Another star is born! This year's recipient of the 77th Cannes Film Festival's Palm Dog Award is Kodi, a Griffon mix from the movie "Dog On Trial".

What To Plant In June

The Easiest Way to Cook During a Power Outage

It's All About 'Norms' and 'Civility,' Isn't It?

Fears of the death of the Hubble Space Telescope have turned out to be greatly exaggerated, with plans announced for it to go on, operating on a single gyroscope. Practical observing time will be reduced, as it will take Hubble longer to move from one target to another, but there are no plans to shut it down. On May 31, Hubble was placed in safe mode because of faulty readings from one of its gyroscopes. When this was followed by the announcement of a press conference Tuesday afternoon, American time, fears were high that its closure would be announced. After all, Hubble has been operating for 34 years, the last 15 of these without the capacity to service it.Instead, the conference described a plan to keep the space telescope operating, quite possibly until the mid-2030s when its decaying orbit will see Hubble burn up in the atmosphere, unless intervention occurs. Hubble needs its gyroscopes to shift its orientation from one part of the sky to another, as well as to maintain focus on a target once it’s there. It’s designed to operate with three at a time. The 2009 repair mission left it with six – but three of these failed within a decade, so since 2018 it has had no redundancies for full operations. The latest failure means the end of peak performance for the foreseeable future.However, while three gyroscopes are ideal, in 2008 Hubble demonstrated the capacity to operate on just one, albeit with longer downtime as it reorients. The process relies on using Hubble’s magnetometers and sun sensors to combine with a single gyroscope to get Hubble pointing in the general vicinity of the target. From there, fixed head star trackers and eventually fine guidance sensors slowly bring it to the precise spot in the sky. Once it has found its target, a single gyroscope keeps Hubble pointing almost as precisely as all three.Schematic of Hubble's multiple guidance systems.Image Credit: NASA/STSciThe new plan will rely on one of the remaining working gyros, with the other gyro placed in spare mode, to take over when this one fails,Even the malfunctioning gyro may not be completely dead. It‘s suffering what is known as “saturation”, where it reports the telescope is slewing at the maximum rate when it moves between targets, irrespective of the actual speed of movement. Hubble’s operators have found they can fix the problem temporarily, but saturation always returns. However, with more time, a permanent fix may be found.The gyroscopes are Hubble’s weak link because they rely on wires thinner than a human hair to carry power in and data out. Passage through the fluid inside the gyroscope can lead to corrosion. The limitations may encourage NASA to spend more time on a few targets where extended observations are particularly valuable, such as the famous Hubble deep field, rather than shifting as often. They will also prevent viewing objects closer to us than Mars, given the rate of movement required to track them. However, NASA noted in a statement; “These are rare targets for Hubble.”When operating, a wheel within the gyroscopes spins at 320 revolutions per second. The considerable angular momentum this provides makes it easy to measure the force produced by any turning of the telescope, allowing that change to be tracked precisely.After the closure of the space shuttle program, NASA lacks the capacity to perform maintenance on Hubble, let alone boost it into an orbit safe from atmospheric drag. Billionaire private astronaut Jared Isaacman has offered to cover the costs to revamp Dragon to extend Hubble’s life beyond that date, but questions of safety have kept NASA undecided on the idea. Even without such a mission, however, if Hubble can squeeze four years’ worth of operation out of each remaining gyroscope, it could be operating after the JWST, branded as its successor, runs out of fuel.Hubble has had plenty of near-death experiences before. However, like the hero in an action movie who saves the day operating on one leg (read: gyroscope), one of the greatest scientific instruments in humanity’s history just doesn’t quit.

Many scientists believe that sperm counts across the world are on a general decline, with potentially serious ramifications for fertility and male health – but what if they’re wrong? A new study from researchers in the UK, Canada, and Denmark suggests the true situation may not be so straightforward, and that sperm quality, rather than quantity, should be the focus.Data suggesting that sperm counts are dropping has attracted a lot of attention in recent years, with some going to far as to call it a looming “spermageddon”. Over the last 30-plus years, a string of studies have raised the alarm about declining sperm quantities in industrialized nations, with exposure to everyday chemicals, cannabis use, and recently microplastics coming under fire as potential causes. But now, a new study has come to a rather different conclusion.The team analyzed data from 6,758 men aged 18-45 from four cities in Denmark who had applied to become sperm donors at the world’s largest sperm bank, Cryos International. The data covered the period between 2017 and 2022, and all samples were assessed in the same way.“It is commonly believed [that] sperm counts in men are falling,” said co-author Professor Allan Pacey of the University of Manchester, in a statement emailed to IFLScience.“We did not see such a change and that suggests that in this population of sperm donor applicants, in these four Danish cities, sperm concentrations have not changed between 2017 and 2022.”Digging deeper into their findings, the team did observe a small decrease in sperm concentration and total sperm count between 2019 and 2022 of around 0.1-5 percent year-on-year. This change, however, was not statistically significant.There was one result that surprised the team. “The decline in measures of sperm motility between 2019 and 2022 was an unexpected finding,” commented co-author Professor Robert Montgomerie.Motile sperm concentration and total motile sperm count – both measures of sperm quality rather than absolute quantity – decreased by 16 and 22 percent, respectively, from 2019-2022.“This decline roughly corresponds to the onset of the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic,” Montgomerie noted. “While there is no evidence to suggest that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is directly affecting sperm, we speculate whether the widespread lockdowns may have led to changes in working patterns, diet, and levels of physical activity which we already know can impact sperm motility.”It's an intriguing suggestion, but one the authors stress in their paper cannot be directly determined from their data.It’s also not clear how well this population of volunteer sperm donors can be generalized to men across Denmark as a whole, noted co-author Anne-Bine Skytte, Medical Director of Cryos International.Any new research that calls into question a well-established idea is bound to come under scrutiny. But Professor of Reproductive Medicine Dr Chris Barratt, who is based at the University of Dundee and was not directly involved in the study, praised the authors’ approach in a comment to the Science Media Centre:“Studies to date have poorly investigated sperm motility but this study has done a good job. This data is important as it shows, on a large sample set with high quality methods, that we should be focussed on sperm quality, rather than sperm quantity.”The altruism of those who are willing to donate their sperm to assist people experiencing fertility issues can also help advance scientific discovery – as Skytte put it, “This is an unexpected benefit of their generosity.”The authors suggest that collecting more lifestyle data from donors could help us pinpoint the potential causes behind declining sperm quality at a population level, which could then also be used to develop personalized interventions for donors wishing to improve their own sperm quality, making it a win-win.In short, this study would suggest that the old adage of “quality, not quantity” is bang on the money.The study is published in the journal Human Reproduction.

Imagine if Republicans were to seize a pivotal moment to engage in a sustained national debate over issues like inflation, crime, national security threats, and the costs associated with Joe Biden’s border policies. No political analyst would suggest that Democrats could withstand such focused scrutiny on top national concerns where a supermajority of voters oppose Biden’s policies.So, instead of avoiding a budget fight in September, why not confront it head-on? The timing of September 30, right as early voting begins, could be strategically ideal for a budget fight over the border. Why not leverage your strongest advantage when it matters the most?It is political malpractice to employ a 'run out the clock' strategy based on the uneducated belief we’ve got this election in the bag.Many of us have lamented how Republicans in recent months have given up every leverage point on every must-pass bill for the remainder of Biden’s term. But that assertion is not technically true. As the fiscal year 2024 budget capitulation played out well into the new year, we are just a few months away from the deadline for 2025 government funding, which comes due on September 30. None of us ever viewed fiscal year 2025 as a factor based on the assumption that Republicans would never risk a government shutdown fight right before the election.But shouldn’t the assumption be the exact opposite?Why wouldn’t Republicans want to hang the border invasion funding over the Democrats’ heads precisely as people are beginning to vote? After all, we are not discussing a budget fight defunding Social Security or popular programs people rely upon. We are talking about the funding for a foreign invasion of squatters, gang members, murderers, rapists, and, increasingly, Middle Eastern terrorists and military-age Chinese men.Republicans have enough news stories to inundate a government-funding debate with so many damning consequences of the Biden invasion that Democrats would either need to relent or suffer electoral blowback. Even 42% of Democratic voters support mass deportation. Simply turning back new invaders would easily garner supermajority support.The fact nobody is pushing this strategy exposes the mistake conservatives, including Trump, are making with this election. Trump has been politically matriculated into the establishment way of thinking: We merely need to run out the clock on the election, give Democrats everything they want, and avoid any intra-party fights and drama. Once he wins the election, then we will somehow fix everything. This explains why Trump is backing Mike Johnson’s speakership and strategy of “clearing the decks” of any leverage and why he is endorsing every down-ballot establishment candidate in the primaries.But the strategy wrongly assumes that Trump is a shoo-in and that we don’t need to make any big plays to win. While it’s certainly possible for him to beat Biden, it is quite bizarre — given the losing streak since the 2017 Virginia elections — that we would assume we are sitting on an insurmountable lead and therefore opt for the “run out the clock” strategy.Have we learned nothing from the 2022 elections? Or nearly every special election since then? Or the Wisconsin Supreme Court elections? Or the Pennsylvania Supreme Court elections? Is nobody the least bit curious why Democrats won in 2022 and continue to win most contentious special elections?The polls are internally conflicting and all over the map. They predicted a massive GOP wave in 2022, yet for the first time ever (aside from after 9/11) the party in the White House won the midterms, even in the midst of a terrible economy. Why would we assume things will change on their own by repeating the same lazy and complacent “look at the polls” mantra while refusing to pick any policy fights?To understand why it’s imperative for Trump to demand a border fight on the budget, it’s instructive to examine why Republicans continue to lose elections.The current electoral climate truly defies 200 years of history. Typically, the party occupying the White House always loses the midterm elections to varying degrees, even if the world is relatively tranquil and the economy is humming and the incumbent president is charismatic and well-liked. Think of 2010 and 1994 as examples of when Republicans crushed the midterms against well-liked presidents — despite much less political and cultural malaise — because of blowback to radical Democrat policies.Yet, here we are with an incontinent, dementia-ridden president, record affordability problems, a border invasion, rising crime, and a litany of radical policies that clearly don’t poll well with swing voters, and still Democrats remain ahead in nearly every Senate race.Every conservative should ask how Republicans managed to lose in 2022 (and most elections since) rather than making the wave elections of 1994 and 2010 look like red ripples? Unless and until that question is answered, it is political malpractice to employ a “run out the clock” strategy based on the uneducated belief we’ve got this election in the bag because “this time is different.”What should be clear, based on the dichotomy between Democrats’ poor polling on issues and job approval versus their electoral success, is that we are failing to bring these auspicious political issues to the forefront of voters’ minds. The modern Republican Party is struggling due to a combination of internal weakness, subversive elements, and the personal and image-related baggage of Trump, causing elections to become more about drama than substantive issues.Knowing that, the best way to focus the election on the issues that bedevil the Democrats would be to draw a line on our most popular issue during a budget fight just as voting begins.Wouldn’t Trump rather have a government shutdown over Biden refusing to relinquish funding for Venezuelan gangs and Middle Eastern terrorists crashing into our Marine base than a discussion over Stormy Daniels or his latest court hearing?If we continue to stand for nothing and do nothing to highlight Biden’s unpopular policies, voters will remain exactly where they are, and Republicans will lose yet again.Democrats have superior ground game, a first-rate mail-in-ballot and early-voting operation, and they are outspending Republicans by a mile in nearly every race. Unless Republicans make a big play and win over enough suburban swing voters who care about safety and security, they are unlikely to overcome the built-in blue firewall on the ground that has defied political science during recent elections.

In recent years, June has been transformed from the start of summer to a 30-day quasi-religious celebration of all things related to LGBTQIA+ “pride.” The same people who spent the last few weeks chastising an NFL kicker for praising his wife in a commencement speech have no problem forcing the entire country to celebrate kids who want to cut off their genitals. Corporate logos, school districts, government agencies, professional sports leagues, and media outlets all change their logos and post materials signaling their allegiance to the “virtue” of pride. The critics of homemaking have no issue with sexual evangelicalism. Self-worship is a dead-end religion. No amount of slick wordplay can change the fact that man is not God. June is also the month when the left’s most important sacrament was dealt a major blow. The Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade was handed down on June 24, 2022. For pro-life groups, it was a cause for celebration. But for the party of child sacrifice, the decision led to a perverse performance of biblical sorrow, complete with torn garments as well as weeping and the gnashing of teeth. One of the lessons that every American, particularly Christians, should have learned in the last decade is that human beings are religious by nature. We can’t help but worship someone or something. The secularists who attack Christianity as a regressive and hateful religion are far more aggressive with their evangelical outreach than the average churchgoer. The recent story out of Florida about a manhunt for a driver who profaned a sacred symbol of the left is one example. Surveillance video shows someone doing donuts on a large Pride flag mural painted on the street. This apparently was taken as a sign of disrespect to the favorite religion of the regime. A local group of leaders, including members of the clergy, gathered to declare it an act of hate. Somehow, I doubt they would be nearly as protective or defensive if someone tore down an American flag and set it on fire. John Adams, one of the nation’s founding fathers, famously remarked, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Politicians and pundits never seem to ask what you get when a nation is made up of immoral and religious people. Or put a different way, what do you get when a nation’s religion is one that demands child sacrifice and rejects the generational mandate to propagate the species? The answer is simple: death culture. Anti-natalism and pro-gender-confusion are expected outcomes from an ideology untethered from our Creator. People who deem themselves too sophisticated to worship God inevitably engage in the worship of self. They may cloak their idolatry in the language of intellectualism, but the truth is plain to see. What makes these developments so dangerous is how quickly and thoroughly our culture has been converted. We live in an age where cultural tastemakers and corporate news breakers inform the public – with a straight face – that men can get pregnant. But self-worship is a dead-end religion. And no amount of slick wordplay can change the fact that man is not God. People who know nothing about automobile design marvel at the attention to detail in every aspect of a high-end vehicle. Everything from the paint job and high-end leather interior to the souped-up engine and responsive steering are a testament to the designer’s attention to detail. No one would ever suggest that such a magnificent creation came together by chance. Likewise, no one would suggest that pushing the brake pedal makes the car go faster. But for some reason, we take this approach with human beings. You can infer function from the form of any creation, but purpose can only be established by its designer. Men and women have bodies that literally fit together like hand and glove. Sex is certainly pleasurable, but its primary purpose is for reproduction — within the bonds of marriage. The clerics of Pride reject God’s design and insist that their definitions of man, woman, and marriage should be treated with reverence. For all their adherence to evolution, progressives fail to see how their ideology leads to extinction. The good news is that this rebellion against God’s design and purpose for humanity will not last forever. Abomination appreciation month is only 30 days. Both the Bible and the calendar offer the same hope: Pride comes before the fall.

Have progressives had enough yet?We’ve already seen several character actors get attacked on the mean streets of New York City, including Steve Buscemi of “The Sopranos” fame. “Saturday Night Live” even made an unfunny bit about it. (Does it make any other kind?)The City of Angels is no better.Los Angeles denizens have faced similar woes thanks to the city’s pillow-soft-on-crime rules. Recently, “General Hospital” actor Johnny Wactor died after confronting thieves attempting to steal his car’s catalytic converter.There’s more.Fellow actor Jonathan Tucker had to step in during a neighbor’s home invasion nightmare this week in Los Angeles. Luckily, no one was hurt, and Tucker proved heroic when the family in question needed him.Now, one of the most mainstream, apolitical souls is sounding the alarm over the sorry state of affairs.Jay Leno blasted L.A. officials for treating catalytic converter thefts like a misdemeanor, helping spark the current crime wave. Elections have consequences. Blind party loyalty does too.Will Smith's slap-happy slumpDoes Hollywood have another summer bummer on its hands?The industry is still reeling from the under-performing duo of “The Fall Guy” and “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga.” Who knew a Mad Max movie without Mad Max might struggle at the box office?Now, Deadline reports the fourth film in the “Bad Boys” series could join them. “Bad Boys: Ride or Die,” once again starring Will Smith and Martin Lawrence, could bring in as little as $30+ million.That just won’t do for an action-packed sequel that cost $100 million.This is Smith’s first populist film following “The Slap Heard ‘round the World,” and that will get some of the blame should “Ride or Die” underwhelm.Maybe.It could be a movie-going public exhausted by both endless sequels and sanctimonious stars. Or they’re willing to wait until the film hits VOD sooner than later. You can watch “Fall Guy” at home now and “Furiosa” by month’s end.Jon Stewart's moment of MAGA Jon Stewart said what a good progressive shouldn’t say. Again.Remember how much fire he took from fellow liberals when he suggested COVID-19, which began in Wuhan, China, may have been created in a virus research lab in Wuhan, China?He also got singed after he suggested President Joe Biden wasn’t the second coming of Abe Lincoln during his return to “The Daily Show” faux anchor chair.Now, he’s committing the ultimate far-left sin: admitting the legal system is rigged against Donald Trump.Stewart told fellow comedian Tom Segura that the system had to get rid of Trump one way or another.“Everything other than just have a better idea.”The 61-year-old retreated to his far-left talking points Monday on “The Daily Show.” Maybe he hoped his base wouldn’t see the Segura interview and miss a rare “truth to power” moment from the fading comic. Those comments still could go viral at the worst possible time for his party.Let’s hope so.Lupita Nyong'o's press junket hellOscar winners sure have it good. Fame. Fortune. Celebrity. Did we mention fortune?For Lupita Nyong’o of “12 Years a Slave” fame, there’s a downside, and it’s “a torture technique.”Waterboarding? Starvation? Watching a Hannah Gadsby special? No, it’s undergoing a day’s worth of interviews from a mostly fawning press. She recently whined about enduring press junkets, events where a star is questioned by dozens of journalists who come in waves from around the country, if not the world.“Different people are being ferried in … You have to give each one of them attention, focus, and an articulate answer that you just gave to the person before. That’s irritating.”There’s a grain of truth in what she said. This reporter participated in many press junkets in the early 2000s. Some of the questions posed were dumb. Others proved downright insipid.Still, complaining about irritating Q&As is like saying the cruise ship’s crème brûlée wasn’t as tart as the one from your favorite French bistro.