Well, I thought the Jurassic Park movies were supposed to be a demonstration of the consequences of creating abominations against nature, a decent into chaos from taking an idea too far at all costs... plus something irrelevant about cloning dinosaurs
Unless I misread something, I think the photochrom process is a colorization of an originally black and white photo, and was popular because of how it allowed for cheap mass printings of things like postcards. But that would still make it a black and white photo that was later colorized. The Library of Congress has a couple different versions of this one, with the colors being kind of different. I'm not completely sure what the differences between those are though.
Unfortunately 3D printers still have a ways to go as some of the steps creating the mentioned objects involved spray painting or filling molds by hand, as they reached the limit of the printer they had at the time. The important thing here is recognizing that a sacrifice in sound quality allows for a lot more creativity, as their methods can work on things made ways other than 3D printer, and even stuff you make at home by hand. Electrostatic speakers are straightforward to make, even for a kid's science fair project, unless you want really good sound quality where it can get difficult as with any kind of speaker design. Someone just had to notice that isn't the only direction for speakers to go.
General purpose quantum computing on a significant, practical scale is probably still more than a decade away. Even then is not a panacea of computer performance woes, as there is a very short list of algorithms for them, some of which may end up still slower on a quantum computer than a conventional one.
The design reminded me of lens designs of a fast lens for photography, and it looks like in this case it might be a Nikkor-S Auto 50mm f/1.4 (about half way down the page).
It is not like the people who use the lines of reasoning that the article is trying to highlight by paralleling stick to rigorous definitions either. And if the mayonnaise in your fridge doesn't have egg yolk in it, then isn't that playing loose with definitions too?
At some points in the history of the demo scene things change, depending on what is considered part of the system. With OpenGL and DirectX being standard on most machines for some time now, they no longer have to write their own rendering and rasterization code from "scratch", and support for sound has gotten easier in some ways. Although there are still demos being made for older systems doing it the old way, along with people that get cranky about calling something 64k (or 4k for the smaller demos) when it depends on many MB of external libraries.
I see a lot of stuff that is not even as bad as "There is soap in your ..." but instead analogous to "The same chemical in X is used to make soap." That becomes even one more step removed from making sense, and in that particular example with soap you could argue anything with olive oil falls under that category that should be labeled as scary.
That said, as dense and hard to read as some journal articles are, it doesn't take much reading skill to look up something on pubmed and get a gist of some research, especially with a little practice. A bit of arithmetic can go a long way to figuring out how dosages compare to real life situations too. It is just important to remember there might be multiple papers, with results discussing different things or disagreeing for some subtle reason. And that unlike newspaper headlines, science journals rarely will label something as good or bad, and instead typically go for some qualitative impact, which may be both good and bad for the same substance in different situations, or just insignificant.
Early on it says "5-man crew" which sounds small, while the later numbers total to 50. Wikipedia gives a 44-52 crew size, so might just be a typo that is a bit confusing at first.
Unfortunately I'm tempted to say half of the stuff here, (i.e. the stuff different from what you probably have seen a million times before by weather services and weather men) might be pretty baseless. For example, if electrical current is already making into the flesh of one foot, it will be much lower resistance to go through your legs to the other foot than to make more passes through your shoes.
Seiches can be produced sometimes up to thousands of miles away from an earthquake, far beyond where the shaking would be felt by a person. It comes down to the size of the body of water, and if a person is likely to notice large wavelength waves on it, but swimming pools seem to be about the right size to respond to earthquakes.
Pennsylvania is one of the twelve US states where voice recordings require consent of all parties involved. In the other 38 states, as long as one person in the conversation is aware of the recording and gives permission for it, then it is ok. There are other cases of people recording police misconduct and crimes in much more serious situations using their own device that have been charged under illegal wiretapping laws.
The recipe looks not too far off from a popular homemade marshmallow recipe I've used before and is therefore pretty inauthentic. An authentic Peep recipe would be rejected and derided by half of my family members.
That said, as dense and hard to read as some journal articles are, it doesn't take much reading skill to look up something on pubmed and get a gist of some research, especially with a little practice. A bit of arithmetic can go a long way to figuring out how dosages compare to real life situations too. It is just important to remember there might be multiple papers, with results discussing different things or disagreeing for some subtle reason. And that unlike newspaper headlines, science journals rarely will label something as good or bad, and instead typically go for some qualitative impact, which may be both good and bad for the same substance in different situations, or just insignificant.