Scientists at the Schmidt Ocean Institute have discovered a new hydrothermal vent field off the Western Galápagos Islands – one that has been speculated about for around 20 years‚ but never actually located until now. To finally pin the evasive vents down‚ the team had some help from a group of obliging squat lobsters‚ whose trail led them exactly where they needed to be.Setting out to characterize hydrothermal vents west of the Galápagos in the Pacific Ocean‚ the researchers stumbled upon the new field‚ which is larger than a soccer pitch and made up of five geyser-like chimneys and three hot springs. Hydrothermal vents are fissures on the seabed from which geothermally heated water can escape. As such‚ things get pretty toasty around them – the highest temperature recorded at the freshly discovered field was 288°C (550°F).But it was only after spotting a Galatheid crab‚ also known as a squat lobster‚ that these observations became possible. As the team followed the crustaceans like breadcrumbs‚ their number grew‚ until finally they arrived at the long-awaited vent field. “Scientists have known since the early 2000s that this vent field was likely there. But it was particularly hard to locate because the fluids are clear and do not emit large clouds into the water like black smokers do‚” Dr Roxanne Beinart‚ one of the lead researchers‚ said in a statement. “It took our team of chemists‚ geologists‚ biologists‚ and a few crabs to find it.”Alongside the geysers and hot springs‚ the team found giant tube worms thriving in the balmy waters of the field‚ which has been named “Sendero del Cangrejo” or “Trail of the Crabs” in homage to its crustacean colonizers.  The discovery of the 9‚178 square meter (98‚791 square foot) field was the result of a 30-day expedition‚ beginning on August 13‚ which involved Schmidt Ocean Institute’s research vessel Falkor (too) in collaboration with the Galápagos National Park Directorate‚ Charles Darwin Foundation‚ and the Ecuadorian Navy’s Oceanographic and Antarctic Institute. Falkor (too) has had quite a year‚ being involved in numerous discoveries that have helped further our understanding of hydrothermal vents and their effects on the entire planet.“This is the fourth hydrothermal vent field discovery made by scientists on our new research vessel Falkor (too) since March‚ in addition to the discovery in August of a new animal ecosystem living under hydrothermal vents‚” said Schmidt Ocean Institute Executive Director Dr Jyotika Virmani.“With 75 percent of the seafloor still to map‚ finding this new vent field shows how much we still have to learn about our planet and those who live on it. I am continually amazed by the otherworldly beauty of our seafloor and look forward to uncovering more.”A large cluster of giant tube worms proved the researchers were in a new hydrothermal vent field.Image credit: Schmidt Ocean Institute (CC BY-NC-SA)This expedition‚ and others like it‚ help create a more complete picture of the deep sea as a whole‚ as well as of the area west of the Galápagos more specifically. They also shed some light on hydrothermal vent systems and how they are interconnected.“Understanding and adding a better description of the distribution and unique nature of such deep-water hydrothermal communities is hugely important for the integral management of our oceans‚” said Stuart Banks‚ Senior Marine Scientist at the Charles Darwin Foundation. “Such a discovery for the Galapagos and Eastern Tropical Pacific takes us important steps closer to ensuring hidden deep-water biodiversity is recognized‚ appreciated‚ and built into ongoing conservation efforts.”

Hypnosis doesn’t work on everyone‚ with some people being particularly responsive to suggestion while others are more difficult to mesmerize. To try and understand why certain individuals are so easily entranced‚ researchers have recorded the brain activity of a group of volunteers while attempting to hypnotize them‚ revealing key differences between the brains of the most and least susceptible subjects.The study – which has yet to be peer-reviewed – involved a total of 75 participants‚ all of whom were asked to complete an assessment designed to reveal their susceptibility to hypnosis. This pre-screening stage allowed the authors to identify 40 individuals who scored either extremely high or unusually low‚ meaning they were classified as very likely or unlikely to respond to being hypnotized.The researchers then used electroencephalography (EEG) to record the neural activity of these 40 volunteers before and after “hypnotic induction”‚ which was achieved by one of the researchers reading a suggestive script. “By recording [EEG] before and after hypnotic induction and analyzing diverse neurophysiological features‚ we identify several features that differentiate between high and low hypnotic susceptible individuals for both pre- and post-induction periods‚ which underscores the multifaceted nature of hypnotic phenomena‚” write the researchers.“Instead of pinpointing a singular neural pattern‚ our results corroborate the understanding that hypnotic experiences possess a layered neural foundation‚” they continue.However‚ while the factors separating strong and weak responders were numerous‚ one element of brain activity stood out as a clear predictor of susceptibility to hypnosis. Specifically‚ differences in the aperiodic exponent of neural activity prior to hypnotic induction were found to correlate with a person’s predisposition to being put under.EEG readings are made up of two parts‚ known as the periodic and aperiodic exponents. Periodic signals are oscillatory‚ meaning they repeat at regular time intervals. These neural oscillations emerge from a background of aperiodic signals‚ which don’t repeat.It’s likely that these differences in baseline aperiodic signals influence a person’s “mental absorption‚ feelings of relaxation‚ and preparation for hypnotic responding.” According to the researchers‚ these traits are typically higher in those who are more easily beguiled‚ and are therefore likely to influence a person’s suitability for hypnosis.Perhaps the most important finding here is that the patterns that determine susceptibility to hypnosis were found in the period before hypnotic induction‚ rather than afterwards. “Susceptibility to hypnotic suggestion therefore reflects a predisposition that is captured by neural features independent from the hypnotic procedure‚” write the study authors.“This finding resonates with the hypothesis that hypnotic susceptibility is an inherent psychological trait predisposing certain individuals to be more responsive to suggestions‚” they conclude.A preprint of the study‚ which is a preliminary version of a scientific paper that has not been validated by peer review‚ can be found on bioRxiv.

In a heartwarming tale of unlikely friendships‚ a video from The Dodo introduces us to an extraordinary duo: Dimonte‚ a spirited kitten‚ and his 130-pound canine brother‚ Purpose. This charming narrative begins with their human companion Latoya expressing surprise and delight at the dynamics of their relationship. She never considered herself a cat person until... The post Tiny cat melts hearts showing 130-pound Cane Corso ‘who’s the boss’ appeared first on Animal Channel.

Florida is home to more than just gators and the infamous Florida men. The state boasts a lot more wildlife than just crocodilians. Snake and bird species by the dozen also call the state home. With how much wildlife calls this place home‚ it’s inevitable that they’ll rub shoulders with Florida’s human residents sometimes. Autumn... The post Crane visits woman every single morning then introduces her to his new family appeared first on Animal Channel.

Learn a few basics about buying‚ cooking and preparing your turkey for Thanksgiving. 📖Thanksgiving Menu The holidays are just around the corner.  Are you ready?  Have you written up the menu‚ decided on what dishes you are serving‚ shopped for recipe ingredients and the turkey?  Do you have traditional dishes you prepare every year or...

If blue states can defy and subvert federal immigration law — and they do — why shouldn’t red states be allowed to enforce it? A new House Homeland Security Committee report found that Joe Biden’s southern border invasion is costing taxpayers $451 billion‚ a burden shouldered mainly by states and local communities. With the federal government ignoring immigration law‚ it is the right and responsibility of red states to defend their own people. To that end‚ after several years of dawdling‚ the Texas legislature last week finally passed SB 4‚ which empowers state and local law enforcement to arrest illegal aliens for their illegal entry into the state. Given that the effects of the invasion plague every major city‚ the Texas bill needs to be the beginning of a paradigm shift in the way states address the crisis. SB 4 also grants state judges authority to return illegal aliens to Mexico. In some instances‚ however‚ the crime of entering the state illegally would be punishable by up to six months in jail for first-time offenders and two years for a second offense. The bill passed the Texas House 83-61 along party lines and the Senate 17-11‚ with one Republican voting with the Democrats. What happens in Texas doesn’t stay in Texas The lone dissenting Republican senator was Brian Birdwell‚ a co-author of an earlier‚ watered-down version of SB 4. He claimed Texas was setting a “terrible precedent” by “invalidating our obedience and faithfulness to our Constitution” — which specifies that “all power and responsibility for immigration is delegated to the federal government.” Funny enough‚ I can’t find a provision in the Constitution that says anything close to that. Naturalization is an enumerated power of Congress under Article I‚ Section 8. But immigration — especially the power to block a flood of would-be squatters crossing the border — was regulated by the states for the first 100 years or so of our nation’s history. We need to set up a direct challenge to Plyler v. Doe‚ much as red states did with Roe v. Wade. At the same time‚ both houses passed SB 3‚ which would provide $1.5 billion for the maintenance‚ operation‚ and construction of border barrier infrastructure‚ including about 100 miles of border wall. Also‚ in response to my friend Todd Bensman’s phenomenal reporting about the massive illegal alien community of Colony Ridge just east of Houston‚ SB 3 provides $40 million for the Texas Department of Public Safety to police this growing violent area. Apparently‚ the cartels have been operating in Colony Ridge with impunity. The community drew public attention when a Honduran illegal alien murdered five people earlier this year. SB 4 is the bill that every state needs to pass‚ not just the border states. What comes to the border doesn’t remain at the border. It migrates to our cities‚ well beyond the Rio Grande. And the cost to Texans is massive. According to a report from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office‚ illegal aliens cost the state $152 million for housing‚ between $62 million and $90 million in Medicaid expenditures‚ and somewhere between $579 million and $717 million for uncompensated hospital care. Yet Texas is not unique. Every state bears the burden of illegal aliens‚ from the crimes they commit to the public services they consume. It’s simply a fact. A Federation for American Immigration Reform study found that illegal immigration cost U.S. taxpayers at least $182 billion this year alone‚ with states picking up nearly two-thirds of the tab. A legal war worth waging Obviously‚ the left will fight SB 4 in court‚ and the ACLU is already preparing a lawsuit. But now is the time to set up a direct challenge to U.S. v. Arizona‚ the 2012 U.S. Supreme Court decision that barred states from enforcing immigration law. We need every red state to follow the Lone Star State’s lead but with one major addition: removing the lure of “free” public education‚ which is crushing many local communities. In some school districts‚ 30%-40% of the student body are foreign-born and in the United States illegally. In places like Dallas‚ Los Angeles‚ and New York City‚ the percentage is much higher.The U.S. Supreme Court in 1982 struck down a Texas law that “prohibited the use of state funds for the education of children who had not been legally admitted to the U.S.” That case‚ Plyler v. Doe‚ has done enormous damage in the intervening 40 years. We need to set up a direct challenge to Plyler much as red states did with Roe v. Wade. As we debate whether red states can enforce federal immigration laws‚ blue states continue to flout federal law enforcement. Last month‚ police in Fairfax County‚ Virginia‚ briefly detained a Honduran national on rape and kidnapping charges. Border Patrol had caught and released the same man two years ago. Immigration and Customs Enforcement asked Fairfax to keep the man in custody‚ but the Fairfax County jail did not honor the detainer and released an accused illegal alien rapist back onto the streets. If blue states can release rapists‚ why can’t red states arrest and deport them? At a minimum‚ it is their right to deny all public services to trespassers. SB 4 is a great start and potential model for the nation to address and reverse the crisis of 8 million illegal aliens who have entered the United States during Joe Biden’s disastrous tenure. The critical element‚ of course‚ is how eagerly Texas Governor Greg Abbott will enforce the law. We’ll see.

My 9-year-old went as Ken for Halloween this year. The original plan was to go with the movie's Sly Stallone-inspired look‚ but instead of a white fur coat‚ the Goodwill gods delivered up a perfectly sized acid-washed jean jacket. So the (sleeveless) Canadian tuxedo it was. Add to that his blond hair and the Himes six-pack (nature's compensation for shortchanging us on height) and the kid was a mini Ryan Gosling. "All the Kens in that movie had a pull-up content and Gosling won‚" I told him. That piqued his interest. He's very competitive and runs with a particularly sporty crowd of fourth-grade boys; everyone knows exactly where they rank according to various athletic metrics. "How many?" I didn't know‚ so I guessed. "Fifty-two." He nodded just enough to convey respect without admitting that he was impressed. "I'll install a pull-up bar‚" I said. Thing is‚ my son could beat Gosling in a pull-up contest‚ if he set his mind to it. I could beat him‚ and I recently earned a free AARP prescription and a some intimate photos of the inside of my colon. And I bet you could beat him too. Of course‚ you shouldn't take any exercise advice from me that you wouldn't take from a qualified medical professional‚ but my point still stands. Pull-ups are wonderfully egalitarian that way. Just ask David Goggins. Back in May he did what he thought was a new world record of 7‚801 pull-ups in 24 hours. As he was submitting the evidence to Guinness‚ he found out another guy had just done 8‚008. That record stood for a whole five months‚ until an Australian policeman named Gary Lloyd hit 8‚600. Quoth Goggins‚ "There is always some motherf**ker out there working harder than you hunting your ass." Get your form in order first. None of that CrossFit kipping like Mark Wahlberg did when he said he could do more pull-ups than Dwayne Johnson. You want explosive on the way up and slow and controlled on the way down. Don't use momentum; use your back muscles. Keep your core engaged the whole time. Use an overhand grip‚ slightly wider than shoulder width‚ knuckles up so your wrists and not your fingers do the work. Hit the bar with your sternum to encourage proper form‚ and use your full range of motion. More detailed information on form here and here. You don't need an in-house pull-up bar‚ but I spend much of the work day hunched over my computer about 15 steps from my bed‚ so I like the idea of banging out a set every couple of paragraphs. The bar I bought is a Rogue Jammer pull-up bar in red knurled Cerakote. Pricey‚ but Rogue is arguably best in class when it comes to made-in-the-USA fitness products‚ and we're talking about potentially tens of thousands of future reps here. Besides‚ those cheap ones you wedge in the doorframe never seem to fit my doors. Titan Fitness and Fringe Sport also offer American-made wall-mounted bars that come highly recommended‚ while FitBar makes the best doorway pull-up bar I've seen. Women should pay heed as well. Forget leaning in — what about pulling up? Yes‚ your relatively weak upper body strength can make it seem impossible‚ but you haven't met Angela Gargano yet. If you can hang‚ she can get you to your first pull-up and beyond.

For more than a century‚ the K-12 education system in the United States has been monopolized by poor-performing government-run public schools that have little to no competition because the education funding method is fatally flawed. Fortunately‚ one of the few silver linings that has emerged from the COVID-19 pandemic has been a surge in support for school choice and the enactment of a more market-driven approach to education funding: universal school choice via vouchers‚ commonly called education savings accounts. Universal school choice is a long-overdue reform that has gained momentum in recent years. Unlike the antiquated system in which state and local governments collect taxes for education and then distribute those funds directly to public schools‚ universal school choice distributes education tax dollars directly to parents so that they can choose the school that best fits the unique learning needs and circumstances for their child. This is a superior education funding process compared to the status quo because it introduces market forces‚ principally through competition in the education marketplace‚ which has been sorely lacking for far too long. It also leads to much-needed innovation in the increasingly stale‚ one-size-fits-all government-run education sector. As of 2023‚ approximately 90% of K-12 students in the United States attended a public school. This is not by choice. In fact‚ most parents would prefer their child to attend a different school rather than the one and only public option arbitrarily assigned to them based on their zip code. This is especially true for parents with children stuck in poor-performing and unsafe public schools located in inner cities. In recent years‚ as standardized test scores show‚ these public schools have done a miserable job of properly educating their students for a successful future. Two of the most appealing aspects of the school choice revolution under way across the nation are that it leads to less education spending and better academic outcomes. One way or another‚ the government (whether at the local‚ state‚ or federal level) is going to play a large role in the education funding system. On average‚ K-12 public schools spent $14‚347 per pupil in 2021‚ according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Meanwhile‚ several states‚ including New York‚ Vermont‚ Connecticut‚ and New Jersey‚ spent in excess of $20‚000 per student. The average annual tuition rate for the nation’s 22‚440 private K-12 schools is much lower‚ at $12‚350 per student. In general‚ private schools are more affordable than public schools because they lack the enormous bureaucracies that have become commonplace in bloated public school districts. Private schools are more streamlined and devote more of their resources directly to classrooms‚ while public schools and their overweening district offices divert limited resources to countless programs that have little to do with boosting educational outcomes but lots to do with perpetuating bureaucracy. What’s more‚ students attending private schools consistently outperform their public school peers on nationwide standardized tests including the National Assessment of Educational Progress‚ better known as the “Nation’s Report Card.” Of course‚ universal school choice has no shortage of critics. But most of these opponents have an agenda‚ and most work within the existing public school monopoly. Take teachers' unions‚ for example‚ which have battled school choice for decades. Unions argue that school choice programs take education dollars away from public schools‚ harm low-income families‚ and widen achievement gaps. These arguments are weak‚ at best‚ considering that public school funding has increased substantially in recent years while academic outcomes have remained stagnant and achievement gaps either have remained the same or gotten worse. Others deride universal school choice and voucher programs as the antithesis of a free market‚ arguing that state and local governments should not provide large sums of money to parents for educational purposes because it is inflationary and akin to a subsidy. This is misguided. We live in a society in which we agree that some degree of compulsory education is necessary for the preservation of our freedoms‚ values‚ and way of life. One way or another‚ the government (whether at the local‚ state‚ or federal level) is going to play a large role in the education funding system. But it is much more in line with free-market principles for the government to offer education dollars directly to the consumer (parents) versus the other way around‚ where government showers money on the provider (in this case‚ the public schools). Think of it this way: The government gives out subsidies in the form of food stamps‚ but it does not require that those funds be spent in a government-run grocery store. If that were the case‚ could you imagine how lousy the government-run grocery stores would be? The government-run grocery stores would surely know that they are the only option‚ which would deter improvements and innovations. The same logic should apply to government funding for education. Under the present circumstances‚ government plays an outsized role in education funding. We would be vastly better off we limited the government’s role by making it merely a conduit of funds directly to parents‚ who would use the money to ensure their children receive the best education possible — whether that’s at a public school‚ private school‚ parochial school‚ charter school‚ or even homeschooling.

I recently attended a conservative policy event that focused in part on promoting the benefits of universal school choice. It reaffirmed my opposition to this legislative trend‚ even though such laws would be financially lucrative to my business and me personally. The Texas state legislature last week removed universal school choice from a massive reform package. Lawmakers were wise to do so‚ for several reasons. First‚ school choice fosters economic dependency on government funding. Second‚ it is not a “free-market” solution. Finally‚ it isn’t a conservative policy‚ even if the big think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and Americans for Prosperity have jumped on board the taxpayer gravy train. Hats off to Texas legislators for not jumping into the deep end with Senate Bill 1‚ as other states have done and‚ I believe‚ will later regret. Have you seen the shirt that says‚ “I don’t co-parent with the government”? If universal school choice is enacted‚ then everyone will be co-parenting with the government. Demand-side economics is why we’ve experienced massive inflation around the United States. A Heritage Foundation study that concluded Arizona-style education savings accounts are not inflationary is deceptive‚ in part because the study’s authors didn’t use data that reflects the current laws being passed. The Heritage study based its findings on school choice that targets individuals with learning disabilities and low incomes‚ as opposed to people already paying for their child’s private education. In short‚ Heritage compared apples to oranges and advocates oranges because of apples. That isn’t sound reasoning. Besides‚ since when has relying on the government to subsidize healthy middle-class and rich families’ income ever been considered “conservative” policy? Government funding of school choice creates economic dependency‚ it is not a free-market solution‚ and it isn’t a conservative policy in any sense of the term. Advocates of universal vouchers and ESAs argue they are a “free-market” solution. Not really. Someone pushing universal school choice once told me that a free market is when the government gives everyone the same amount of money and they can spend it anywhere they want. All I could think of was Inigo Montoya from “The Princess Bride”: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." Investopedia defines a “free market” as “one where voluntary exchange and the laws of supply and demand provide the sole basis for the economic system‚ without government intervention.” Clearly‚ the government giving families $8‚000 a year‚ sourced from their neighbors’ taxes‚ is not a free-market solution. A system of universal basic education income is not a conservative policy. It is a neo-liberal policy. Just wait for Amazon‚ Disney‚ Microsoft‚ and Apple to start buying up schools and implementing their ESG goals on all private school platforms. Wait until they start data-mining your kids. Just wait for China to start buying up private school platforms and data-mining your children. Let me leave you with a story. My friend Rachel is a leader for Classical Conversations in Arizona‚ and we don’t let our Christian leaders take neo-liberal school choice funds. She was recently talking to a friend who had taken the ESA money and was so happy to have the funds. “I used to have to work part-time to homeschool‚” her friend told her. “I would have my aunt come over and watch the kids for me so that I could go to work. Now I don’t have to do that!” Rachel‚ being trained in the tools of rhetoric‚ politely replied: “So let me make sure I understand what you’re saying. You used to rely on hard work and your family‚ and now you rely on the government.” Her friend’s eyes got wide as she began to realize what she had done. I would urge legislators to drop school choice proposals altogether‚ until we have a better idea of how programs that have already passed in other states are working. States’ tax receipts are starting to plummet as the looming recession becomes more apparent. A state surplus in funds can quickly turn into a deficit‚ and welfare programs like school choice are notoriously hard to repeal‚ even when they become economically unsustainable. Government funding of school choice creates economic dependency‚ it is not a free-market solution‚ and it simply isn’t a conservative policy in any sense of the term.