YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #satire #astronomy #libtards #nightsky #moon
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Night mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode toggle
Community
New Posts (Home) ChatBox Popular Posts Reels Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Daily Caller Feed
Daily Caller Feed
6 w

Legacy Media Blames Trump For Soaring Energy Prices, Turns Blind Eye To Biden’s Grid-Crushing Policies
Favicon 
dailycaller.com

Legacy Media Blames Trump For Soaring Energy Prices, Turns Blind Eye To Biden’s Grid-Crushing Policies

Legacy Media Blames Trump For Soaring Energy Prices, Turns Blind Eye To Biden's Grid-Crushing Policies
Like
Comment
Share
The Lighter Side
The Lighter Side
6 w

Canadian Mountie Sits Down With a Senior–And The Conversation Saved His Life
Favicon 
www.goodnewsnetwork.org

Canadian Mountie Sits Down With a Senior–And The Conversation Saved His Life

A family member called the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in British Columbia requesting a visit to the home of their loved one to check on his well-being—and the officer ultimately ended up saving the senior’s life. In April, the Salt Spring Island Mounties received the request from an out-of-town family to check on their elderly […] The post Canadian Mountie Sits Down With a Senior–And The Conversation Saved His Life appeared first on Good News Network.
Like
Comment
Share
Science Explorer
Science Explorer
6 w

There's A Very Intriguing Reason Why Great White Sharks Have White Bellies
Favicon 
www.iflscience.com

There's A Very Intriguing Reason Why Great White Sharks Have White Bellies

It's a lot smarter than you might think.
Like
Comment
Share
Science Explorer
Science Explorer
6 w

NASA's Space Probe Finds Evidence Of A "Helicity Barrier" In The Sun's 2 Million Kelvin Atmosphere
Favicon 
www.iflscience.com

NASA's Space Probe Finds Evidence Of A "Helicity Barrier" In The Sun's 2 Million Kelvin Atmosphere

If confirmed, this might help solve a long-standing mystery about our Sun.
Like
Comment
Share
Science Explorer
Science Explorer
6 w

Why Do Some People Talk In Their Sleep?
Favicon 
www.iflscience.com

Why Do Some People Talk In Their Sleep?

A topic of converzzzation.
Like
Comment
Share
NewsBusters Feed
NewsBusters Feed
6 w

Vanity Fair Goes Full Neurotic Overanalyzing if South Park Is Sufficiently Anti-Trump
Favicon 
www.newsbusters.org

Vanity Fair Goes Full Neurotic Overanalyzing if South Park Is Sufficiently Anti-Trump

Almost everybody would agree that the first South Park episode of the current season slammed President Donald Trump. However, that was not enough for Vanity Fair's Hollywood Correspondent, David Canfield. Displaying steroid levels of insecurity, he just has to know if the creators of South Park, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, are really really anti-Trump. You can see Canfield's desperate insecurity in his story on Wednesday, "South Park Has Been Pissing Viewers Off for Decades. Then It Came for Trump," which led off with this subtitle: "The show has a history of controversy and provocation—but it’s still virtually impossible to know where Trey Parker and Matt Stone really stand." That was the first clue that Canfield just had to find out for sure if Parker and Stone were as satisfyingly anti-Trump as himself. Therefore he leaps into a highly neurotic microanalysis of just what are the politics of the show's creators. ...At the same time, it’s never been an easy series to pin down. South Park initially made a name for itself with contrarian, pessimistic satire, arguably characterized by Stone saying, back in 2001, “I hate conservatives, but I really fucking hate liberals.” The Trump phenomenon challenged Parker and Stone to stake out a more evolved point of view—and a decade in, it seems as though they’re still trying to figure it out. It also seems as though David Canfield is still trying to find out if Parker and Stone are still anti-Trump enough to smugly satisfy himself and the Vanity Fair crew. Speaking with Vanity Fair two months before the 2016 election, Parker said he and Stone still weren’t sure how they felt about PC culture: “I don’t think that we came to any real answers.” And even back then, they sounded exhausted by the prospect of Trump as a subject. “We already did this Donald Trump episode,” Stone told VF. “And real life is outrunning satire this year.” Uh-oh. Such vague answers only adds to poor Canfield's neurosis on just where Parker and Stone really stand politically. During Trump’s first term, South Park still appeared uncertain about how to handle him. The show called out the new president as a xenophobe and an authoritarian, jabbed at his wild behavior on Twitter (now X), and reminded viewers of the allegations of sexual assault that continued to trail him (and which Trump has denied). Yet perhaps because South Park filtered its Trump critique through the character of Mr. Garrison—he’s been the show’s stand-in for the president until this season—Trump ignored it. At the same time, Trump opponents criticized those same episodes, claiming they echoed alt-right sentiments—particularly when South Park tackled workplace harassment and trans athletes. GASP! So South Park does NOT consistently follow the standard liberal narrative? Such heresy is what causes Canfield to grow even more neurotic in his desperate search to pin down South Park politically. South Park didn’t even try to tackle the 2024 election. Last September, Parker and Stone told me that they had intentionally decided to skip it. “I don’t know what more we could possibly say about Trump,” Parker said. How many hours of sleep did Canfield lose over that? South Park still mostly plays as an equal-opportunity offender; it’s the rare comedy to generate genuine, consistently strong reactions on both sides of the aisle. Perhaps you should just relax and live with that idea rather than performing a microanalysis of just where Parker and Stone are coming from on the political scale.
Like
Comment
Share
The Blaze Media Feed
The Blaze Media Feed
6 w

Stop blaming dopamine — kids aren’t addicts; they’re bored
Favicon 
www.theblaze.com

Stop blaming dopamine — kids aren’t addicts; they’re bored

Nowadays, it seems we can be addicted to anything — not just alcohol and drugs, but pornography, random internet browsing, video games, and smartphones. Academic research papers have investigated a wide range of other behaviors including gambling, but also “dance addiction,” “fishing addiction,” “milk tea addiction,” and “cat addiction.” One cheeky paper used the standard medical criteria to show that young people are “addicted” to their real-life friends.While this trend involves many factors, perhaps the single most important claim that has transformed what might be devoted or enthusiastic behavior into a presumed medical case of addiction is the presence of the neurotransmitter dopamine.Parents and others are at risk of missing more fundamental mental health issues that could be at the root of the obsessive behavior, potentially harming the very children they seek to help.Health experts and the popular press tell us that fun activities can give us “dopamine hits” and that overindulging can result in “dopamine blowout.” Indulging too much in naughty activities (somehow, it’s always naughty activities) may create a “dopamine deficit.”To cite a few of many examples: A Washington Post podcast declared that “dopamine surges” explain why “you can’t stop scrolling, even though you know you should.” The Guardian reported that Silicon Valley is “keen to exploit the brain chemical” to keep us hooked on tech. Earlier this month, CNN told readers that “an addiction expert says it might be time for a ‘dopamine fast.’”The problem with this scientific-sounding explanation for an alleged explosion in addictive behaviors is that it’s not supported by science. Solid research connecting dopamine spikes to drugs and alcohol — that is, the capacity of one chemical to ignite another — has not been shown to occur in similar ways with other behaviors. Drug use is fundamentally and physiologically different from behaviors that do not rely on pharmaceutical effects. This has been confirmed in humans: Technology, such as video games or social media, simply doesn’t influence dopamine receptors the way illicit substances do.Experts say what we are seeing instead is pseudoscience that appears to legitimize a moral panic about behaviors that trouble certain segments of society. By falling for this pseudoscience, parents and others are at risk of missing more fundamental mental health issues that could be at the root of the obsessive behavior, potentially harming the very children they seek to help.“Addiction is an important clinical term with a troubled and weighty history,” said Dean Burnett, a neuroscientist and co-author of a brief explainer of what dopamine does and doesn’t do. “People enduring genuine addiction struggle to be taken seriously or viewed sympathetically at the best of times, so to apply their very serious condition to much more benign actions like scrolling TikTok makes this worse.”Burnett likens current narratives about dopamine and technology to “science garnish,” effectively adding a dash of scientific language to nonsense beliefs. “It’s the informational equivalent of sprinkling parsley on a lasagna that’s 90% horse offal,” he said. “It may look nicer, but it isn’t.”The pseudoscience, however, does play a useful role for parents and others who seek to restrict the behaviors they find disturbing. After all, “don’t do X because it will dangerously rewire the reward circuits of your brain and cause addiction” is more compelling than “don’t do X because I don’t like it and think you are wasting your time.”Growing mistrust of expertsAt a time when science has been riven by a series of scandals involving unreliable and falsified research at universities, including Stanford and Harvard, the public is having a harder time distinguishing scientific truth from pseudoscience. As growing numbers of Americans question the veracity of many well-established findings, such as the safety of vaccines, the popularity of the dopamine myth amounts to another misreading of science to serve other purposes in a culture desperate for simplistic moral answers.Such answers can be found in bookshelves full of titles like “Dopamine Detox” and “Dopamine Reset.” These experts warn us that activities we think make us happy are actually making us unhappy in the long term because we’re doing dopamine wrong.Advice sites are quite explicit about this: “You can get dopamine either from rich sources like meditating, exercising, or doing something that is meaningful to you and that serves you in the long run. Or you can get dopamine from self-sabotaging activities like eating junk food, scrolling social media mindlessly, or anything that provides pleasure instantly or in the short term. The choice is yours.” At the extreme, people may go on “dopamine detoxes,” avoiding fun activities for some length of time in hopes of resetting their dopamine.It’s time to put the pseudoscience on dopamine in the dumpster and let kids be kids.It is not surprising that dopamine has been seized on as a ready explanation for human behavior. Dopamine is a naturally occurring neurotransmitter in the brain. It is involved in a number of behaviors and functions, ranging from movement to memory to executive functioning. It’s also involved in pleasure centers of the brain, particularly anticipatory pleasure. Think of it like the feeling of a child awaiting Christmas, the giddy excitement. That’s often different from Christmas Day itself, which feels less exciting, even if it’s pleasant.The role played by dopamine in the brain, however, is complicated. Brain functions rarely work out to one-to-one relationships between a single chemical and some horrible outcome. And certainly not in ways that happen to coincidentally flatter people’s pre-existing moral conceits.Much of what we know about dopamine comes not from humans, but from experiments on rats — which cannot, of course, peruse the internet or use smartphones. In a series of graphs produced by the National Institute on Drug Addiction back in the early 2000s, the difference in activation of dopamine for addictive drugs versus pleasant and normal activities is well documented.They show that administering stimulant drugs such as cocaine and amphetamine causes massive elevations in dopamine after the drug is introduced. These levels spike to over 300% of baseline for cocaine and a whopping 1,000% for amphetamine.By contrast, the increase in dopamine levels from routine activities such as food or sex is much lower, about 150% of baseline for food and 200% for sex. And this increase occurs in anticipation of the activity, not afterward.So yes, there is a kernel of truth in the dopamine/addiction story. Some drugs, as well as routine pleasurable activities, definitely involve dopamine systems. But the key difference is the timing of when and how much of the dopamine is released — before versus after the activity — and this distinction is almost always ignored in scaremongering stories about rampant addiction.“Addictive drugs are different from natural rewards (e.g. food, water, sex) in that [dopamine] will not stop firing after repeated consumption of the drug, the drive to consume is not satiated because they continue increasing dopamine levels, resulting in likelihood of compulsive behaviors from using drugs and not as likely when using natural rewards,” according to an article in the Journal of Biomedical Research.Pete Etchells, a professor of psychology at Bath Spa University in England and the author of “Unlocked: The Real Science of Screen Time,” says research doesn’t support the claim that dopamine drives addiction in other pleasurable behaviors that don’t rely on pharmaceutical effects.“The role that it plays is really complex, to the point that neuroscientists no longer really consider it the sole or universal factor to consider,” he said. “So when we try to say dopamine ‘surge’ = pleasure surge = addiction, that doesn’t really hold up under scrutiny.”Is everything addictive?Part of the confusion over the science comes from the widespread way the term "addiction" is used. Long-standing debates are still ongoing about whether the criteria used to identify substance dependencies still work when applied to everyday hobbies and behaviors such as work, exercise, shopping, sex, video games, or social media.The problem is apparent when looking at the basic criteria the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual uses for addictive disorders. A person needs to answer “yes” to five of the nine questions below to be diagnosed. In this example, X is the sport or hobby you happen to be passionate about and spend some money on.Do you think about X (i.e., your passionate hobby) when not doing X?Do you feel bad (sad, anxious) when unable to do X?Do you find yourself spending more time/money on X?Do you notice you’ve kept doing X even when you meant to stop or cut back?Have you given up other hobbies/activities to do X?Have you continued to do X despite it causing obvious problems (i.e., health, work, family commitments)? Have you deceived others about the time you’ve spent doing X?Do you find yourself doing X to relieve negative moods or stress?Have you experienced the loss of a job/school/relationship because of X?If X is heroin, a yes answer to all of these questions leads to bad results. But it’s not clear that this is true for all the questions when X is eating pizza, reading a book, working out, or playing a video game. If the answer is yes to the question about reading books to relieve negative moods or stress, that’s good. People should do something to relieve negative moods.The question is whether things like video games or social media are more like heroin or more like books. At present, the best evidence suggests the latter. Older adults may not like these activities, but there’s little evidence that they’re addictive in any analogy to substance abuse. There’s no tolerance and withdrawal from technology. They don’t interact with dopamine systems the same way.Parents may believe that taking a smartphone or game console away will 'fix' their kids’ problems, leaving the real underlying issues unaddressed.Making matters more complicated is the psychology of why some people overdo some pleasant behaviors. It’s widely believed that behavioral addictions are a feature of the thing that users are using. To be sure, smartphones, for example, are designed with elements like push notifications to hold the attention of users. However, users can easily adjust these settings, and they are hardly an innovation of modern technology. Books often end chapters mid-scene for the same reason.But such addiction mainly appears to be a feature of the person exhibiting the problems, research shows. Cases of technology overuse can be a symptom of other underlying mental health problems like anxiety and depression, which tend to predate the specific technology addiction. Constant texting is not something done to teenagers by machines via dopamine. By contrast, time spent on technology is a poor predictor of mental health issues.History of moral panicsAs it purports to provide a simple explanation for complex issues, dopamine pseudoscience can be linked to previous moral panics, particularly regarding the new habits of youth. Fear sells, as Frederic Wertham showed in the 1950s when his book “Seduction of the Innocent” gained wide traction for its spurious claim that connected comic books to delinquency and homosexuality.Today, many schools are enthusiastically attempting to shift blame for their own failures onto technology. At present, evidence suggests that cellphone bans in schools don’t work as well as expected, for instance. Public records requests have revealed that even as some teachers and administrators promote these policies, data from their own schools indicates that some student outcomes worsen after cellphone bans, rather than improve.RELATED: How Baby Boomers became unlikely digital addicts Photo by IsiMS via Getty IMagesThe false narratives on addiction may end up hurting children in more profound ways, too. They can distract families from the real psychological issues youth face. Parents may believe that taking a smartphone or game console away will “fix” their kids’ problems, leaving the real underlying issues unaddressed. These efforts may even backfire, removing stress reduction and socialization outlets that youth rely on.It’s time to put the pseudoscience on dopamine in the dumpster and let kids be kids. Some may have mental health issues that need to be addressed, and others, well, mostly need some freedom to explore the world on their own terms.Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations and made available via RealClearWire.
Like
Comment
Share
The Blaze Media Feed
The Blaze Media Feed
6 w

Gentle parenting gave us spoiled tyrants, now FAFO parenting is restoring order
Favicon 
www.theblaze.com

Gentle parenting gave us spoiled tyrants, now FAFO parenting is restoring order

Gentle parenting — or as BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey calls it, “permissive parenting” — was all the rage for a while. It encouraged parents to replace authority and traditional discipline with empathy, compassion, and positive reinforcement, promising flourishing children who were confident, autonomous, and respectful.What it really did was birth entire generations of undisciplined kids ruled by their emotions, who loathe authority and don’t understand the first thing about natural consequences. You’ve seen the videos of parents futilely attempting to reason with their screaming 3-year-old who wants to eat dirt or permitting their 6-year-old to smear paint on the walls because she’s just “expressing herself.”We’ve seen the fruits of gentle parenting. They’re poisoned.The pendulum, however, is now swinging back. Authoritative parenting — modernly called FAFO, or “f**k around and find out,” parenting — is back in style. Even the Wall Street Journal says so. In a recent article titled "Goodbye Gentle Parenting, Hello ‘F— Around and Find Out," author Ellen Gamerman defines FAFO parenting as an approach that “[teaches] children accountability through tangible repercussions.”Allie is relieved that people are finally returning to common sense. “Yes, we should all be authoritative parents,” she says, noting that it’s possible to be an authority while still being gentle in the way the Bible instructs. “If you’re not the authority in your home, your 3-year-old’s going to be the authority in your home. That is disordered, and you are setting them up for failure,” Allie warns.“[Children] don’t have the emotional regulation, the maturity, to be able to do that.”According to the WSJ article, FAFO parenting depends on letting children suffer the natural consequences of their actions. “FAFO is based on the idea that parents can ask and warn, but if a child breaks the rules, mom and dad aren’t standing in the way of the repercussions. Won’t bring your raincoat? Walk home in the downpour. Didn’t feel like having lasagna for dinner? Survive until breakfast. Left your toy on the floor again? Go find it in the trash under the lasagna you didn’t eat,” Gamerman writes.She also stated that “critics blame the [gentle parenting] approach for some of Gen Z’s problems in adulthood.”Allie agrees, “Yes! Like not being able to look in people’s eyes ... and just, like, the overemphasis on, ‘I’m sorry, like, that’s outside of my realm of comfort. I’m not comfortable doing that. I don’t want to do that. That’s outside of my boundary.’”The difference between the thriving Gen Zers and the stereotypical ones who get roasted for their laziness and entitlement, Allie says, is that the first group “had good parents ... who told them no.”“They had parents who said, ... ‘You’re not going to get a phone when you’re 11. You’re not going to have social media when you’re 13,” she says.“The parents who knew that their role was to steward and to be an authority and to love their children ... while still being as kind and as gentle and as supportive as possible — those are the kids I’ve seen that can look you in the eye, that can sit through dinner and they’re not looking at their phone. They’re not obsessed with social media; they’re not obsessed with themselves; they’re willing to work hard even when it’s not fun.”To hear more of Allie’s commentary, watch the episode above.Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Like
Comment
Share
Twitchy Feed
Twitchy Feed
6 w

Trump Kicks IRS Chief to the Curb: Billy Long's 'Fri-Yay' and Birthday Email Antics Roasted on X
Favicon 
twitchy.com

Trump Kicks IRS Chief to the Curb: Billy Long's 'Fri-Yay' and Birthday Email Antics Roasted on X

Trump Kicks IRS Chief to the Curb: Billy Long's 'Fri-Yay' and Birthday Email Antics Roasted on X
Like
Comment
Share
RedState Feed
RedState Feed
6 w

‘Cry More, Lib’: Ken Paxton Dunks on Beto O'Rourke's Whining Over Court Loss
Favicon 
redstate.com

‘Cry More, Lib’: Ken Paxton Dunks on Beto O'Rourke's Whining Over Court Loss

‘Cry More, Lib’: Ken Paxton Dunks on Beto O'Rourke's Whining Over Court Loss
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 5434 out of 91337
  • 5430
  • 5431
  • 5432
  • 5433
  • 5434
  • 5435
  • 5436
  • 5437
  • 5438
  • 5439
  • 5440
  • 5441
  • 5442
  • 5443
  • 5444
  • 5445
  • 5446
  • 5447
  • 5448
  • 5449
Stop Seeing These Ads

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund