As soon as I saw the headline in the U.K. ‘Daily Mail’ I knew it was going to be amusing. To be fair, and to their credit, they did make a decent enough fist of trying to explain the ‘dilemma’.
And what is that ‘dilemma’. When we are talking about stars, including our own Sun, we have to factor in the delay it takes for light from it to reach us. In the case of the Sun it takes 8 minutes and 20 seconds. Has to do with the enormous distances involved and the speed of light (which, though very fast, is only ‘that’ fast). So, if something was to happen to the Sun it would be 8 minutes and 20 seconds before we saw anything. Just the laws of physics.
Betelgeuse is ~640 light years away. That means it takes light from Betelgeuse ~640 years to arrive to us, on Earth.
So, we are seeing Betelgeuse as it was ~640 years ago!
Think about that.
When looking at stars we are always looking way back … into history.
We just have NO, NO, NO WAY of knowing what is happening at Betelgeuse right now.
All we see is what happened ~640 years ago.
So, it is difficult to write about ‘future’ events involving stars. The event might have already happened! We just don’t know.
That is the problem with this article. Betelgeuse could have already exploded — without us knowing.
Think about it. It is cool. SMILE.
P.S., All the stars that make up Orion are not the same distance away from us!
Betelgeuse is much closer than most of the others in that constellation! Something else to think about.
There was no surprises here. This is basically what I have been following for the last 6-years! Yes, 6-years.
Yes, I have cheated off-and-on. Not majorly. Went through a face of snacking heavily on nuts. I have cut that out since my knee injury since that has curtailed the amount of exercise, i.e., running, I can do.
As it says, this is not too hard to adhere to.
Just wanted to share with you.
Prior Posts on Same Theme …
and there are MORE. Just ‘search’ blog.
Click image to access the post.
When I saw this I knew that YOU would expect me to share it with you. DONE.
Just so I could be proved wrong, I am thinking about ordering one for myself and wearing it when I go to the beach. I think I will look OK. The only problem. From what I can see they don’t seem to make it in MY SIZE! They all seem too BIG to fit I. Dilemma. Maybe I could get somebody to alter the small size to fit I.
You are going to go on Zyrtec because you have bad allergies. And usually you have bad allergies because you are susceptible to various types of allergen — and rarely just one. If you are the allergic type, you are invariably going to be allergic to dust mites on top of the other stuff that likely bothers you.
So, if you start taking Zyrtec you might as well resign yourself to it being a life-sentence.
That definitely seems to be the case with I and I have come to terms with it.
It was 7-years ago that I was advised to take a Zyrtec a day, 365-days a year, whether I thought I needed it or not. I did as I was told. It was a miracle. Most of the chest colds I used to get, two to three times a year, basically went away. Overall I became much healthier. I realized that most of my chest colds were set off my allergies. So, I take Zyrtec, religiously, every day — as does Teischan (12).
Last August my doctor told me that he thinks Zyrtec is too strong and that I should switch to Claritin. I did. It was a bust. Claritin just wasn’t strong enough. My chest problems came back with a vengeance in days. So, after 22-days of suffering I had no choice but to go back to Zyrtec.
So, when I saw this article I was conflicted. People complaining of Zyrtec withdrawal appear to be missing the point. They shouldn’t be trying to go off Zyrtec in the first place! The itching will be the least of their problems. My advice is that they don’t try to quit.
Just stick with Zyrtec. That is what I am doing.
Search ‘allergy’ & ‘zyrtec’.
This morning, 11:30am.
This was funny and rather SAD. Played right into the ‘Fake News‘ narrative.
To be fair, the U.K. “Daily News” quite often steals the march over the rest when it comes to breaking U.S. news.
Not today. Got it totally wrong.
I was watching it live on TV when I pulled up the ‘Daily Mail’ on my pad. The TV is telling me that there is confusion and the ‘Daily Mail’ is emphatic. HUGE type too.
Hurts their credibility — and yes, I know that there are millions that will claim that the ‘Daily Mail’ has never had any to begin with. That is a tad unfair. I started reading the ‘Daily Mail’, while living in the UK, daily, home-delivered, over 40-years ago. So, we have a long history. But, I am UPSET with this. They should not have rushed.
C’est la vie.
Search on ‘daily mail’.
Because, IF I were a rich man, I would get 3 of these, every day, for lunch. I will give the buns and half of the third to the dogs, but will scoff down the 2.5 with relish (but without any relish). That would keep me going for a couple of hours. I might have to have some nuts to take the edge off.
Wow. The hot dogs is the kicker.
But, $75 each!
My budget for lunch is $1.50! Hence, the disconnect.
I am thinking whether I could possibly start a GoFundMe page.
Ah! To be rich.
In the meantime back to my 99 cent a package hot dogs.
I won’t beat around … well, the bush. It is something that I have been passionately in favor of all my adult life.
I believe that you shouldn’t try to fight evolution. That there must have been a reason why we have things in the places we do, and that we should let evolution do its things, wherever possible (bar wisdom teeth). I am against tattoos and circumcision too — vehemently in the case of the latter.
I never really understood why people found it distasteful; same for foreskins. So, I am glad and now (yet again) I seem to be in good company.
We need a new name for the look — to denote that it is the anti-Brazilian. It needs to be fuzzy and friendly. How about the ‘Canadian’?