President Donald Trump, his allies, and the United States of America prevailed on Tuesday as Rep. Thomas Massie (R., Ky.) lost his primary race to Trump-backed challenger Ed Gallrein, a retired Navy SEAL and fifth-generation dairy farmer. The Associated Press called the race for Gallrein roughly an hour after polls closed, with Massie poised to lose by double digits. "I'm going to win," Massie told CBS News on Monday. Instead, he'll join disgraced former Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R., Ga.), Jamaal Bowman (D., N.Y.), and Cori Bush (D., Mo.) as the latest fringe agitator and antisemite to endure an involuntary early retirement. As gracious as ever in defeat, Massie apologized to supporters for letting them down. Just kidding, he blamed the Jews. "I would've come out sooner," he said, "but I had to call my opponent and concede, and it took a while to find Ed Gallrein in Tel Aviv."

Before his resounding primary loss on Tuesday night, outgoing Representative Thomas Massie lent credence to the notion that foreign interests and American fifth columnists beholden to them contributed to what his allies called a "billionaire plot" to oust him from Congress. Indeed, the opposition to Massie pumped millions of dollars into his race, among them "pro-Israel groups like the United Democracy Project and Trump allies like MAGA KY," according to NOTUS. But these are Americans engaging in protected political speech. When I last checked, a self-described "libertarian Republican" would typically not object to, say, the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United. Rather, what Massie and his fans were attempting to launder into the discourse was the implied claim that his deep-pocketed adversaries were beholden more to Israel's interests than America's.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday revealed previously undisclosed details about his new bunker-like White House ballroom, saying it would have a drone base on ​the roof and a military hospital as part of a six-story subterranean complex. Amid ‌the bang and clang of construction, Trump took a group of reporters on a tour of the project to try to bolster his argument that the U.S. Congress should allocate $1 billion to pay for security enhancements to the building.

President Donald Trump gave reporters a fresh look Tuesday at construction of the new White House ballroom, touting it as a hardened security structure that runs six stories into the ground. "This goes down very deep," Trump said Tuesday from outside of the White House, motioning for reporters to check out construction updates. "You get a better view right over here. … These are already down two floors. That is down about six stories deep. That's big stuff. Normally, when you build a ballroom, you build it flat. You just throw the ballroom. It would have been built."

At a time when his poll numbers are sagging, the economy is sputtering and the war he launched in Iran simply will not end, President Trump spent Tuesday morning showing off his skills in the profession he feels most comfortable with: real estate. Mr. Trump summoned reporters to the White House to give them a peek at the giant hole where the East Wing once stood, before he had that part of the complex torn down to make way for a $400 million, 90,000-square-foot ballroom.

Since the dawn of man, right-handedness has reigned supreme without much intel as to why. While our ape brethren also develop strong preferences toward one hand over another, there is generally an equal number of left- and right-handed individuals. Conversely, 90% of humans are right-handed. And now, scientists think they have discovered when this prevalence developed.  A new study led by researchers at the University of Oxford suggests that it went hand-in-hand (pardon the pun) with two other major evolutionary shifts: walking on two legs and developing much larger brains. Thousands of primates helped narrow the possibilities A variety of primates, Canva The research, published in PLOS Biology, analyzed data from 2,025 monkeys and apes representing 41 different primate species.  All the evolutionary factors tested—tool use, diet, habitat, body size, social structure, brain size, movement patterns, etc.—seemed to match human data, leaving no real clues as to why our species decided to become almost exclusively right-handed.  However, that changed once researchers added brain size and the ratio between arm length and leg length to their analysis. Suddenly humans, with their larger brains and legs much longer than their arms (a hallmark trait of bipedal walking), stood out from an evolutionary standpoint.  These factors, along with other fossil records, help us imagine a timeline that looked something like this:  The evolution of bidepal movement, Canva Human ancestors (Ardipithecus and Australopithecus, respectively) began walking upright, allowing one hand to become specialized over the other. At this point, there would likely be an equal number of left-handers to right-handers.  As our brains grow to incorporate more complex activities like using tools, communicating through a wide array of gestures, and participating in complex tasks like cooking and performing rituals, so too does our right-hand bias. In fact, the same 90% right-hand dominance is already present around 2.6 million years ago…before Homo sapiens and Neanderthals entered the scene.  One side of the brain might hold an important clue Image of the brain hemispheres, Canva That third factor (complex tasks) is particularly interesting. Sequentially organized behaviors, also known as hierarchical action, are often believed to be something managed by the brain’s left hemisphere. The left hemisphere also controls all the motor functions and movements on the right side of the body. That said, all three elements, along with the fact that humans learn by imitating their parents, likely played equally important roles in the evolutionary narrative.  Ancient “hobbits” added another intriguing clue Backing this theory is the “hobbit” species discovered in Indonesia. This ancient humanoid species maintained smaller brains and the ability to climb while also walking. Conversely, it did not have nearly the same amount of right-hand dominance.  There are, of course, more mysteries to unravel. Why some of us are still left-handed, for instance. Or whether the limb preference of other animals suggests a similar evolutionary pattern. But, regardless, the study reminds us that even the most seemingly simple quirks that make us human actually tell an incomprehensibly vast story of how we came to be in the first place.  The post Scientists think humans developed right-handedness thanks to these 2 factors appeared first on Upworthy.

If there’s one thing individuals and Fortune 500 companies have in common, it’s the inability to resist a personality test. Employers have long used tests like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator or the Enneagram to understand their employees better and build more compatible teams. And people in general seem strangely addicted to quizzes that categorize them by personality type. It’s long been known that most personality tests aren’t scientifically sound, but that doesn’t stop people from taking them. Part of the reason is that those tests tell us something about ourselves as individuals while also making us feel like we’re part of a group identity. They seem to help us understand ourselves and one another better, and thus appear to “work.” However, as researcher Madelyn Leembruggen explained on SciShow, most personality profiles simply play into a psychological trick we humans easily fall into. The Barnum effect and how it works “Personality tests and profiles take advantage of a weird psychological tendency that also benefits everything from horoscopes to fortune tellers to Buzzfeed quizzes,” Leembruggen said. It’s called the Barnum effect. “The Barnum effect was named after P.T. Barnum, the iconic and problematic showman known for his ability to captivate, and often manipulate, an audience,” she explained. “The Barnum effect is the phenomenon where if you give someone a personality test, they’re pretty likely to believe that the results are true and accurate, regardless of how hard the profile-maker actually tried. There’s something about taking the test itself that makes an audience more likely to believe the end result.” Personality tests became popular after WWI, when someone developed an assessment to determine which soldiers might be prone to PTSD. In the decades that followed, personality profiles appeared in popular magazines and psychologists’ offices alike. But researcher and college professor Bertram Forer felt skeptical about their accuracy. He basically said the results weren’t any more specific than saying that a person has opposable thumbs. Personality test example (Photo credit: Canva) Professor Forer’s 1949 personality test experiment In 1949, he conducted an experiment to test his hypothesis. He gave his Intro to Psychology students a personality questionnaire. Then, he told them he’d analyze the results and create a unique personality profile for each student. When they got their results, they rated them for accuracy. Only one student rated their results below a 4 out of 5, indicating nearly all students felt their results reflected their personality. However, Forer had duped them. He had actually given every student the exact same analysis. “Forer made a list of general, vaguely flattering, and universally relatable statements,” Leembruggen explained. “So, why did everyone believe that their list was so perfectly tailored to them? Well, that’s the Barnum effect.” Essentially, most personality descriptors in personality profiles are fairly relatable to most people. And when you combine any sense of the trait being positive, most people will see themselves in it. The SciShow video gives these statements as examples: “You have an analytical mind, though  you also might space out at times.” “You pride yourself as an independent thinker, and don’t accept other people’s statements without good proof.” “You love variety and tend to rebel against too many restrictions and limitations.” “You don’t always reveal all of yourself to others.” “You have a great desire for other people to like and admire you.” Most people see themselves in some, if not all, of those statements because they’re vague enough to feel true. However, 1949 was a long time ago. Haven’t psychologists gotten better at creating real personality profiles? Many personality tests have binary categories of traits. (Photo credit: Canva) How accurate is the Myers-Brigg Type Indicator, though? One of the most popular personality tests of the past 50 years is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, or MBTI. This test splits people into 16 personality categories based on combinations of eight traits or preferences: Introversion/Extroversion, Sensing/Intuition, Thinking/Feeling, and Perceiving/Judging. Your “type” would be a combination of four letters, like INTP or ESFJ, with a corresponding description of that personality. Many people have taken an MBTI test at work, but is it really accurate? “When researchers want to see how well a certain assessment tool, test, or survey actually works, one thing they’ll do is have the same people take the same test multiple times,” Leembruggen said. “If they get the same score each time, we’d say that tool has good test-retest reliability. And in studies of MBTI where participants took the assessment multiple times, up to half or even more test takers received a different result for at least one of the four letters.” Accurate or not, people love their Myers-Briggs. However, psychologists prefer a more recent personality indicator known as the Big Five Personality Trait model.   12 Things Everyone Should Know About Personality1. Most psychologists agree that most personality variation can be captured with just a handful of higher-order traits. The most popular approach posits five traits, often known as the Big 5.[Link at end of thread.] pic.twitter.com/lciTNcZOGo— Steve Stewart-Williams (@SteveStuWill) November 25, 2025 What is the Big Five Personality Trait model? In the Big Five, people rank as low, medium, or high in five personality dimensions: extroversion, neuroticism, openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness. (A more recent test known as HEXACO includes honesty-humility as a trait.) “These tests, and newer variations that include subcategories of these five, do seem to show better test-retest reliability,” Leembruggen shared. “One major reason that newer tests based on the Big Five are more reliable is that they’re based on accumulating data from multiple long-term studies from the 1990s onwards. And they’re rooted in the principle that, if a personality trait exists in humans, languages will adopt words to describe it.” However, she notes, most research only includes people from WEIRD countries: Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic. That reality alone makes it hard to extrapolate universal personality traits or types. Many people enjoy taking online personality tests. (Photo credit: Canva) The way personality tests are designed is inherently flawed Finally, the nature of personality tests with multiple-choice answers, most of which only offer two options, is flawed. “When you have to answer every question from a list of predetermined options, it’s called a forced-choice measure,” Leembruggen explained. “These tests are easy to administer and to grade, but the downside is that they’re really rigid and can flatten nuance, including how people’s personality traits can change due to the passage of time and other variables. We’ve all stared at a multiple-choice question and wished there was an option to check ‘other.’ So trying to make a questionnaire-style test that can accurately gauge anybody’s personality might be kind of impossible.” That certainly won’t stop a lot of people from taking those tests, though. Accurate or not, there’s something about them that draws us in. Maybe it’s just fun to self-analyze. Maybe we yearn to know ourselves better, and those tests offer a structured and largely harmless way to do that—or at least to feel like we’re doing it. You can follow SciShow on YouTube for more research-based learning. The post The psychological trick behind why personality tests like Myers-Briggs always ‘work’ appeared first on Upworthy.

NBA legend Michael Jordan is known as one of the most ruthless competitors ever to step foot on a basketball court. But he also understands that success isn’t everything, and that it all works toward fulfilling a greater life purpose. “To be successful, you have to be selfish, or else you never achieve. And once you reach your highest level, you have to be unselfish. Stay reachable. Stay in touch,” he once said.  Jordan recently showed that he has never forgotten where he came from by reconnecting with Ms. Etta, the transportation coordinator at Emsley A. Laney High School where he graduated 45 years ago. Ms. Etta was a hospice patient at Lower Cape Fear LifeCare in Jordan’s hometown. In her final days, she couldn’t stop talking about Jordan, who was one of her favorite students. Her biggest wish was to hug him one last time. Jordan reaches out to a beloved high school teacher in her final days View this post on Instagram A post shared by Lower Cape Fear LifeCare (@lcflifecare) Administrators at LifeCare tried to reach out to Jordan, but they never heard back. Then, on May 12th while at home, Wendy, a LifeCare social worker, received a call from an unknown number. It was Jordan: “Is this Ms. Etta?” he asked. Wendy then drove over to Ms. Etta’s bedside, and they set up a video call with Jordan. “They laughed, reminisced, picked at each other, and shared a moment that brought tears to everyone in the room,” LifeCare wrote in the caption of an Instagram post showing Ms. Etta and Jordan smiling and talking together. “A memory her family will carry with them forever.” High school plays a big role in Jordan’s legend. He graduated from the school in 1981, but as a sophomore in 1979, Jordan was “cut” from the varsity basketball team. Jordan has always said this was the catalyst for his becoming one of the greatest pro athletes the world has ever seen. However, at that time, sophomores rarely played on varsity teams. Jordan was sent to Junior Varsity because the team needed taller players.  Michael Jordan in 1984. Credit: United Press International/Wikimedia Commons Jordan never forgot about his high school days Jordan has clearly gotten over the slight, and, in 2019, he donated $1.1 million to Laney as part of an agreed-upon deal between Jordan, the school, and Nike for the 2013 sales of Jordan’s special Laney 5 sneakers.  “Mike decided that he wanted to take care of Laney High School,” Laney Athletic Director Fred Lynch said, according to WECT. “With him and his attorneys wanting to make sure that it would go entirely to Laney High School. So, Mike is still the man.” Half of the money went to the athletic department, while the other half was used at the school’s discretion. “It’s a very good thing. It’s a blessing to give that much money to a school,” Laney student Dariius Dutton said. “It means a lot to me because I love Laney, I love my school. And I think it will help a lot.” One can have all the success in the world, but without gratitude, it’s as empty as never having achieved anything in the first place. For Jordan to reach out to someone who helped him as a child in their final days shows that, although he may have reached incredible heights as an athlete, he never forgot those who helped him get off the ground. The post Michael Jordan made a beloved high school staffer’s final wish come true while she lay in hospice appeared first on Upworthy.