#he doesn’t fully remember darwin but knows in his heart that darwin is important to him so he stays near them when possible

[hershelwidget]

I don’t know anymore have a Caleb prepared to Fight for his bestie

“she asked for no pickles” lookin scene

[jade-doodles-questionmark]

On Alexander, Angelica and Eliza

Heres some long-ass personal interpretation based on the musical that nobody following this blog signed up for lol. Not gonna be touching on history coz i’m no expert and there’re ppl way more qualified for that. and it’s good to keep things separated.

there’re obviously many similarities between the two A’s. Both are witty, outspoken, center of attention, and a bit of a flirt. To me, the most interesting trait shared by both is their awareness: They know exactly where they stand socially, and subsequently, how to play by the rules to climb up. This clear awareness is where I got the idea for the staircase drawings. “i’m a girl in a world in which my only job is to marry rich/ my father has no sons so i’m the one who has to social climb for one” is a demonstration of Angelica’s awareness, just as “As a kid in the Caribbean I wished for a war/ I knew that I was poor/ I knew it was the only way to rise up” shows Alexander’s.

it’s different for Eliza - i know as the show proceeds, she gradually becomes more ambitious and active, but in Who Lives Who Dies Who Tells Your Story, what she asks, instead of how to rise up, is: “Have I done enough?” this quiet insistence is why i always see her as someone who does things because she thinks it’s a right thing to do, no matter whether that thing in question would benefit her personally or not. sure, she gives off "cinnamon roll" vibes, but girl’s no less strong or badass than Alexander or Angelica.

More under cut coz I’m incapable of being concise:

Angelica:

what always strikes me as interesting about Angelica is the contrast of what she says vs. what she does.

In The Schuyler Sisters, the majority of her lines are about empowering women, which, I think, is where the depiction of Angelica as an angry feminist comes from in some fanfics. But in Satisfied, we see she plays squarely by the rules of patriarchy and social classes (the three fundamental truths part). 

Similarly, in TSS, she says "so men say I'm intense or I'm insane", seemingly unbothered, if not lowkey proud, by these comments, but in Satisfied, she talks about the resulting gossip if she were to marry Alexander. 

I saw a post which expressed that Angelica thinks like Alexander but acts like Burr, and I agree. She has a sharp mind and is unafraid to speak out, like Alexander, but she’s also got things to lose, like Burr. Having family responsibilities means that she does not, and cannot, act without restrictions and hesitations like Hamilton. She doesn't necessarily wait it out like Burr, but she does think things thru, because the important decisions she makes carry enough weight to not only affect the future of herself but also of her family.

I had mentioned in an old post that Satisfied is basically Angelica assessing cost & gain for each of the options she has, for all the parties involved. even though that song's ending has mixed feelings and it's DEFINITELY a heartbreaking song, Angelica's choice did maximize the gain for everyone at the time: She was able to maintain her bond with Alexander and married rich to ensure her material comfort. Alexander was able to marry a Schuyler and elevate his status. Eliza got the boy she loved and was happily married. She even foresaw some possible challenges the newly wed Hamiltons were likely to face (“He’ll never be satisfied”).

She knows she lives in a world of patriarchy; she isn't happy with it, but she knows how to take advantage of the system as much as she can. She knows how to be the center of attention, be charming, and appeal to ppl. She knows what kind of husband is beneficial to have. She knows how to influence politics in her own way (take a break). Part of why I found Satisfied so sad is that her mind and her heart wish for two different things. Angelica is a realist, over everything else. She can be a feminist, but definitely not an angry one.

Alexander:

I talked a bit abt him in an older post on Maria - and a lot of what I said abt Maria applies to him. If the challenge Angelica was facing is invisible societal restrictions on women, what Alexander faces is purely regarding survival. Having needed to fight and compete for resources, I imagine he's at least somewhat influenced by the philosophy of social darwinism. I also said, in the same post, that I don't think he'd be really inclined to help ppl in the same difficulty he used to be in, for the same reason. If he could make it this far with his own hard work, how would it be fair to make things easier for others now? Would those ppl even deserve their success now the bar has been lowered? It's not exactly a right way of thinking, but it's also hard to blame him. after having to compete for resource w others in order to climb up, it’s hard to change the mentality.

I've seen a music analysis (by Howard Ho on YouTube) on Hurricane, and it concludes that when Hamilton was singing that song, he wasn't exactly recalling the past - he's been mentally living in that reality and never truly left. (There's similar remarks that Hamilton's past in the Caribbean had always plagued him despite his power and position in Chernow's biography, but we're only analyzing the musical here.) He never fully turned off his survival mode.

To clarify: by survival mode, I don't literally mean he fights to survive. He didn't exactly show a strong will to survive and was quite willing to give up his life for noble causes, up until he met Eliza. What I meant is, he remembers being destitute and helpless, he remembers seeing deaths of trivial importance, so he fights to be as far away from destitution and helplessness as possible, he fights to have the opportunity to die a glorious and noble death. Because to be able to die for something matters is still a privilege. No matter how high up he rose to position, his insecurity that he may end up losing those never faded away. This raw energy, I guess, is what gradually turned the others in the musical to be more like him.

Eliza:

Eliza seems to be the one who's the most content abt their situations out of the three. After all, one of her motifs in the musical is "look around at how lucky we are to be alive right now", and the other one is “that would be enough”. 

ppl usually say Helpless and Satisfied should be listened back to back (and nothing wrong with that), but comparing these two songs, Helpless doesn’t explore as much of Eliza’s character as Satisfied does Angelica. Throughout Helpless, she’s spent most of the song narrating what happened and falling head over heels for Alexander. As for her first appearance in TSS, she doesn’t have as much of a voice and show of character in comparison to Angelica, Burr, other Peggy either. 

The first moment we truly see her thoughts is in That Would Be Enough. It’s also in this song, her two other motifs (”that would be enough” and “narrative”) are introduced. Unlike Alexander and Angelica at that point of story, she’s happy with her life, wants it to remain that way, and doesn’t ask for more. 

i dont mean she’s not ambitious like the other two - she’s driven, but by other things. she doesn’t think of legacy, material comfort, status, position, etc. as important as Angelica and Alexander, as we can see in Burn. it’s not that she doesn’t know the rules - girl’s not playing the game at all. 

unlike the two A’s, Eliza’s growth happens in the second act. Angelica’s barely in the second act, and in the same act we see Alexander’s most trusted weapon, writing, contributing to his downfall. but for Eliza, she turns from the observer in Helpless, the supporter in That Would Be Enough, to the only one on stage in Burn, and to being the center of stage in Who Lives Who Dies Who Tells Your Story. in the second act we see her going thru the series of most crushing heartaches: Reynolds Pamphlet, death of Phillip, and death of Alexander, but we also see her strength. she’s a good person, but ppl usually forget that being nice takes energy and strength too. it takes strength to support, to forgive, to mourn the passing of your loved ones, and to preserve their memories and legacy. she shines and grows after overcoming the loss and heartbreaks. Angelica says in Satisfied “she’d say 'i’m fine' but she’d be lying”, i don’t think she’s giving Eliza enough credit for her mental strength there lol. 

side note: this is where i got idea for the eliza art from a few days ago - kintsugi represents the idea that your wound becomes your history and forms part of who you are, rather than something ugly to be ashamed of. I think it fits well with Eliza’s development.

Congrats! you’ve made it till the end! don’t know why u’d do that, but thanks! 

if u’re reading this feel free to send me a simple art request to compensate the time u took reading my bullshit

[harveywritings92]

Jacob Frye x Reader: prompt 12.

From my writing prompts 12. “Why have you been avoidin- What happened to your arm?!” == “ I tripped on some ice and landed on it, Also broke my phone that’s why haven’t called you, sorry.”

Note: obviously there were no phones in the 19 century just yet, so the reader asked a female Rook to deliver a note to Jacob that "got lost" somehow. 

Evie's brow twitched as she watched her brother pace around the train grumbling to himself, he's been like this for two weeks her patience wearing thin! Two weeks ago Y/n went silent and Jacob been at his wits end trying to figure out where and why? 

"I just don't get why she hasn't sent a message or something?" Her twin sighed before sitting on a couch across from her desk. "I don't know Jacob have you tried her cousin?" Evie huffed just wanting her brother out of her hair for five minutes! 

Jacob gave her a blank stare causing Evie to face-palm "Aleck! her cousin is Mr. Bell have you check with him?" She snapped vexed and in disbelief that he hadn't figured out that Y/n was Aleck's cousin! They dating for what, since they first arrived to London? Evie closed her eyes for a moment and rubbed her temples then went tell him to go ask, But Jacob was already gone and his sister sighed relieved to finally get some peace! 

Jacob was traveling via rooftops when something caused him to stopped on a chimney he looked down into a nearby market, he focused his eyes and he saw a familiar golden glow in the sea of blues and greens, "There you are love." he cooed before leaping into a hay cart before hopping out and rushing after the y/hc woman who nearly shrieked as his arms snaked around her waist, before realizing who it was. "Jacob, you scared me!" She sighed clutching her chest.

Then noticed he seemed upset. "Is something wrong?" Y/n asked concerned Jacob frowned he doesn't hear from her for two weeks the nerve of her obliviousness! He let go of her “Yes there is...Why have you been avoidin-" She turned fully around so she can face him Jacob got an eye full of her broken arm splint and plastered. "What happened to your arm?!" he demanded carefully examining her cast."I tripped on some ice and landed on it." Jacob winced having that mental image in his head, of his girlfriend in pain. 

"I told a Rook to give you a note detailing what happen, maybe she lost it? Sorry." Y/n said completely naive to what really happened,Jacob's lips twitched knowing full well that his Rooks never forget things... Especially something important like this! he made a mental note to have a little chat with the rooks who were on patrol on the day of y/n's accident, particularly the women; He noticed she was struggling to hold grocerie bags and took the bags from her.

"Jacob you don't need-" He cut her off by booping her on the nose "Oh, but I do!~" he purred before the two walked back to Alec's Jacob kept fussing asking how she tripped and if she had gotten hurt anywhere else..if she was taking anything for pain? 

The Y/ht woman wouldn't say much knowing full well he was gonna try and help, don't get Y/n wrong Jacob means well, it's just his bedside manner can be a little... overbearing? She recalled Evie getting a cold and the hazel eyed brawler pretty much went full mother hen and banned her from leaving the train...to make a long story short there were eight fires at least in the dinning car that week! The y/nat made a mental promise of never getting sick around her boyfriend.

Y/n didn't want to think what he'll do! Luckily he seem to sense her cunctation to his questions and shifted to Alec and upgrades or if Y/n's obtained any building blueprints (Reader works for the city this allows her to obtain building layouts for the twins to copy off, then she puts the blueprints back.) or maps to any hidden brotherhood caches around the city.

"I might though I still need time to translate it who wrote it did so in Hebrew." She explained then thought back to when they first met, the y/ht woman could hardly stand Mr. Frye he was always short towards her. 

Jacob noticed her inner thoughts and and asked her what was she was thinking about? " Oh just thinking back a few months ago," The gang leader cocked a brow "Oh?" genuinely curious Y/n giggled "When you thought me some rich priss to afraid to get herself dirty." She mused enjoying how his ear turned pink.

"Well, you were dressed to impress so, I just thought..." Jacob didn't really want to finish that sentence, he was glad his assumptions of Y/n being a posh princess were wrong. 

He nearly dropped to his knees and proposed, the first time she pulled the layout plans for the Whitechapel stronghold out from under her skirt giving him a nice view of her succulent thighs...speaking of her body were her bosoms getting bigger? Y/n noticed him staring at her chest and cleared her throat snapping him out of it. 

Soon, they were back at Alec's the inventor hadn't even noticed they're entranced until his cousin snuck up behind and tickled his neck with her cold fingers. Mr. Bell nearly jump of his stool in fright before realize who it was. "Y/n dear! you gave me a fright!" He noticed Jacob and the shopping.

 "Did you go out, is that alright?!" he asked asked warily causing Jacob to cock a brow at the inventor then shoot Y/n a look a that said *And here you thought I was overbearing?*  The y/wt explained to her cousin that it was fine for her to walking outside she wasn't made of porcelain! She just broke her arm she wasn't dying.               

"Sorry,it just when those children told me what happened I nearly had heart-attack, I promised your parents I'd look after you." Alec said really fast that Jacob and Y/n could hardly understand as Alec started hyperventilating, causing Y/n to try and calm him down.

 "Aleck, Aleck...*snap,Snap* hey, hey I'm fine I'm still breathing aren't I?" she said gesturing to herself and sat her cousin back down. "It'll take more than a broken bone and a concussion to put me down." She forgetting Jacob was still there. "What? You didn't say you had a concussion!" He blurted out The y/nat woman winced..yeah she did leave that little detail out didn't she?

"What else You have been keeping from me?" he demanded Y/n assured him nothing, but then Aleck had to open his mouth "She can't hear in her right ear.." His cousin shot him a venomous look the assassin gave the y/ht an identical look, that clearly explained how she hadn't heard him running after her. "Y/n how bad was it?"  He wasn't asking he was telling her to answer him, Aleck didn't want to get caught in the crossfire slipped away.

*Way to look out for me cousin dear!* Y/n pouted the she told Jacob the whole story of slipping on the ice, and remembered falling down some stairs...then blacking out, when she woke up she was in the hospital! Mr. Darwin and her cousin were waiting on her. "So you were comatose for three days, a have temporary hearing loss...and decided to keep it from me." Jacob exasperatedly summed up her injuries Y/n nodded then winced seeing his eyes narrow he was mad at her. 

Jacob got up she flinched expecting him to blow up! instead she was surprised when Jacob pulled her into a tight hug. "*sigh* Woman you'll be the death of me." he huffed pulling away as Y/n stared at him bemused "a-Aren't you mad?" she stammered as the assassin pulled smirked at her.

 "Oh, I'm furious~...But, I not about let my temper out someone in recovery." he said scrutinizing her form looking for sign of discomfort, his lips twitched seeing none.That was good but, he really wanted to make her squirm."Of course You realize, Now I won't leave you alone, right?" He chirped enjoying how the color drained from her face, needless to say Y/n was totally thankful to have that cast off and her hearing back in full, Cause Dr. Jacob had the bedside manners of a house cat and was a terrible cook!     

[aion-rsa]

Marvel’s WandaVision Episode 5: MCU Easter Eggs and Reference Guide

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

This article contains WandaVision spoilers through episode 5, possibly beyond, and for the wider MCU.

WandaVision episode 5, “On a Very Special Episode…” took everything we liked about the first two episodes and shook them up. For the first time, we have a fully blended approach to the storytelling, with the episode alternating between the altered “sitcom” reality of Westview, NJ and the actual, current MCU events. And then there’s that multiverse-shattering ending to contend with.

There’s a lot to break down with this week’s WandaVision, so we’d better get to it…

Sitcom Influences

WandaVision took us to the ‘80s this week, with a little Growing Pains, some Family Ties, and maybe a hint of Full House thrown in for good measure. The living room set itself looks very much like the standard seen on shows of the era, specifically Family Ties and Growing Pains.

Family Ties

The aging up of Billy and Tommy is much like Andy Keaton from Family Ties. In season 4, Andy was born and spent the whole season as a baby. As of the beginning of season 5, Andy was suddenly about 5 years old with zero explanation.

Also from Family Ties is the beginning of the opening credits, where it would show someone painting a colorless sketch of the family.

Bettany’s Michael Gross impression was extremely disturbing in how good it was a couple of times.

Growing Pains

Wanda and Vision getting vaguely horny for each other while doing regular domestic stuff is reminiscent of the way the parents would occasionally get it on on Growing Pains and Family Ties.

The sitcom theme lyrics and feel are extremely Growing Pains. And yes, as you might expect, they are very appropriate for these characters.

Here are the full lyrics for you (courtesy of the Disney+ closed caption feature):

“You wander the world with a vision…Of what life could be But then the years come and teach you…To just wait and see Forces may try to pull us apart…But nothing can phase me If you’re in my heart Crossing our fingers Singing a song We’re making it up as we go along Through the highs and lows We’ll be right, we’ll be wrong We’re making it up as we go along And there will be days…We won’t know which way to go But we’ll take it higher…You’re all I desire When the going gets tough…When push comes to shove We’re making it up Cuz we got love we got love we got love We got WandaVision”

Darcy also refers to Vision “playing Father Knows Best,” a callback to the sitcom style of the first episode.

We wrote in more detail about the sitcom influences of WandaVision episode 5 here.

Scarlet Witch

For the first time, we get the names of Wanda’s parents: Irina and Oleg Maximoff, but in the comics they were known as Django and Marya.

Wanda was born in 1989, the same year as Elizabeth Olsen.

We learn here that the “Scarlet Witch” codename has never been used in the MCU

Darcy refers to the anomaly as “the hex” after the hexagonal patterns that were noted in the previous episode. In the comics, Wanda’s powers are often referred to as “hex bolts.” She could also produce “hex spheres” and the town seems to be enveloped in a large one here.

Wanda’s accent, missing since Avengers: Age of Ultron, makes its triumphant return here.

Wanda talking to the kids about how “my brother is far away from here” is technically true: his corpse is…nowhere nearby. Although given how the episode ends, she could very well have been referring to another corner of the multiverse. We’ll get to that soon enough.

SWORD seems to refer to what’s going on as “The Maximoff Anomaly.”

Vision

We now know that Vision’s corpse is physically present in Westview and he isn’t just a manifestation of Wanda’s powers, nor was the horrific image of him glimpsed at the end of episode 3 a hallucination: it was Wanda seeing him as he really is.

Vision is working on a Commodore 64 at Computational Services. This early personal computer was a terrific gaming machine, with graphics and sound that were far better than early home gaming consoles of the era.

Vision apparently had a “living will” about what he didn’t want done with his body in the event of his untimely demise. Think of it like the MCU equivalent of a DNR. No, not a “do not reveal.” The other thing.

House of M

Before Agnes shows up the second time around, Vision is reading a newspaper with the headline, “LOCAL HOMEMAKERS INNOVATING RECIPES.” Moments later, he folds the newspaper in a way so that it only says “HOM.” HOM is short for the big Scarlet Witch comic event House of M.

The Twins

While it’s used as a setup for the twins inexplicably growing up, Wanda and Vision are horrified to find that the babies have simply vanished. In the comics, the first time we really get an idea that something is wrong with the children (as well as Wanda’s mental wellbeing) is when they show us that Billy and Tommy would cease to exist when Wanda wasn’t around.

This episode is the first to really feel like it’s borrowing a lot from Wanda’s most important story: the Dark Scarlet Witch story from Avengers West Coast. In that book, the first clue that something was wrong with Wanda was how the twins would disappear when she wasn’t looking a them. This would often happen when Agatha Harkness (presumably Agnes here) was babysitting for them. And later, Wanda’s personality started to shift towards full villainy and she was very cavalier about the use of her powers, something we start to see in this episode. 

For most of the episode, the twins are dressed in red and green. This more than a nod to their parents’ favored color schemes, but it appears to mirror the colors they adopt when they grow up to be superheroes themselves. William becomes the hex-wielding Wiccan, who favors red, while Tommy favors green (like his Uncle Pietro) as Speed.

Sparky

Poor Sparky. Good boy.

The name “Sparky” is a reference to Tom King and Gabriel Hernandez Walta’s brilliant Vision story, in which Vision and his “family” (not the Maximoffs) move to the suburbs and try to live a “normal” life. Part of that includes a synthezoid canine named “Sparky.” He didn’t meet a good end there, either. Stop letting dogs die in our stories, you monsters! It’s too sad.

Lagos

This week’s commercial is for Lagos Brand Paper Towels, with the catchy slogan of:  “For when you make a mess you didn’t mean to.”

This references the opening scenes of Captain America: Civil War, when Wanda used her powers to stop Crossbones from detonating a bomb in a crowded marketplace. While she reduced the number of casualties overall, a number of innocent civilians still died when he exploded. It’s the first indication that Wanda’s grief and trauma in Westview are driven by far more than just the loss of her lover.

The Lagos ad is also another reference to the Infinity Stones. Previously, we’ve had the toaster (Power), the watch (Time) and the Tesseract-shaped bath powder (Space). Here, we have a red liquid spill in a sly nod to the Aether (Reality). Only the Mind and Soul stones to go – which means two more commercials.

X-Men

These are definitely not the only X-Men references in the episode (of course), but we’ll get to that big one down below…

The scene of Wanda confronting SWORD agents looks to be directly inspired by the scene in the first X-Men movie where the police try to take down Magneto. Much like Wanda, he uses his powers on their guns, causing them to be aimed at the cops themselves before escaping. Considering the payoff to this episode and Magneto’s role as Wanda and Pietro’s sometimes-father in the comics (not to mention Pietro’s definite father in the X-Men movies), this was more than likely set up. 

Vision says he was reading Charles Darwin’s “The Descent of Man” to one of the twins, a book that deals with evolution. (David Bowie voice) “Gotta make way for the homo superior!”

The Twilight Zone

Serious Twilight Zone “It’s a Good Life” vibes in the episode throughout, particularly when Agnes is visibly weirded out by Wanda with her “take it from the top” moment (unless she’s deliberately screwing with everyone), and the mailman telling the twins “your mom won’t let [Sparky] get far.”

Also, while we’re on the subject of The Twilight Zone, Agnes appears to live at the corner of Maple St. and Sherwood Drive. “The Monsters are due on Maple Street” is a notoriously paranoid unpacking of suburban paranoia.

Westview

The opening credits feature a “Greetings From Westview, NJ” postcard in a pretty common format, but one made most famous on the cover of Bruce Springsteen’s “Greetings From Asbury Park” album.

We wrote more about Westview in general here.

“For the Children

Vision points out that there are “no other children in Westview,” which calls to mind the creepy “for the children” chant from back in episode 2. 

Captain Marvel

Darcy draws the connection between how both Wanda and Carol Danvers got their powers via an Infinity Stone. Similarly, they acknowledge Wanda almost took out Thanos in Avengers: Endgame but that this feels outside the scope of her powers. Still, the fact that both Wanda and Carol stood up to Thanos isn’t something that’s being glossed over in the MCU.

Note Monica’s reaction when the name “Captain Marvel” is said isn’t exactly what you’d call enthusiastic.

Monica Rambeau

Monica’s test results coming back blank seem pretty significant. Is this a signifier that her molecular structure has changed, whether from the blip or passing through the hex barrier? Are we witnessing Monica’s superheroic origin story in slow motion?

Who is the Villain of WandaVision, anyway?

Despite the implications from the end of episode 4, Wanda isn’t completely in control of what’s going on. At various points in the episode she seems to be manipulating everything, but at others seems to be completely immersed in this reality. 

But if she doesn’t remember how this all started, that sets up a potential villain reveal (or more than one) down the road.

What’s up with Agnes?

Agnes is complicit but was disturbed by Wanda’s ability to “resurrect” so how much can she really know? Unless, of course, she’s just “acting” this way to continue with her cover.

On the other hand, Agnes “helping out with the kids” is kind of in line with our Agatha Harkness theory for the character.

Reed Richards?

Monica mentions that she has a particular “aerospace engineer” in mind to call for help. Based on all the other subtle Fantastic Four clues that were in the fourth episode, could this individual be Reed Richards?

If they aren’t taking that big a swing, it could be Adam Bernard Brashear, known as “The Blue Marvel,” another prominent Marvel scientist, and one who has led the 616 version of the Ultimates with Monica on the team.

Evan Peters is Pietro

“She recast Pietro?”

Yes, you are indeed seeing Evan Peters returning as Pietro Maximoff/Quicksilver here. This is (at least until it’s revealed that the MCU Wanda and Pietro were indeed mutants whose powers were merely “activated” by Strucker’s experiments) now officially the first appearance of a mutant/member of the X-Men in the MCU. Peters, of course, played Pietro in three films,X-Men: Days of Future Past, X-Men: Apocalypse, and Dark Phoenix. While Aaron Taylor-Johnson played Pietro in Avengers: Age of Ultron, Peters played him in Days of Future Past, and he was generally more warmly-received by fans.

And does this indeed mean that Pietro is alive again, albeit in “recast” form? Or is Wanda so powerful that she ripped open a hole in the multiverse itself in order for her brother to “make a guest appearance” in Westview? This could very well be the first indication of what’s to come in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness and the possibly Spiderverse-y Spider-Man 3.

Unless…what if this isn’t Pietro at all? What if it’s someone manipulative merely taking the form of Pietro to mess with Wanda even further?

Also, Pietro’s “bad boy” appearance very much feels like it fits with the Family Ties aesthetic. His “New York tough guy” look and persona is much like Nick, Mallory’s idiot boyfriend.  Coincidentally, Nick also starred in an episode of the show where he got a dog and it died soon after from an accident.

We wrote much more about the shocking WandaVision episode 5 ending here.

We Are Kind of OK With the ’80s

Jazzercise was indeed a real thing, god help us.

For those of you thinking the internet was a whatever a reverse anachronism is, we made the same mistake too. But it turns out it has been around in some form since the 1960s, when the Advance Research Projects Agency (precursor to today’s US government mad science agency, DARPA) networked a few computers and sent messages back and forth. 

Unanswered Questions

Dennis the Mailman is back from episode 1. His little aside to the kids is an indicator that he is vaguely aware of what’s really going on. Not necessarily in a sinister way, but a reminder that the people of Westview aren’t really enjoying this.

One of the camera feeds we see is from Satellite 348. Avengers #348 had a Vision-centric cover and story.

Is there a significance to the stuffed animal on the chair at the beginning? I thought maybe it was a stuffed Bova or something, but I think it’s just a bunny.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

Spot anything we missed? Let us know in the comments!

The post Marvel’s WandaVision Episode 5: MCU Easter Eggs and Reference Guide appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3pZW8jy

[stevedonnellyfaith-blog]

Evolution (Post 93) 6-17-15

Some friends of my parents stopped by this week.  They are a fun couple.  He is a folksy, puttering, retired physics teachers who once took my father’s side in a debate with other faculty members about why the lighting fixtures in the dining room were swinging back and forth in time. “Hal’s conjecture is both right and wrong,” Mr. Dorson offered in mediation, “While he is right that this is an earthquake, Hal is wrong about the oscillating motion of the chandeliers. They are stationary; it is the building that is moving back and forth.”  

It is helpful to have a physics teacher around to interpret natural phenomena, but for his wife, a liberal librarian, being married to an ultraconservative who is going deaf can be a trial. I believe she has taken up gardening and visiting museums as a means to deal with the relentless onslaught of Fox News with the volume turned up to eleven. It heartens me to see two people with differing views living together in toleration rather than consternation.  It is easy to see though, who a blaring news or sportscast could upset peace within an American family.

The news doesn’t really interest me much anymore.  Today my mother asked me what I thought of the drama of some felons that had escaped from prison somewhere quite a while ago but hadn’t been caught yet.  Initially, I thought she was talking about the Texas jailbreak from about a decade ago. Come to find out she was talking about a new escape that I had only vaguely heard about accidentally.  I am currently in kind of a news gray-out status with the expectation of placing myself under an out and out cone of silence in the Christmas season once the presidential hi-jinks begin in earnest.  By February every broadcast on every channel will be wall to wall politicians, people who used to be politicians and people who once worked for politicians for the foreseeable future.

While temporal debates are consequential and do impact The Church, I seem to be developing and increasingly lower tolerance for posturing, weasel words, taking others out of context, flamboyant exaggerations and smarminess.  Then once the commercials are over, I can’t stand the news commentators either.  It does seem like whenever Joe Biden blows his nose, Fox News will air alternating Democrat and Republican operatives who will dramatically exaggerate the significance and importance of the color of Joe’s handkerchief.   MSNBC will cover the same story with two Democrat operatives who refer continuously with nauseating condescension to a particular hanky that they both remember Dick Cheney using at one point last decade.  I vaguely remember that there may actually be another cable news channel, or there once was one, but it has become so irrelevant now that it is only watched in airport waiting areas by travelers who have forgotten to pack earphones as protection.  So that pretty much leaves the often biased CSPAN broadcast as my only probable news source. Unfortunately CSPAN is pretty much a consensus pick for the most boring channel not dedicated to auctioning shiny baubles.  So I mostly ignore the political news.

With regard to social issues, my views are mostly insulted on MSNBC and so vociferously agreed with by Sean Hannity that even I begin to question axiomatic beliefs that I have held all my life.  Mostly, I listen to a couple of minutes of Al Kresta on my drive home and compare my own conservative views against whatever Pope Francis has to say.  I try to allow his words to change my heart in a way that my mind can make sense of after the fact. Sometimes his views challenge me, but I am confident that Francis truly believes what he says and that the Pope doesn’t add spin. In general, whenever a Vatican mouthpiece is pontificating for him though, I change the channel as fast as I can.

With respect to matters of the faith, I do buy into whatever Pope Francis has to say lock, stock and barrel, whatever that means. (I search Google for stuff like that all the time and send kind thoughts towards David Katreeb as I’m doing it.)  Anyway, I think, for instance, that the Pope quite reasonably explains the Church position on evolution in a rational way that is consistent with a man who holds a degree in chemistry.  I agree with Francis when he articulates that evolution as a theory is not inconsistent with Church teaching.  God most likely may have chosen to work His design using evolution as a tool to mold the earth until Jesus entered creation in the flesh of a man.  As Supreme Being, He could also have chosen the more unlikely path of creating a whole mess of fossils and bones as a kind of archeological window dressing so that people wouldn’t be forced to believe in Him.  I don’t expect that He would do that, but as a man, I am not a self-appointed umpire of all that He does.  I am also not a competent judge of the intricacies of how other men think creation happened.  My only strong belief is against the neo-Darwinist spin that the theory of evolution proves that God doesn’t exist.  I know God does exist so I try to take a pass on things like hedonism, euthanasia, eugenics and genocide for which atheism provides license.

Here is a metaphor to explain my feelings on how neo-Darwinists extend the evolutionary theory into atheistic excess.  Nicholas, Abby and Natalie were visiting Pam’s parents in Maryland this weekend.  During the visit, Nicholas discovered a record turntable and a nunchaku set in the basement.  He also ran across a Bud Light clock but that is entirely beside the point.  His conjecture that both relics were a cool find is perfectly acceptable.  If Nicholas extended his reasoning to assume that when placed before a karaoke microphone, his grandfather would belt out, Kung Fu Fighting by Carl Douglas, Nick would be pretty far afield.  His grandfather is actually partial to Roy Orbison – the Okinawan fighting sticks belong to Nick’s Uncle Chris.

Anyway, my point isn’t that the neo-Darwinist (Darwin believed in God) atheists have been hitting themselves in the head with sticks too much, even though I don’t agree with their misguided negation of God.  It seems as if we can reasonably believe that dinosaurs became birds or whatever inference paleontologists can reasonably support with evidence.  It doesn’t bother me that no fossil evidence of a missing link between me and Zippy the Chimp.  I’m sure a very low percentage of living troglodytes were actually preserved in shale sandwiches, so I am unconcerned by missing monkey bones.

To me it seems reasonable to believe that proto-evangelical Jesus oversaw evolution; that seems to be what Francis either believes or allows. That interpretation is also consistent with what Jesus has lead me to believe through the Holy Spirit and my discussions with Pam.  It doesn’t bother me when Traditionalists take the Old Testament more literally. To me the Pentateuch doesn’t read as Adam’s, Abraham’s and Moses’ diary any more that the New Testament reads as a Jesus’ memoir.  The Bible provides us with enough information to feed our faith a healthy meal, while still allowing the atheists enough freedom to come to the conclusion that random chance bred herds of allosaurs, then extincted them, while leaving their bone caches so that we can script an increasingly ridiculous Jurassic movie franchise.

Science is wondrous.  Georges LeMaitre, a Belgian Catholic priest used science to formulate the Big Bang Theory which gives us a window or inkling into how God created all of this and all of us.  For those less interested in the beauty of God’s creation, there is also a funny television show by the same name.  God intended us to engage in science so that we can discover more and more about what He has wrought.  Certainly, we will not discover it all, any more than we will find all the dinosaur bones, but what we do find will lead us closer to Him … if we engage in science honestly.

Not everybody follows the scientific method that was originally formulated by the Catholic Church.  Agendas other than truth can warp scientific findings and theories like evolution into false doctrines. Eugenics, for instance, the bastard child of evolutionary thought, lead men to massacre their neighbors.   Whether the corpses were Armenian, Jewish, Cambodian or Tutsi was immaterial, the blood was on the hands of atheists who purported to be using junk science for rationale.  The last century was bulwarked and sandbagged with bodies killed by men liberated from the enslaving belief in a higher power.  In this century the Neo-Darwinists are bringing us contraception and chemically induced gender selective abortion on demand, an abomination that would have horrified Hitler himself because it is double-decimating his master race within the course of several short generations.

For faithful Catholics, let us forgo intramural arguments about monkey DNA.  Because our observations are made of potshard fragments of a complete vase of knowledge, we will never fully understand the entire tableau that God has wrought until we learn everything we desire to know in the fullness of time.  I look forward to answers about Fatima and Lourdes and the Tilma of Guadalupe as well as how exactly the Big Bang was boomed.  With regard to evolution I have one last thought that interests me:  could there indeed be evolution beyond Jesus incarnation?  Also is Jesus’ glorified body an evolution of a different order that we will follow into, leaving our monkey relatives to their banana smoothies? In the meantime, let’s stick together as Catholics and try to sway the thought of those who no longer recognize evil and cruelty for what it is.

[power-in-christ-blog]

✝️CHRISTIAN TOPICS 2017✝️ #3 of #6 (May 2017) - CAN HUMAN INTELLIGENCE FIND ALL THE ANSWERS... 🤓 2017 is nearly halfway through and today's blog marks the halfway point of my series of Christian Topics for the year. This month's blog has been especially challenging due to limits on the amount of free time available to me since my second son, Jude, was born in April. But regardless, with some careful planning [and a lot of sacrificed lunch hours] it has finally reached fruition. The topic I am focusing on this month is close to my heart; I genuinely believe that as a species, humanity can be exceptionally arrogant to a point—myself included—with what we think we can know and understand in this life. I will try to explain my thought process below. 🌎MODERN AGE/MODERN WORLD 🌎 There can be no denying that we live in a remarkable age, we have many wonderful tools such as: science, medicine, technology, aeroplanes, cars, boats, spacecraft etc. Truly we live in a connected age of convenience where everything is just a touch away. As a species we certainly have accomplished many things, a lot of which can be credited to advancements in science and technology. In today's world it's possible to store a scary amount of our personal data on our phones—I am even writing this on my iPhone—to take anywhere for convenience; additionally on these very devices we have access to the largest resource of information on the planet directly within our hands in the form of the internet; this can provide a lot answers—albeit not always accurate—to a lot of life's questions. On a personally level, I also am a large fan of video game consoles, I have been since 11, this still remains a strong passion to this day. Video games allow us all to live out fantasies of adventures and enjoy escapism from the usual routine of daily living. 🎮 There are many other things around us that are connected; our cars (although not mine lol) can be fitted with GPS to help us travel and have computers storing data onboard also; hospitals have mountains of data on patients and treatments stored away - just remember the recent hacking incident with the NHS being held to ransom; even our roads and streets are monitored by CCTV to ensure everything runs as expected. So clearly technology is something in our day-to-day lives and science is all around us, sometimes subtly, other times not so, advancing all aspects of our societies. I hope this shows that I value both of these things and appreciate the value of aforementioned examples above. 📱 🔗HOW DOES IS ALL FIT? 🔗 The problem lies in the fact that sometimes the scientists and philosophers of our world think that they can answer, or attempt to answer, all of life's questions. This type of curiosity is definitely admirable but to believe we can find all of the answers of universe is quite unrealistic. Let's take a look at two of the most notable examples below: 💥Georges Lamaître proposed a study in 1927 that would go on to become know as The Big Bang Theory; this is normally recognised as one of the most popular theories for the creation of our universe (and yes I now he was a Catholic). 🐒Charles Darwin famously published "On The Origin of The Species" in 1859 thus laying the groundwork for what would become The Theory of Evolution. Now I won't disrespect the work of these two highly-intelligent gentlemen, in reality I know they are far more intelligent and accomplished than myself. But I personally believe that the problem with these types of theories is that they are constantly being modified and updated to the point where you are not sure what to believe. In something of a tradition I will now use some etymology to explain scientific theory, scientific fact and plan old regular facts. I will demonstrate this to show the subtle, but important, differences that are generally neglected by many when discussing science and facts. For this research I have used www.dictionary.com to ensure the answers remain grounded. ⚛️FACTS, FACTS & THEORY... ⚛️ 💡SCIENTIFIC THEORY💡 (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/scientific-theory) This simple term can cause a lot of confusion for people as the context is often misused. When people think of a theory, they generally consider it be an idea that hasn't been proven, science however as a different definition for the word: noun 1. a coherent group of propositions formulated to explain a group of facts or phenomena in the natural world and repeatedly confirmed through experiment or observation: the scientific theory of evolution. 🔬 SCIENTIFIC FACT🔬 (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/scientific-fact): Something that a lot of people are not clear on is the common vernacular used when explaining basic scientific ideas. For example: when science calls something a "fact", what it is actually referring to is a "scientific fact". This can cause confusion as an actual fact is not the exactly the same thing as a scientific fact. Below I will show the definition of both: noun 1. any observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and accepted as true; any scientific observation that has not been refuted. Examples The structure of a cell membrane is considered a scientific fact. ❗️FACT ❗️ (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/fact) I am sure this one needs no introduction, if people are unsure on this one then hopefully the definition below will help: noun 1. something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.
 2. something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact. From the above you can see the differences, a fact is an absolute, something that is undeniable; whereas a scientific fact is an observation accepted as a truth by multiple scientists. Personally I think a scientific fact is a bit fluffy, scientists give themselves the freedom to declare a something a fact simple because multiples of scientists think the same, this doesn't mean they are always correct. Science provides itself with plenty of wriggle room to change its mind, theories and facts. Science does declare that this is because ideas are constantly evolving (no pun intended), however personally I feel this is just a glorified way of erasing or editing mistakes. A good example of scientific facts changing or being removed is in the hyperlinks below, this shows multiple scientific facts which are now obsolete; the point of the matter is that at one time, not so long ago, they were considered concrete fact, but now that is not the case. So to summarise, what is the difference between a scientific fact and a scientific theory? In short the scientific theory is a way of explaining a detailed hypothesis; these hypothesis then become scientific fact once multiple studies and scientists agree. Another point of confusion is that some might not realise is that science recognises Evolution as both a scientific theory and a scientific fact; the Big Bang Theory however is recognised only as a scientific theory - this is largely due to less evidence or agreement among the scientific community on the theory. 🤖SO WHATS THE REALITY?🤖 The truth is that Evolution has many supporters, it is usually categorised as macroevolution (changing from one species to another) and microevolution (small changes to a species over time), both of which have varying levels of evidence demonstrated in animals and wildlife. The Big Bang Theory, however still needs further work, but is largely accepted as the best possible answer to creation in the scientific world. However many respected scientists have recently suggested it may not be the definitive answer to the creation of the universe. As to the question of whether mankind evolved from apes through a common ancestor or not; there certainly are intriguing arguments to be made regarding the similarities in genetics and DNA between apes and mankind, but these theories don't necessarily disprove God. Science also declares that mankind shares a common ancestry with chimpanzees and gorillas, likely from Africa. It notes that the individual species of animals followed their own unique evolution timeline to become the various species we see around the world today. Fossil records are also used as evidence to show us the various evolutionary stages, but in some cases they can be incomplete or inconclusive. In short, science has some good evidence, lots of hypotheses, and many supporters to suggest the Man evolved to the point of homo sapien through common ape ancestry. It can also demonstrate that various species can adapt to suit their surrounding environments over time. But Evolution, like the Big Bang Theory, can't be fully demonstrated given the nature of the theories and hypotheses - even Richard Dawkins concedes to his point in the YouTube video in the hyperlinks below. Ultimately it boils down to this: science says the universe was created out of nothing, with a big explosion of creation using proven forces like gravity. But what then is there to declare God didn't cause the bang? It can show us partial clues, but neither of the two are unlikely to be able to be clearly shown, and certainly not demonstrated, to erase any traces of doubt. 📜AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD📜 From what you can see Evolution and the Big Bang Theory both are incredibly interesting ideas. They are also probably the best examples the collective human mind could imagine or theorise over to explain our very existence today. But as humans we are all limited, even the most intelligent among us should not be fooled into thinking that we can potentially understand everything the universe has to offer. Some people assume Genesis creation account was intended as metaphor written by Moses. What is there to say that when God created the world it didn't look like a Big Bang if it could have been observed from afar - perhaps Genesis was God's perception described to Moses in a firm he could comprehend?! The crucial mistake humanity makes is that we think we can know it all. The fact of the matter is that the universe is filled with many secrets, many of which will be beyond human comprehension forever despite our efforts. Science is truly important, we need it for our world; but how can we trust theories and hypotheses which constantly change or get disproved? With science the goalposts change always, God has always kept his word the same (with the exception on updating the language for modern audiences, but God isn't changing here). I think it's fair to say that the one limit of science is human intelligence and this is something that won't change ever. I won't say Evolution or the Big Bang Theory are wrong, but I do think they can fit within any faith depending on how you interpret and apply scriptures. After all, what is there to say that Adam and Eve didn't resemble our ape-like cousins in the beginning or Neanderthals?! The Bible itself does show some evidence of an evolution or adaptation of mankind. I will list some of these changes below: 🦍Goliath had 12 fingers and 12 toes - 2 Samuel 21:20 🦍 Methuselah lived for a whopping 969 years; this makes him the oldest person recorded in Biblical history - Genesis 5:27 🦍Giants lived during the Bible, Goliath was over 9 foot tall and King Og of Bashan was over 11 foot tall, plus there were many others - Amos 2:9 The above are just some of the examples of how the human race has changed and adapted according to the Bible since our creation. This clearly shows that mankind has changed throughout the ages for various reasons and is supported by the Bible. In a respect the Bible here is demonstrating that mankind has evolved and adapted to get to where we are today. Ultimately I believe we were created as Man and Woman by God, personally I would rather trust a higher power with faith rather than place my trust and faith in human intelligence, despite how intelligent the individuals may be. One thing that this world has shown me time and again is that it can't be trusted; it has taught me that man always has an agenda to fill; God on the other hand, I know I can trust and feel a relationship with through love and faith. I do believe species adapt to survive and improve, but I think in the beginning we were created human. Ultimately my final point is that science and mankind get things wrong a lot. Don't fall victim to assuming that everything the world tells you is true, history has shown that science is not infallible with facts; God on the other hand never lets us down if you trust him! I truly believe in God and trust his work and word totally, the secular world may think that is stupid but I don't care; I would rather this world label me stupid than trust in mankind. Truly I think the below sums it up for me: Psalm 118:8: "It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in humans." 🙏🏻 🔗USEFUL LINKS:🔗 Big Bang: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lemaître Dawkins Can't Prove Evolution: https://youtu.be/4Wp3Awd3MIk Evolution Questions: http://www.livescience.com/32503-why-havent-all-primates-evolved-into-humans.html Disproved Scientific Facts: http://list25.com/25-science-facts-that-were-proven-wrong/ https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/natashaumer/science-facts-you-might-have-believed-in-the-90s Adaptation In The Bible: https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/giants-in-the-old-testament/