Some reliably blue states are decided by far more narrow margins than expected

'There is probable cause to believe the defendant has committed a violent felony'

News The Magic Faraway Tree The Magic Faraway Tree Adaptation Gets Even More Star-Studded Into the woods! Into the woods! By Molly Templeton | Published on June 6, 2024 Screenshot: Netflix Comment 0 Share New Share Screenshot: Netflix Last month, it was announced that Andrew Garfield and Claire Foy will star in The Magical Faraway Tree, a film adaptation of Enid Blyton’s extremely popular, very British children’s novels. Garfield and Foy play the parents of a trio of children who find, in the woods behind their home, a magical tree and an enchanted wood. Now, the film has added a trio of curently-very-hot stars to the cast: Bridgerton’s Nicola Coughlan (above); Sweet Tooth’s Nonso Anozie; and Baby Reindeer breakout star Jessica Gunning. Coughlan plays a fairy, Silky; Anozie is Moonface; and Gunning plays Dame Washalot. According to Deadline, they’re also joined by Lenny Henry (The Sandman), Michael Palin (Monty Python), and Simon Russell Beale (Penny Dreadful) as “a trio of mystical wise men from the Land of Know-Alls.” And three more delightfully named characters have also been cast: the Saucepan Man will be played by Dustin Demri-Burns (The Great); Mr. Oom Boom by Mark Heap (Renegade Nell); and Mr. Watzisname by Oliver Chris (Foundation). Ben Gregor (Britannia) directs the adaptation, which has a screenplay by Simon Farnaby, whose resume includes epic highs (Paddington 2) and questionable lows (Wonka). In their “contemporary reboot” of the book series, Deadline noted earlier this year, “the three protagonists are uprooted from their hi-tech home in an ultra-modern London Nine Elms-Battersea Power Station-style development to a ramshackle barn in the English countryside without an internet connection.” No release date has been announced, nor we do know, yet, who will be playing the three kids.[end-mark] The post <i>The Magic Faraway Tree</i> Adaptation Gets Even More Star-Studded appeared first on Reactor.

News She Loved Blossoms More The Trailer for She Loved Blossoms More Introduces the Meanest Time Machine Maybe it’s possible to love blossoms TOO much By Molly Templeton | Published on June 6, 2024 Screenshot: Yellow Veil Films Comment 0 Share New Share Screenshot: Yellow Veil Films Your reaction to the teaser for the upcoming horror film She Loved Blossoms More may depend, in large part, on your feelings about one of its first lines: “We beam little animals to an alternate dimension,” says one of the three brothers on whom the movie focuses. They do this in order to create a time machine to bring back their dead mother, which, sure, admirable plan, I guess? BUT THE LITTLE ANIMALS, THOUGH. Being beamed “beyond the edge of space and time” doesn’t seem like it could possibly be good for them. Variety offers a little more detail about the film, which is directed by Yannis Veslemes: “The film follows three brothers who build an unusual time machine in order to bring their long-dead mother back to life. When their delusional father comes into the picture, the experiments go awry, and they descend into a psychedelic hellscape where the past and present fuse in a comedic yet disturbing exploration of grief.” Everything about this trailer is a bit psychedelic, from the music to the grainy shots to the strobes and peculiar time machine. Veslemes told Variety, ““We tried to build a whole fantasy world condensed in a family mansion and its surroundings. Ι suppose you can place yourself in this house, spy on this family and even have fun with their suffering. It sounds crude but films exist also for that. Joy and grief feel equal in this world.” She Loved Blossoms More is screening at the Tribeca Film Festival, but does not yet have a U.S. release date. [end-mark] The post The Trailer for <i>She Loved Blossoms More</i> Introduces the Meanest Time Machine appeared first on Reactor.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. In Victoria’s Latrobe Valley, a debate over free speech has emerged following the suspension of Councillor Melissa Ferguson for her refusal to apologize for tweets that alleged the harms of gender ideology to women and children. Some of the tweets that Ferguson is being published over, were, in fact, retweets of other’s remarks. Ferguson’s suspension has ignited a fierce debate. Rachael Wong, CEO of Women’s Forum Australia, posted on X, “All of the tweets relate to the rights and safety of women and children, and weaponising them against her is harassment, an affront to free speech, and a shameful abuse of power.” Wong also shared the tweets that Ferguson was challenged for sharing. The controversy began when a Councillor Code of Conduct Panel declared Ferguson’s refusal to issue an apology serious misconduct. This decision stemmed from a review by Meredith Gibbs, appointed after complaints about Ferguson’s tweets were lodged by fellow councillor, Tracie Lund. Gibbs upheld the complaints. According to ABC News, which took a negative stance toward Ferguson, the public’s response peaked during a recent council meeting that attracted police attention due to anticipated protests. Although the police reported no notable incidents, the atmosphere inside was charged. During the meeting, community figure Taylah Ling argued against what she viewed as an excessive crackdown on dissenting opinions. Ling contended that council members ought to demonstrate more resilience in the face of controversial views, a position that Lund dismissed as overly simplistic and dismissive of the processes and impact of the misconduct. The community’s support for Ferguson was evident when she concluded her statement and exited the meeting to significant applause, signaling strong backing for her stance on free speech. Ferguson, who contends her social media activity was personal and non-violatory, has been vocal about feeling targeted for her views. She was barred from council activities for a month, which included missing a council meeting and losing access to council facilities. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Victoria: Councillor Suspension Over Gender Ideology Tweets Sparks Free Speech Uproar appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Iran May Have Given Houthis a Hypersonic Missile

Cringe Inducing

Here’s a statistic that might surprise you: around one in five people in the US have a sexually transmitted infection at any one time. There’s nothing wrong or shameful about that – in this age of modern medicine, many are curable and all are treatable – but if you have one, you at least ought to know about it, right?That’s one reason why the results of a new analysis – a critical literature review some 32 papers strong from researchers at the University of Tennessee – are so worrying. According to their results, only around one-half of people who have an STI actually mention it to a prospective sexual partner. In fact, only about one-half of people think they should even have to say anything.“STI cases continue to rise annually, yet the STI disclosure literature published across the last two decades has not kept pace,” the authors write. Which is a problem – because, of course, “sexual partners […] face increased susceptibility for contracting the STI(s), if they did not already have the STI(s) and were not the individuals who transmitted it initially.”Now, perhaps you’re aghast at the one in ten people who are apparently knowingly risking others’ health in order to continue getting their rocks off – and it’s true that in some cases, “it’s just a one-night stand” was deemed reason enough to not come clean. But the overall picture is more nuanced than that, the authors found: “many individuals are not receiving sufficient comprehensive sexual health education,” they write. And the culprit? Our old friend abstinence-only sex education: “Rather than being taught how to correctly use prophylaxis, identify its limitations, and understand the scope and transmissibility of STIs, youth are only encouraged to be abstinent,” the researchers explain.That’s right: not only is it bad for your mental health, useless for stopping sex before marriage, and downright counterproductive for reducing teen pregnancies, it turns out abstinence-only sex “education” has rendered many completely ignorant of important sexual health knowledge. For example, the researchers found that many STI-positive people were under the impression that sexual activity was only risky if they were experiencing symptoms: “Many believed, especially in the case of herpes, that being asymptomatic, STI dormancy, and using prophylaxis were enough to completely prevent transmission, and this negated the necessity for them to disclose,” they noted.But of course, that’s not true. “Although the likelihood of the transmission of herpes is decreased when asymptomatic and using prophylaxis, it is still possible,” cautions the paper. The same is true of chlamydia, gonorrhea, and trichomoniasis, all of which can be spread without the presence of symptoms or even semen, and all of which featured heavily in the responses to various studies in the review (the most common conditions were herpes and HPV, while HIV was excluded from consideration.)Outside of simply lacking the relevant knowledge, there are other factors at play when it comes to disclosing – or not – an STI-positive status. “For some individuals, it may not be the safest decision to make,” the authors point out; for others, the psychological baggage that comes with a diagnosis is simply too great: “For many, the sexual self is ‘damaged’ upon diagnosis,” they write, “and these deeply meaningful, symbolic processes certainly influence disclosure decision-making.”So, what’s the solution? According to the researchers, a massive change in sex education is needed. “The findings from this review highlight individuals’ gaps in sexual health knowledge,” they write. “This is not surprising, particularly in the United States, as comprehensive sex education remains taboo, rather than the norm.”That’s not just a job for schools, they add: healthcare providers, especially those who deal directly with people learning their STI-positive status, should be involved too. “The advice that practitioners may give patients will vary depending on the type of STI, which can also inform disclosure-efficacy coaching. This would be an opportunity to provide counseling about how to notify their current partner and deliver treatment, encourage routine testing, and discuss disclosure strategies should future instances arise,” the authors suggest. “Regardless of the type of STI, patients could be referred to more in-depth counseling services, if necessary, to process the diagnosis and develop strategies for disclosure, should they decide to do so.”And underpinning all of this? Destigmatization – both of having an STI, and of sexual activity itself. “Providing individuals with accurate sexual health knowledge, ample opportunities for testing and treatment, and helping them build confidence in their sexual decision-making is paramount,” the researchers conclude.“Each person interested in pursuing sexual activity with another, regardless of whether they have an STI, should feel empowered to facilitate conversations about their sexual health and wellness with others, including conversations about consent, contraception, preferred sexual behaviors, sexual histories and STI status.”The review is published in The Journal of Sex Research.

The fourth test of Starship has been a success. The Starship and Super Heavy booster combo lifted off from SpaceX’s Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, at 7:50 am local time. The test was for Super Heavy to demonstrate that it could land back on Earth and for Starship to successfully reenter through the atmosphere after having gone into orbit.Neither Starship nor Super Heavy landed. They are designed to do so but it was not part of this test. Super Heavy used a virtual tower, acting like it was landing on land and reigniting the engines just above the sea of the Gulf of Mexico, demonstrating that it can be done.Starship reached an altitude of 212 kilometers (132 miles) before coming back to Earth. The ship got beat up during re-entry, with the flaps breaking apart a bit and a camera getting cracked. It safely reached terminal velocity and was able to re-orient itself and perform its first-ever landing burn, before safely splashing down.    IFLScience is not responsible for content shared from external sites.Put together, Starship and Super Heavy are the biggest and most powerful rockets ever built. In total, they make up a rocket that is 122 meters (400 feet) tall. NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, which will be used to take astronauts back to the Moon, is 98 meters (322 feet) tall. For historical comparison, Super Heavy has twice the thrust of the Saturn V, which took the astronauts of the Apollo missions to the Moon. In the future, SpaceX hopes to increase the thrust by up to three times what was achieved by Saturn V.SLS was briefly the record holder of tallest and most powerful rocket ever built. But if there is a competition, it is friendly. SLS and Starship have to work together to return astronauts to the Moon. SLS will bring the Orion capsule to Lunar orbit – a special one called the Near-Rectilinear Halo Orbit – where it will encounter Starship. Starship then will ferry the astronauts to and from the Moon’s surface.Without Starship, there is currently no way of getting to the lunar surface, hence the importance of these tests for the future of lunar exploration. Starship needs to demonstrate continuous safety and success. Two more tests are expected this year but SpaceX has not yet shared any details about them.Starship has so far achieved several successes but all its flights have ended in fire. The first launch in April 2023 showed that the rocket can fly but Super Heavy and Starship couldn’t separate which led to SpaceX deliberately blowing up the rocket to keep it from veering off course.There was a lot of discussion about the first test being rushed at the behest of SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who was claimed to be keen to make a weed-related joke about the launch date as it lifted off on 4/20. Another point of evidence of the rush job of the launch was the extensive damage the rocket did to Starbase – its launch platform. Its powerful engine ended up blowing out a chunk of concrete from beneath its orbital launch mount and raining debris in the vicinity. The second test was in November 2023. It was another partial success, building on the first launch. The Super Heavy booster exploded, but luckily after it had separated from Starship. But Starship too ended up going boom. Contact was lost between Starship and ground control after 9 minutes and the onboard computers exploded the ship.The third test was the closest to a complete success. It took place in March and was the farthest and fastest that Starship has ever flown. Both Super Heavy and Starship were supposed to do a soft splash landing, but neither did. Super Heavy hit the Gulf of Mexico as fast as a F1 car. Starship burned over the Indian Ocean instead of splashing down in it.  

During the mid-late Eocene epoch, 44-34 million years ago, large parts of Antarctica were ice-free, creating room for river systems now long frozen. Sediments from the Amundsen Sea came all the way from the mountain range that spans the continent, revealing there was no inland sea in between to capture them.The world was a hotter place in general 40 million years ago, but the difference was most stark in Antarctica. Great ocean currents drew warm water down from the equator to lap at its margins, before the formation of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current blocked their passage. Consequently, while the highlands were glaciated, and the lowlands got snowy in winter, forests flourished.Forests need rain, and regular rain means rivers. However, identifying where these ran is challenging. There has been plenty of time for the landscape to change since the ice came. Consequently, we can’t just look at the current lie of the land and assume water flowed to what is now the lowest point.Drilling through all that ice to establish what it was like long ago is a challenge, but Professor Cornelia Spiegel of the University of Bremen and colleagues found an easier way to identify Antarctica’s lost rivers. They drilled into sediment around the coast using the icebreaker Polarstern.In the Amundsen Sea, the team found 17-24 meters (56-79 feet) of sediments composed of minerals that do not match those of nearby West Antarctica. Instead, these came from the Transantarctic Mountains, which divide East and West Antarctica. Unfortunately, no fossils were found in these sediments to indicate the ecosystem of the era,As their name suggests, these mountains run right across the continent, but that crossing is at right angles to a line from the South Pole to the Amundsen Sea. For the minerals to have reached there in the Eocene, they must have been carried by a river 1,500 kilometers (932 miles) long, or more if it meandered. Such a length is not exceptional – it would barely make the top 100 in the world today, but it would have dominated West Antarctica, then, as now, much smaller than its eastern counterpart.The Transantarctic debris would have been deposited into a swampy river delta, with the authors choosing the Rhine and the Rio Grande (the US/Mexico one) as modern counterparts.Mountain ranges will always produce glaciers, rivers, or both to carry the precipitation that falls on them away. However, a much shorter trip to the sea might have been expected. “The existence of such a transcontinental river system shows that – unlike today – large parts of West Antarctica must have been located above sea level as extensive, flat coastal plains,” Spiegel said in a statement.Sea levels were higher then, with much less water trapped in ice, so these West Antarctic plains must have been a fair bit higher than they are today. On the other hand, they couldn’t have been too high, or they would have been covered in ice, even under the warmer conditions of the time.For around 10 million years, a river flowed from the Transantarctic mountains to the Amundsen Sea. The route is not known, but the most likely one is outlined here.Image credit: Zundel et al., Science Advances 2024 (CC BY 4.0)Spiegel and co-authors conclude a set of events, including the depositing of sediments in the Amundsen Sea, rift-related magmatism, seafloor spreading, and the rise of the Transantarctic Mountains all started around the same time: 44-40 million years ago. This followed around 40 million years when the area had between relatively tectonically quiet. The deposition may have been stopped 34 million years ago by the onset of permanent glaciation, or by the development of a seaway closer to the mountains.Given the erosion or subsidence that has taken place since, we can’t expect the return of such a river when West Antarctica is ice-free, something that may happen disturbingly soon. Nevertheless, the authors argue that only by understanding what the world was like back then can we understand how it changed to one with permanent sheets of ice at the poles.The study is published in Science Advances.