continuing to rub his nose in it.

(Source: theoncomingcapaldi)

(Reblogged from heroofthreefaces)

People keep asking copperbadge what he had for breakfast last week. There are in fact good and sufficient reasons for this odd behavior, but it reminds me of a story:

Time was when a certain boy went out West to stay with his grandparents. While he was there, they went to visit a traveling carnival where one of the sideshows was a Native American man of advanced years sitting under a sign proclaiming that he was Chief Rising Buffalo, and that he remembered everything that had ever happened to him. The boy paid the money and asked Chief Rising Buffalo what he’d had for breakfast on July 4th, 1862.

"Two eggs," said Chief Rising Buffalo.

Huh, thought the boy, I bet he just made that up. How would anyone ever know? And he went on to the next sideshow, and eventually he went home, and he forgot about the whole thing.

Twenty years later, a certain young man returned to the West to see about settling matters after the deaths of his grandparents. When he got off the train, he saw an elderly Native American man standing on the platform, and, moved by a well-meaning but ill-informed sense of shared humanity, greeted the man by raising a hand and calling “How!”

"Scrambled," said Chief Rising Buffalo.

ritchandspace:

people are all like “doctor who can’t be a childrens show, its too scary.” yeah, because childrens stories have always been so safe and wholesome and never disturbing and fucked up, ever.

There’s an essay by GK Chesterton (“The Red Angel”, in Tremendous Trifles) where he argues that children need to hear stories about monsters being fought and horrors being overcome. Worrying that they’ll be frightened by the monsters and horrified by the horrors is beside the point, he says, because even a child who has never been told a single scary story is capable of inventing their own monsters to frighten themselves with — but the knowledge that monsters can be fought and overcome is invaluable, and not always so easily discovered on one’s own.

(He doesn’t mention Doctor Who specifically, but it was 1909 and nobody had invented a working time machine yet, so I think that can be chalked up as an understandable oversight.)

(Reblogged from ritchandspace)