Akasazh
Speaking of logos, the new Citroën logo itself is very ugly.
It's bad when a budget brand, Dacia, is going more inventive stuff, like designing a slide in bed system and attachable tent for their station wagon.
I also remember the joke that was written on the same wall 'it takes leather balls to play rugby'.
I didn't get the joke till much later, but somehow it stuck with me.
The article spends most time on evolution Sacks' homosexual identity and struggle with sexuality and repression.
His uncertainty and melancholical bouts maar him question his own work and make the author conclude him 'putting himself in his work'.
However very little evidence is presented. Most insinuated about is 'awakenings' yet even in that case it's hard to reach conclusions.
The author plays of his perennial self-doubt as aan admission, but there's very scant evidence about him actually making up stories.
I'm not saying his method is our isn't flawed, it's just that the title belies the story. The struggle with his sexuality is the main subject and only small bits are about his uncertainty of his work.
X triggers y which revolutionized how we do z and changed the world to our 'current understanding'.
In this case the writer is trying to push a theological, conservative narrative, and Aquinas fits perfectly! Wow!
Otoh one could argue that Aquinas biggest achievement is showing the natural world cannot be explained solely from the bible, thus necessitating less convoluted explanations (Occam's razor) this paving the way for science through falsification.
A new weapon is introduced and finds success, is boasted as the future of warfare. It works and is a significant advantage for the side using it, being a force multiplier.
After the initial succes the other side starts using it too, and there's a scramble for countermeasures. This makes the wonder weapon less effective.
Then articles are written that are the inverse of the hype following the first implementation. Even doubting if 'this is the end of -wonder weapon- ?'
Look at the tank. With every new weapon (take drones) it is theorized that drones would be the end of effectiveness of tanks as a weapon system.
It's not, but it's not longer a wonder weapon, yet a piece of equipment, that's constantly evolving. Is an arms race and it's been like that since the invention of the club by our ancestors.
Napoleon proved that having meritocracy in the battlefield leadership beats out old sullen generals that are there because they have always been..
https://old.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3dgt1f/could_yo...
I do support your enthusiasm for the topic and applaud your critique of the article.
But your argument seems to be: the authors didn't pay much respect to the science, in favor of clickbait; they should've read work of fiction instead.
I cannot asses how scientifically accurate Kim Stanley Robinsons' writing is, but he's a doctor of literature rather than a astrobotanist.
I mean ancestry.com data van be used similarly, but genetical info is inobfuscable.
The globular shape meant that reuse was impractical. Smaller allongated amphorae (the form most people think of when amphorae are mentioned)could see reuse as roofing tile, however they didn't hold the same volume.
https://www.sal.org.uk/collections/explore-our-collections/c...