Rooster Teeth Poppycock

    • Fan Art Friday #96: Yang Cosplay by Kazenary

      5 days ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      It’s time for our weekly look at the best Rooster Teeth fan art from our community, curated by the fine folks at BIGBITE!

      This week’s featured artist is Kazenary, AKA @kazenary, for this Yang cosplay.


      Kazenary is a graphic designer based in Stuttgart, Germany. She made the Ember Celica pieces within a week to take to Fotocon, and says this cosplay was largely assembled with blood and tears.

      Her main inspiration was Barbara Dunkelman. Kazenary loves her character, and each time she’s wearing Yang, she wants to be like her – a strong woman.


      Want a chance to be featured in future Fan Art Fridays? Head over to the Fan Art Friday thread in the Art forum to find out how!

    • Answers to Questions Posed in RT Podcast #461

      2 weeks ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      It's time for our regular segment in which @Gafgarian (AKA Jeremiah Palmer) provides answers to the burning questions left unanswered in each episode of the Rooster Teeth Podcast. Read on to get closure for Who Cares About Szechuan Sauce? – #461.


      Can you have honey with Whole30?

      You cannot. While other similar diets like paleo do allow natural sweeteners, such as honey, Whole30 does not allow it. According to their FAQs, the reason for this decision is because honey is typically used as an artificial sweetener which modifies the natural taste of food. Since one of the goals of Whole30 is to help you appreciate the "natural taste of food" even natural sweeteners like honey or maple syrups are to be avoided.

      How much were movie tickets in the 1980s?

      According to the MPAA, the average cost of a movie ticket in the 1980s was approximately $3.42. This is in contrast to the previous decade where the average was only $1.98 and our current decade in which the current average is trending at nearly $8.50.

      Guns in the UK?

      Gun control has been a part of their history for hundreds of years. The first legislature banning a gun in the United Kingdom occurred in 1594 as a response to the assassination of William of Orange in 1584. Queen Elizabeth I, feared her own assassination and banned wheellock pistols near a royal palace. Further legislation in the following centuries would be levied against crossbows and rifles. It would not be until 1870 that a law requiring a person to obtain a license to carry would be drafted. Created with the intention of raising operational funding for the state, the license was only required when carrying a weapon off your own property however no sort of license was required to actually purchase the gun. The Pistol Act of 1903 would see the first regulation limiting the sale of a firearm followed by the Firearms Act of 1920. This act was in direct response to the mass availability of firearms after World War I. In addition to requiring the registration of all purchased firearms the license also listed the maximum amount of ammunition the owner could purchase, and own, at any point in time. The punishment for being found in violation of this act was a £50 fine or three months imprisonment however it did not specifically make it illegal for criminals to possess nor specifically identify criminal uses and subsequent punishments if the firearms were used during the commission of a crime. 1933 would see the first law which outlined the punishments for anyone using "a firearm or imitation firearm to resist arrest." Actual possession of the firearm was also made illicit unless the owner could prove a valid and lawful use for possession. While a few other formal acts would be put in place over the next fifty years providing additional regulation around purchasing age and, in 1968, combining all firearm legislation into a single Firearms Act which also added restrictions on shotgun ownership, it would not be until the Firearms Amendment Act of 1988 that a blanket ban would go into effect.

      This ban was a direct result of the August 19th, 1987 shooting across Hungerford, Berkshire, United Kingdom which took the lives of 16 people and injured 15. It was discovered, afterwards, that the perpetrator legally owned two shotguns, three pistols, and two semi-automatic rifles. This realization led to extreme limitations on the legal ownership of certain firearms. Along with making the registrations of shotguns a requirement it also made all semi-automatic and pump action centerfire rifles, magazine loaded shotguns, "military weapons" with explosive ammunition, and all pump-action and self-loading rifles illegal. Two firearm amendments in 1997 would further restrict gun ownership. These would be in response to the deadliest mass shooting in British History which led to the deaths of 16 children, a teacher, and the gunman. These two acts would essentially restrict all handgun ownership listing the only exceptions as pistols with "historic interest," starting and signal pistols, muzzle-loaders, and shot pistols for pest control. The passing of these acts led to over 162,000 forfeited pistols and over 700 tons of accompanying ammunition. Under special circumstances it is possible to get a Personal Protection Weapon license which would allow one to own a restricted weapon for protection purposes, this is a relatively rare occurrence.

      It should be noted that, despite these strict regulations, a 2010 shooting spree left 13 dead, including the shooter, who legally owned the two weapons he used to commit the crime. Additionally, a 2016 Home Office report listed a total of 27 homicides and 579 attempted murders by gun in 2015. Cumulatively, the report listed 8,399 crimes committed with a firearm during that same year; however, over half of those involved air rifles or some other "imitation" firearm. Thoughts? Is it working? What are the gun laws where you are at?

      Can you monetize hunting videos on YouTube?

      As of August, YouTube no longer allows the monetization of videos with any firearm content. It is immediately flagged as non-advertiser friendly content and while a manual review can be requested, it follows the same review guidelines as any other request. While some content creators have claimed that their videos have remained flagged as non-advertiser friendly even after a manual review, stating that "any content glorifying guns" will remain non-monetized, this is not an official YouTube stance on the content.

      Large gun-related content creators, such as Military Arms Channel, have been vocal about the dangerous precedent auto-demonetizing firearm videos will set for the future of our second amendment rights. In direct response, and in anticipation of, Military Arms Channel have launched which is an independent video hosting and sharing platform that is dedicated exclusively to firearm related videos. Proponents of this move have pointed out that, while it is fantastic that there is a place which creators can freely host their videos with monetization and without fear of persecution, the biggest draw of YouTube is the sheer enormity of video content which can easily lead to natural discovery of content that would be otherwise never seen. It will take some time for Full30 to reach this level, if ever.

      How does the triple crown shotgun work?


      Chiappa Firearms, is the manufacturer of the triple barrel shotgun line which includes the Triple Crown (seen above), Triple Magnum, and Triple Threat. The respective rifle's webpage state that the firing mechanism for all use a single trigger pull for a semi-automatic-like firing. By contrast, the original triple-barrelled shotgun, a custom made firearm, seen below, from 1891 was sold for £43,000 in 2012. This triple trigger monster has never been reproduced and, while its new owner claims that it is fully capable of safely hitting three birds with three different barrels from three different trigger pulls, no modern firearm manufacturer has been brave enough to tackle the reproduction of the three trigger mechanism.


      Are states allowed to secede?

      The short answer is no.

      Occasionally, opinionated proponents of secession will point to Article IV, Section. 3, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution as a quick answer to the law of secession. This brief statement reads: "New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress." After quoting this clause, they will also point to the historical record for West Virginia, Vermont, Kentucky, and Maine which are all sometimes incorrectly referred to as "secession states." This is because all four states were created by the "partitioning" of existing states, as instructed by the above clause.

      There is no legal precedent for a state's secession from the union. No, not even the Civil War is recognized as "legal precedent." In the eyes of the US Government, there was never a true secession from the union by the southern states because secession is not a legally recognized state's right. In the 1869 case, Texas v. White, then Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase ruled in favor of Texas on the grounds that the Confederate state government in Texas had no actual legal existence and, furthermore, when Texas, or any state, entered the United States, they become part of "an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible states." A later ruling in the 1877 case of Williams v. Bruffy, regarding debts created during the Civil War, the court ruled that "The validity of its acts, both against the parent state and the citizens or subjects thereof, depends entirely upon its ultimate success; if it fail to establish itself permanently, all such acts perish with it; if it succeed and become recognized, its acts from the commencement of its existence are upheld as those of an independent nation."

      This means that, while the short answer has to be "no" because the United States would never formally grant a state the ability to withdraw from the union and therefore cannot recognize it as even being an option, it does recognize, at least logically speaking, that if a state were to ever successfully do something it can't do because it doesn't exist, then it would HAVE to recognized then... but ONLY then.

      So, are they "allowed"? No! But we weren't "allowed" to secede from the British Empire either... just sayin'.

      What was the Marvel and Northrop Grumman thing?


      Very few details were released about the now cancelled partnership between Marvel and defense contractor Northrop Grumman. Among the items that were shown publicly was the flyer above and a free comic book featuring the Avengers and a brand new group of high-tech heroes known as NGENS. The cover of the controversial issue can be seen below. This partnership was presumably created with the intention of drawing children towards the idea of working for the weapons manufacturer.


      Predictably, any fan who had seen the first Iron Man movie was less than thrilled about the idea of Marvel partnering with what many perceive to be the Obadiah-led Stark Enterprises of the real world. In response to the fan backlash, Marvel announced “The activation with Northrop Grumman at New York Comic Con was meant to focus on aerospace technology and exploration in a positive way. However, as the spirit of that intent has not come across, we will not be proceeding with this partnership including this weekend’s event programming. Marvel and Northrop Grumman continue to be committed to elevating, and introducing, STEM to a broad audience.”

      The moral of the story is, if you were lucky enough to nab one of those limited edition NGENS comics, you should make it your mission to get a few autographs on the cover then put it away for a few decades because it is nothing more than an elusive collector's "misprint" at this point.

      How many BB8s did they make?

      There were eight BB8s created for the filming of The Force Awakens. However, of these eight only one, dubbed the "red carpet version," was seen to be the full realization of J.J. Abrams vision of the little rolling R2-replacement. This was the one on display during the Star Wars Celebration prior to Episode VII's release and is the only one which is picture perfect true-to-life replication of the droid's on-screen presence. The other seven, while obviously versions of BB8 all contain various attributes which allowed the filmmakers to properly utilize them as props for the various scenes. These range from a highly configurable and articulate head, to the rod-puppet used for various character interactions.

    • Fan Art Friday #95: NottaGamer

      2 weeks ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      It’s time for our weekly look at the best Rooster Teeth fan art from our community, curated by the fine folks at BIGBITE!

      This week’s featured artist is Elizabeth DiMarco, AKA @NottaGamer, for this drawing of Trevor.


      Elizabeth lives in Pittsburgh, PA, but she’s moving to Austin next month. She created this illustration using mechanical pencils and three cups of Earl Grey tea. Surprise, she was inspired by pudding.



      Want a chance to be featured in future Fan Art Fridays? Head over to the Fan Art Friday thread in the Art forum to find out how!

    • The Best Charlie Brown Specials Besides the Christmas One

      3 weeks ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      By @charlesaustin


      Christmas is a time for making fun of those less fortunate than ourselves. That’s why Charlie Brown is so popular. Everybody watches that movie, A Charlie Brown Christmas. This guy in the movie, Charlie Brown, is a dumbass who has a really bad Christmas tree. It makes us feel better about our own inadequate Christmas trees when we see his wallowing, sagging, dying spruce in all its puny misery. We suck and our lives suck but at least we’re not as sad as this loathsome bald child.

      If you check your Wikipedia, you will see that Charlie Brown is from a series called Peanuts. This article is about the comic strip. For the culinary nut, see Peanut. For other uses, see Peanut (disambiguation).


      Parade-goers gawk at Charlie Brown while someone humiliates him with the football thing.

      Anyway, A Charlie Brown Christmas is a timeless classic that makes us feel better about ourselves by laughing at make-believe children. But there are actually many, many other Peanuts TV specials. If you want to feel good at the expense of a gormless cartoon dork, you need to watch these ones too.

      A PCPeanuts Christmas

      Snoopy smokes a spliff laced with PCP, causing him to relive the classic 1965 special A Charlie Brown Christmas in reverse. Lucy makes eggnog with contaminated milk to deliberately give Charlie Brown listeria on Christmas Eve.

      Lucy Is Going to Do the Football Thing Again, Charlie Brown

      All of the Peanuts kids are out there on the football field again. It’s Thanksgiving or something. Schroeder plays on his piano a song that sounds like the NFL Monday Night Football theme but is just different enough to not get sued. Everybody warns Charlie Brown that Lucy is going to do the football thing again. But then after like 45 minutes of everyone telling him not to fall for it, Lucy does the football thing again. He is humiliated.

      Charlie Brown Am Become Death, Destroyer of Worlds

      Charlie Brown contemplates the grotesque power of atomic warfare on VJ Day. Woodstock borrows Snoopy's credit card to buy an anime body pillow.

      It’s Funny That Charlie Brown Is Homeless on Christmas

      Charlie Brown inherits a posh brownstone on Manhattan’s upper west side and Lucy does a mail fraud scheme to steal the deed to the property, leaving him homeless on Christmas. Peppermint Patty has a sidestory that rips off the Soup Nazi Seinfeld episode. Snoopy and Woodstock stitch together a big trenchcoat in order to pose as an adult and purchase a bottle of Pappy Van Winkle 20-Year Bourbon and drink it by the train tracks.

      You Are Done, Charlie Brown

      After learning of the FBI’s COINTELPRO plots to undermine Martin Luther King, Jr., Lucy writes anonymous letters to Charlie Brown encouraging him to kill himself. Snoopy bakes vegan scones with Woodstock.

      Charlie Brown Have You Ever Heard of Reptilians Before?

      Charlie Brown's teacher blabbers incoherently during class, then takes him aside after class to explain how the U.S. government is beholden to a conspiratorial cabal of lizard-people aliens. Woodstock orders a Big Salad.

      It’s the Great Caliphate, Charlie Brown

      ISIS propaganda radicalizes Woodstock and he contemplates flying Snoopy’s plane into a federal building. Charlie Brown elopes with a French prostitute to escape his dead-end life surrounded by people who bring him nothing but unending sorrow.

    • Fan Art Friday #94: BoutsoftheBlind

      3 weeks ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      It’s time for our weekly look at the best Rooster Teeth fan art from our community, curated by the fine folks at BIGBITE!

      This week’s featured artist is Cole, AKA @BoutsoftheBlind, for this RWBY-inspired illustration.


      Cole lives in Texas, where he works in retail and has his own webcomic. He used ink and watercolors to create this piece over the span of three hours.


      Want a chance to be featured in future Fan Art Fridays? Head over to the Fan Art Friday thread in the Art forum to find out how!

    • Answers to Questions Posed in RT Podcast #460

      4 weeks ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      It's time for our regular segment in which @Gafgarian (AKA Jeremiah Palmer) provides answers to the burning questions left unanswered in each episode of the Rooster Teeth Podcast. Read on to get closure for Burnie Punks Jon – #460.


      When was the last time Ashley was on the podcast?

      Ashley was on the podcast in July of this year. It was episode 439 and featured her, Risinger, Burnie, and Trevor.

      What is an assault rifle?

      As you might guess, the definition of this seemingly simple object can be VERY different depending on who you might ask. Webster's dictionary defines it as “any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use.” While the Department of Defense defines an assault rifle as “short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges.” For its part, the NRA defines it similarly with "By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power," adding a clarification that, "if applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect." Notable "must-have" attributes of an assault rifle include a selective fire rate, accept a cartridge of intermediate power, use a detachable box magazine, and have an effective range of at least 300 meters.

      The main reason for the casually, and typically incorrect, usage of the term "assault rifle" is likely a combination of mis-informed news agencies attempting to quickly iterate on current events without doing their due diligence and a frightened and ignorant population that is incorrectly conflating the use of "assault" to describe the weapons used in these tragedies and mistakenly believing that there is no difference between the usage of "weapon" and "rifle."

      An "assault weapon" is defined, by the now expired 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban as a semiautomatic firearm with the ability to accept a detachable magazine and two or more of the following accessories: a folding or telescoping stock, a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, a bayonet mount, a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor, a grenade launcher. While the original ban is no longer in effect, several states have adopted and modified the ban within their own borders. No assault weapon legislation has ever mentioned the inclusion of assault rifles capable of automatic fire. This is because it isn't necessary. Several laws since 1934 have been passed which heavily regulate the sale, purchase, and ownership of weapons which would fall into the "assault rifle" category and, ultimately, VERY few shootings or non-military deaths over the course of American history have occurred from an assault rifle. While there are certainly more deaths from guns that would be classified as "assault weapons" there are still far more from a very standard semi-automatic rifle.

      Gun death statistics in the US?

      More recent figures are difficult to verify and, due to the recent tragedies involving guns, tend to be weighted in some way that may influence the results. In order to be as unbiased as possible, the statistics that I am using to answer this question are a culmination of data from several studies over the course of five years from 2011-2015. These studies were performed by the CDC, BBC, FBI, NRC, and NRA.

      The rough aggregation of this data over that five year period, claims that there were approximately 203,000 US deaths by guns for an average of around 33,000 each year. Of those 33,000 roughly two-thirds were found to be suicide and just over 11,000 were homicides, with the rest filled out by accidents, law enforcement, or otherwise unknown motivations. These numbers work out to be roughly 90 gun deaths every day in America with around 30 being the conscious murder of an individual.

      In addition to these statistics, it is estimated that twice as many people are injured by guns each year and of the 90 daily gun deaths, roughly seven are children under eighteen. The gun homicide rate is over 25 times more than the average of other developed nations and a 2010 study estimated that gun violence, in general, cost taxpayers over $500 million in direct hospital costs.

      How many Las Vegas injuries were from stampedes?

      There have been no direct numbers released regarding the causes of the injuries sustained by nearly 500 people on the October 3rd shooting. However, numerous source have since reported that there were "dozens," "fifty plus," or "many" caused by the stampede of the panicked mob.

      What kind of guns did the Vegas shooter have?

      The heinous acts committed in Vegas were both committed using semi-automatic rifles. Despite several people in the news mistakenly identifying the weapons as "assault rifles" or "assault weapons." While it is true that some of the weapons found in the hotel room of the Vegas shooter had scopes or other accessories, the deadliest accessory, the bump stock which dramatically increased the fire rate of the semi-automatic rifle, is not recognized as one of the accessories which would potentially cause the rifle to be categorized as an "assault" weapon.

      In addition to Nevada having some of the loosest gun regulations across all 50 states allowing possession of 50-caliber rifles and large-capacity ammo magazines, following the Vegas shooting, a retired ATF special agent also lamented an obvious "amazing loophole" among current gun regulations. This rule mandates that if you buy two handguns within a five day period, the ATF must be alerted immediately but rifles are not subject to the same scrutiny. This means that someone motivated to stockpile an arsenal could easily do so over the course of a few weeks from the same gun shop. Additionally, Nevada does not require permits to buy or possess a rifle, shotgun, or handgun. Carrying a firearm in public openly is also perfectly legal. Lastly, while most states have independently banned the possession of legitimate machine guns or silencers, Nevada allows them as long as they have been acquired, and registered, according to federal regulations.

      Is it legal to hunt with semi-automatic weapon?

      This, like most gun regulations, varies greatly by state. Most states do currently allow you, in some way, to hunt with a semi-automatic rifle. However, every state that does allow this has placed some type of restriction in order to limit the use of semi-automatic weapons. In some states, such as Michigan, this is a restriction on active shells in the detachable magazine. Michigan specifically puts this count at six however other states, like Ohio, allow only three. Additional restrictions include a limitation on certain size game, stricter licensing requirements, and reliance on local ordinances to handle gun regulations within their own town borders. What I learned from researching this is if you were to grab a handful of ten hunters from any state, it is likely that a third of them are out of compliance in some way just because of the varying complexity of their local gun laws. Some states, such as Pennsylvania, have modified their game regulations so much over the last few years that there is a much higher estimation of non-compliance with several hunters recently voicing their frustration over the seemingly yearly changes to their hunting laws.

      In how many places in America should you not drink water from the tap?

      The culmination of a two-year study performed by the Natural Resources Defense Council, claimed in May of this year that nearly a quarter of all Americans live in an area which is in violation of either local drinking water safety regulations or, in many cases, the 1974 federal Safe Drinking Water Act. According to the NRDC, the issues are typically less about the expected violations of high levels of pollutants and more commonly issues with the lack of communication, in the event of contamination, between local water companies and the residents they serve. One example cited was Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection taking weeks to notify Tampa residents of possible contamination to their drinking water as a result of a large sinkhole outside of the city. Other notable occurrences of alleged neglect include Jim Hogg County, Texas where residents were exposed to extremely high levels of arsenic for years without their knowledge and, of course, Flint, Michigan where insanely high levels of lead had contaminated tap water for years before eventually being exposed, not by the EPA but by pissed off Flint residents who were sick of being ignored and did their own testing to prove the contamination.

      The NRDC states that, along with the blatant violations and lack of communication around those violations, “repercussions for violations were virtually nonexistent. Nearly nine in 10 violations were subject to no formal action.” When asked to comment on the possible reasons for the communication and repercussion issues, a senior attorney for the council, Mae Wu, stated that the difficulty is multifaceted but a primary contributor is that the responsibility to adhere to the 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act falls to the states but there is no clear system of managing compliance within the EPA. This includes laws around compliance and timely communication with affected citizens. She stated, “For drinking water infrastructure, like the pipes and the mains, it’s out of sight, out of mind — until the main breaks outside your house, and you can’t drink your own water.” On a related note, Marc Edwards, a scientist at Virginia Tech, who assisted the Flint residents in bringing national attention to their own water crisis stated, “This has been tolerated so long, and it is so ingrained in the E.P.A. culture to look the other way,” he said. “They’re going to need outside pressure to act and enforce existing laws.”

      For their part, the latest EPA report does identify 12 states as having significant water quality issues. Topping the list are Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. In response to this, a spokeswoman for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, stated that Texas has "finite amounts of groundwater," adding that, “as of March 2017, 96 percent of Texas’ population is served by public water systems that are meeting drinking-water standards.”

      As previously mentioned, a top-down approach is absolutely necessary in order to tackle this monumental clean up task. Despite Trump running on a campaign of infrastructure improvement, both he, and his appointed EPA leader, Scott Pruitt, are supporting legislation that would cut the EPA budget by nearly 31 percent. In spite of this, the NRDC are hopeful that their report, as well as the public outcries from affected residents, like those in Flint, will redirect the EPA's attention to the water crisis in America.

      The latest tinder auto swiper?

      The power of a lightning port powered fan without blades. Genius!

    • Answers to Questions Posed in RT Podcast #459

      4 weeks ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      It's time for our regular segment in which @Gafgarian (AKA Jeremiah Palmer) provides answers to the burning questions left unanswered in each episode of the Rooster Teeth Podcast. Read on to get closure for Triggered by Social Media – #459.


      What is the density of fart air?

      The composition of flatus, the medical term for gas emitting from the intestines, varies from person to person and even has variance from a single person based on their most recent meals, bowel movement frequency, and any number of additional biological quirks. This naturally makes getting a true idea of the "average" fart's density and composition pretty difficult. In addition, the complexity of ensuring that the sample is truly flatulence and has not been tainted by clean air or other gases, poses a difficult challenge. However, that didn't stop gastroenterologists from the Human Gastrointestinal Physiology and Nutrition Department of the Royal Hallamshire Hospital in Sheffield, England from doing their diligence on the subject.

      In 1991, researchers had 10 volunteers, which is legitimately a really small sample size, measure their flatulence over 24 hours via rectal catheters. In order to test against the last point of the inadvertent mixing of external gases, the seal of the rectal catheter was tested by having the subject sit in a bathtub while farting. If no bubbles appeared then the catheter was obviously doing its job. Their study, though much smaller and therefore less accurate than most would probably like, was able to determine averages across those 10 volunteers which, based on several other one-off investigations and articles, are likely close enough to called accurate. Especially given the amount of fluctuation the measurements can have between a single individual let alone hundreds of subjects.

      The study found that the average fart is right around 3 ounces in volume and contains around 80% nitrogen (1.165 kg/m3) and 20% methane (0.668 kg/m3). Using these numbers and a bit of math, we can get a rough density of fart air at right around 1.066 kg/m3. Since the density of air is around 1.204 kg/m3, this would mean that fart air is lighter and rises. Although this may be pretty obvious since we have the ability to smell a fart at all. If it didn't rise then we would all just be trudging through a soupy mess of flatulence that sat right about ankle level. That's quite the mental picture, hah!

      How much would it cost to fill a hot tub with alcohol?

      Your average four-person hot tub holds right around 1,100 liters of water. So, depending on the quality of the alcohol, a rough cost would be somewhere between $11k and just over $4 billion. The large number is only if you were to opt for the world's most expensive liquor which, at the moment, is a bottle of Tequila Ley Pasion Azteca. Though this price tag is largely due to the 6,400 diamonds which decorate the bottle which the manufacturer claims "improve the flavor of the tequila." Interestingly, though unveiled in 2014 as the world's most expensive liquor, to date a bottle has never actually been sold. For those curious, the smaller number was based on the pricing of good old Nikolai Vodka aka turpentine-in-a-plastic-gallon-jug-with-a-handle. Who remembers that from when you were definitely old enough to be consuming alcohol?

      Can you get drunk by inhaling alcohol vapor?

      I suppose I should have prefaced the previous answer with the PSA, you should NEVER fill up anything with alcohol with the intention of submerging yourself in it. Aside from the obvious pain that open sores and orifices may be in after being completely submerged in a caustic solution, you WILL get drunk. You WILL get drunk relatively quickly too, which could lead to you passing out and potentially drowning in a tub of the world's most expensive liquor... or Nikolai... you know, whatever your literal poison happens to be.

      All kidding aside though, alcohol vapor is really dangerous, really quickly. There are several reports of fatalities throughout history which have centered around distillery workers falling victim to poorly ventilated, or just not ventilated, work spaces. A report from Sage Windery in British Columbia explains that it does not necessarily take a large amount either. A worker fell into a partially fermented vat of grape juice which was estimated to be roughly 10 percent alcohol and, after a failed rescue attempt, both the worker and owner of the winery were overcome by the fumes.

      You may be asking, "what if I just inhale a little? I don't plan on jumping into a vat of almost-wine any time soon..." To that I would say that you are not alone. In fact, the vaporization and subsequent inhalation of alcohol has been a thing for over 70 years. Though originally introduced as a treatment for a pulmonary edema, or fluid on your lungs, as the alcohol helps evaporate the liquid quickly, the fact that it was a quicker way to get fucked up wasn't lost on anyone. As mentioned above, however, alcohol vapor is really dangerous. Inhaling does cause intoxication quickly since the alcohol doesn't need to go through a digestive process in order be broken down, but this lack of a digestive process is part of what makes it so dangerous. Our bodies have a natural deterrent against alcohol overdose, vomiting. By bypassing the stomach, though, this trigger is never tripped and your body has no defense against a probable case of alcohol poisoning.

      It should be noted that very few studies have actually been done on the adverse effects on the inhalation of alcohol for recreation so the majority of the above facts are based on the scientific world's understanding of biological chemistry. The studies that have been done are mainly surrounding the use of the alcohol inhalation as a treatment for pulmonary edema which it does prove to be an extremely effective treatment. That said, most have agreed that no amount of inhaled alcohol for recreational purposes is a good idea.

      What does alcohol boil at?

      Different types of alcohol have different boiling point but their ranges are typically between 151°F to 173.1°F (66°C - 78.37°C). For the vapor inhalers in the previous question, though, the vapor is typically created by artificially increasing the air pressure of the bottle containing the alcohol before quickly normalizing it, causing a rapid depressurization resulting in a partial vacuum which drastically reduces the boiling points. However, the actual alcohol content of vapor created during rapid depressurization is comparatively pretty small and, while it still does bypass the stomach's check against overdose, it would take quite a bit of inhaling this partial vaporization to cause serious harm.

      What’s the most expensive thing on Amazon?

      Due to the integration of third-party sellers on the Amazon marketplace, this can get ridiculous pretty quickly and the list changes often. As of last week, the most expensive item on Amazon is a mint condition 1932 movie poster for The Old Dark House. Listed at a meager $750k, the poster below will only cost you roughly ten times the cost to make the actual film, even after adjusting for inflation.


      Other expensive items include autographed sports memorabilia of Babe Ruth and Cy Young, a solid gold chandelier, and other insanely overpriced and largely useless items.

      Can you read in dreams?

      So... maybe? For those who have seen the trippy indie flick, Waking Life, reading anything in dreams, especially digital clocks, is considered to be pretty challenging. Most self-proclaimed lucid dreamers, people who claim to be able to have at least a modicum of control over their dreams, will tell you that they have mastered the ability to read in their dreams, despite it, according to them, being a supremely difficult task to have accomplished. The movie Waking Life, though fantastic visually, does have limited rational dialogue, in my opinion. However, the movie which largely takes place inside a dream, spends quite a bit of time discussing the logistics behind lucid dreaming. In it, the "facts" around reading are supposed to be pretty obvious trigger to recognizing if you are currently dreaming. Words and numbers are expected to appear scrambled, backwards, or generally completely illegible. Interestingly, most lucid dreamers would say that, until viewing Waking Life or otherwise learning of this "fact" about the illegibility of dream-words, they don't really remember ever having issues visualizing real words in their dreams. They say the same about other so-called "dream impossibilities" such as cognitively turning on a light using a switch or actually traversing a staircase. Advocates of lucid dreaming frequently state that the worst thing you can do when attempting to teach your brain how to unlock its full dream potential is to put your thoughts, any thoughts, inside some artificial box determined by a movie, article, or some other nonsense. In other words, everything you know is a lie and in dreams all things are possible.

      For me personally, I was never able to master lucid dreams in any way, though once I think I dreamt that I had, which was very innately meta and screamed Inception. What about you? Are you a dream aficionado? Can you read digital clocks, fly at will, and remember actually walking up each step of a staircase?

      Are people bothered by the word dongle?

      The origin of this six letter word is actually, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, arbitrary or uncertain. However, that hasn't stopped rumors from flying and, in so doing, established the word's cringey related euphemisms and created a stigma similar to "moist" or other inherently harmless words which have slowly evolved to have less than congenial implications.

      Perhaps one of the most famous examples of the danger of having a word which so easily relates to lewd subject matter was when former SendGrid programmer Adria Richards publicly shamed two fellow programmers at a March 2013 programming conference for using the terms "big dongles" to imply a sexual connection to the harmless, to most, word. The response to Richards tweet and photo should not have been unexpected in a tech world largely driven by male ego. Though support for her contempt of the word's usage was very high and even led to the removal of the two offending programmers from their positions, Richards received no shortage of hate for her role in calling them out. This included a public attack from 4Chan and Anonymous against SendGrid's infrastructure. This DDOS attack would lead to a significant loss in revenue for the company which subsequently fired Richards, under the claim that her careless tweet incited a riot against the company and she was ultimately responsible for the revenue loss.

      In either case, the use of the word has, while still definitely part of the technical vernacular, has largely become limited specifically to the various small USB drives, wireless receivers, and other similar devices.

      Is there a limit to how many things can come out of your body at one time?

      There are urban myths abound about the unfortunate simultaneous rapid expulsion of bodily fluids. The name for such a painful sounding experience is, according to Urban Dictionary which will likely be the only place that this feat is ever "defined," is a Fredgazim. According to the source it is simultaneous occurrence of a fart, burp, hiccup, ejaculate, yawn, vomit, poop, cough, pee, sneeze, and cry. While this word, and loose definition, does appear in several places around the internet it is likely that they all stem from this original Urban Dictionary post. The post does claim that the act is named after a Fred Riehl, "the first human to have willingly perform a documented Fredgazim," however, I have been unable to find any information on an individual named Fred Riehl with regards to this incident, other than duplicates of this post, and any sort of "documented Fredgazim" is certainly a stretch.

      Physiologically speaking, a good bit of these things is not possible to simultaneously occur because they rely on competing muscle movements and/or opposing muscle groups. There are also anatomic challenges to things like peeing and ejaculating. So, the short answer is, Yes, there is absolutely a limit to the number of things that can come out of your body simultaneously, though this is related more to the physiological requirements for that expulsion to occur rather than some threshold of matter leaving your body.

      The history of Looney Tunes, Merrie Melodies, and Silly Symphonies?

      The idea that Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies were created in order to sell more Warner Brothers music is a bit misleading. While, at its core, it isn't necessarily wrong, it does leave out a pretty important element which would impact the entire world of animation in ways no one thought possible.

      That important element was Silly Symphonies. Silly Symphonies, though now arguably the least memorable of the three, was the one which started it all and it was created by Walt Disney, because of course it was. Steamboat Willie debuted in 1928, and with it a new era of animation was born. Fully synchronized sound and Mickey Mouse. It was groundbreaking in its technology, artistry, and marketing. Disney knew it was and so did his lead composer, Carl Stalling, who suggested that Walt create a "musical novelty" which focused on the music by having an animation play over a track with the characters reacting to tempo changes, words, and other pieces of the music accordingly. Disney's next piece, The Skeleton Dance, would be the first attempt at this and would also be the first time that the animation and sound were storyboarded and designed together. Its release in 1929 would launch the Silly Symphonies brand which would be picked up by Columbia Pictures and later, United Artists.

      Looney Tunes, a direct play against the Silly Symphonies brand, would be launched by Hugh Harman, Rudolph Ising, and Leon Schlesinger, only a year later. Distributed by Warner Brothers, it would feature its own star main character. That's right, Bosko. Oh, you don't know who Bosko is? That is probably because Bosko looks like this:


      Doesn't exactly play well with the more culturally sensitive crowd of... well really any time after 1950. According to Warner Brothers historians, any resemblance Bosko may have had to an ape, combined with his black skin, was purely coincidental and there was never any racial implication to the playful character.

      In 1931, Warner would follow-up Bosko and the Looney Tunes cartoons with Merrie Melodies, another obvious play against Silly Symphonies, this time with the goal of giving more air time to the extensive Warner Brothers music catalog. Unlike the Looney Tunes episodes which frequently would have original scores, a contract requirement mandated that every Merrie Melodies episode had to contain at least one performance of a song owned by Warner Bros. As essentially the world's first music videos, nearly fifty years before MTV, Merrie Melodies would frequently contain less than memorable, unnamed, animal characters performing nonsensical acts that were vaguely relevant to the backing song... so very little difference from the music videos we now know and love.

      In 1933, Harman and Ising would move their cartoon operation to MGM under the moniker Happy Harmonies, taking Bosko with them. Schlesinger would continue producing Looney Tunes for Warner Brothers with few main character successes and Merrie Melodies continued to flourish as medium to share/sell the WB music catalog. In 1935, Schlesinger would team up with Tex Avery, and later Bob Clampett, Chuck Jones, Robert McKimson, and finally get the hits he had been hoping for since Disney's debut of Willie. 1935 saw the introduction of Porky Pig, followed by Daffy in 1937, and Merrie Melodies would have the first appearance of Elmer Fudd and, of course, his nemesis Bugs Bunny, in 1940.

      Meanwhile, Disney would continue to innovate amination with continuous movement and cell "tinting" in order to show limited color. These would be followed, in 1932, with full blown technicolor distribution, in 1933, by RCA optical sound-on-film system, and, in 1937, the first use of the Walt's multiplane camera which would, arguably, be the biggest innovation in animation since the flip book. In addition to the innovations, Disney would receive several Academy Awards for Best Animated Short. The trajectory of what had once been the great battle of the "musical follies" had split drastically. Disney would show the final Silly Symphony in 1939 with Walt later stating that, “we used them to test and perfect the color and animation techniques we employed later in full-length feature pictures like Cinderella, Snow White, and Fantasia.” Ultimately, Looney Tunes and the team and Warner Brothers were concerned about how a cartoon could make their music business more profitable while Disney, and his team, were figuring out how animation could be a cinematic medium in order to change the world.

      Leon Schlesinger's team were ultimately fine with this direction as they continued to borrow the animation methods that Disney innovated for use in their episodic shorts. By 1941, the popular characters between Merrie Melodies and Looney Tunes were "cameoing" in each other's shorts regularly and that, along with the mandatory Warner Brothers music contract requirement being lifted from the production of Merrie Melodies, allowed the LA animation studio to release more frequently and with higher production value. However, in order to occasionally go back to his roots, the Looney Tunes musical director, Carl Stalling (yes, the same Stalling which started the whole "musical novelty" genre with Disney over a decade earlier), would toss in Warner Brothers classic tune from time to time.

      By 1945, Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies were both shown in full color, with very little difference between the two, and Warner Brothers would frequently charge more for the increased length specials cartoons headlined by Bugs Bunny, who, really until the success of the Disney Parks was America's most recognizable cartoon character.

      I know what you are thinking, what happened to Happy Harmonies?! Don't worry, I was just as curious. Turns out that in 1935, after the movement of Bosko to MGM ownership, he would be redrawn and revealed as the "new Bosko." Unfortunately, they went a bit deeper on the now obvious racial side of things, this time making Bosko a young boy from Africa. Ultimately, Happy Harmonies would end in 1938 after the production of only 37 episodes over four years. Of the 37, nearly half would later receive severe criticism for their less than flattering caricatures of popular African American personalities of the time or other blatantly racist propaganda.

      In case you are curious, I was able to track down the first episodes of all four of the "Musical Follies" of the early cartoon era. It is interesting to see what passed as acceptable and/or entertaining nearly a century ago and, in the end, the best takeaway that I have is that the creators of Cuphead did a phenomenal job capturing that medium and era.

      Silly Symphonies:

      Looney Tunes:

      Merrie Melodies:

      Happy Harmonies:

      What is the relationship between the directors of Gravity and Revenant like?

      While Alfonso Cuarón and Alejandro González Iñárritu, are quite the besties, their camaraderie is really a trio with famed director Guillermo del Toro finalizing the group. All three grew up in Mexico and now years later are often referred to as cinema's Three Amigos. Though their films all have a very distinctive style, it is obvious that their 25-year friendship have had a measurable impact on their work. Over the years they have mutually opined on each other's work in ways only close friends can do. Del Toro once relating a discussion the three had about Inarritu's Birdman, "I'll tell him if it's [garbage]. That's what friends do." Along a similar vein, Cuarón casually mentions that "There's no film I do that doesn't go through them, their eyes and their hands."

      Their stories are all pretty different but all had some roots in the entertainment business. From Del Toro's beginnings as a special effects and makeup artist, Iñárritu as a moderately successful radio DJ in Mexico City, and Cuarón as a lowly assistant director for a low budget Mexican television network. They have consistently leveraged each other for an unbiased opinion of their works since their initial introductions in the early 1990s. Their lives have woven around each other in ways that will probably be the main plot point of an expose on the early-aughts film world and the influences of the Three Amigos. This film/documentary will no doubt be called the Three Amigos and will have none of the fantastic visuals of Del Toro, the darkly twisted plots of Iñárritu, or the bizarrely deep tales of Cuarón. But it will, if it nothing else, be an entertaining report of a decades long friendship and the impact it has had on the film industry overall.

    • Fan Art Friday #93: RT Christmas Tree by Dangerst

      1 month ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      It’s time for our weekly look at the best Rooster Teeth fan art from our community, curated by the fine folks at BIGBITE!

      This week’s featured artist is Daniel Gerstner, AKA @Dangerst, for this 3D Rooster Teeth Christmas tree.


      Daniel lives in Georgia, where he’s a freelance 3D Generalist currently on the hunt for steady employment. To create this piece, he made the ornaments/lights in ZBrush and unwrapped them in Maya, the tree in Speedtree Modeler, the textures in Substance Painter, and the final render in V-ray. Overall, it took about nine hours to complete.


      Want a chance to be featured in future Fan Art Fridays? Head over to the Fan Art Friday thread in the Art forum to find out how!

    • Answers to Questions Posed in RT Podcast #458

      1 month ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      It's time for our regular segment in which @Gafgarian (AKA Jeremiah Palmer) provides answers to the burning questions left unanswered in each episode of the Rooster Teeth Podcast. Read on to get closure for The Sax Machine Plays On – #458.


      Scaramucci Poochie video?

      The original Scaramucci Poochie video has actually been pulled from Jimmy Kimmel's official channel. Here is a reupload of the short clip, though.

      Did Scaramucci give up his business?

      Prior to beginning his 10-day tenure as the White House communications director, Scaramucci did sell his 43.8% share in SkyBridge Capital to HNA Group, a Chinese holding company. Analysts have estimated the value of this sale to be north of $50 million easily. Additionally, he resigned from his position as chief strategy officer and senior vice president at the Export-Import Bank on July 25th. The sale of his shares in SkyBridge were closed in January when Scaramucci stepped down as a managing partner in order to "take a different senior job with the Trump administration." Ultimately, Reince Priebus would successfully block this appointment for months until Scaramucci's July 21st appointment to the position following Spicer's removal. Priebus would be replaced shortly after by John Kelly, who would, as one of his first duties in the new role, remove Scaramucci from his coveted position.

      Unfortunately for the Long Island born entrepreneur, he neglected to obtain a "certificate of divestiture" during his limited time with the Trump administration. This certificate allows federal employees who give up assets for reasons of potential conflicts of interest to be exempt from certain capital gains taxes and requirements. Without this certificate, Scaramucci will likely feel the full brunt of his share sale to HNA Group. This may end up being as much as $12 million owed.

      How many Jews are in the world?

      As of a 2016 census, there are around 14.4 million Jews in the world. Of that number, roughly 8 million live outside of Israel. A further study by the Diaspora Affairs Ministry states that greater than 80% of those 8 million have little to no involvement with their heritage.

      What is off-limits with Whole30?

      We went over this in a bit more detail previously but the quick answer is no added sugar or artificial sweeteners, alcohol, grains, legumes, or dairy. There are very few exceptions to these rules. In addition, the rules state that there is to be "no recreating baked goods, junk foods, or treats." In other words, you are not allowed to use a combination of "on-limits" food in order to create a reasonable facsimile of one of the off-limits items. This is because part of the goal is to cleanse the mind, as well as the body, from any attachments to specific foods, tastes, or cravings.

      Can trumpet players inflate their cheeks at will?

      There are a few things to be reviewed here. The first is that the common picture most get in their heads with regards to the "puffed cheeks" of a trumpet player is the below iconic gif (with a hard "g") of jazz legend Dizzy Gillespie.


      The important takeaway from this obvious freak of nature is that he was obviously a freak of nature. It was originally thought that Gillespie seemed to slowly develop a condition known as laryngocele. This is an empty sac which sits along either side of a person's larynx. This sac's connection to the voice box allows it to expand with a pressure increase inside the mouth. This condition typically occurs naturally at birth due to genetic malformations. It was later discovered that, in Gillespie's case, it was the insane amount of incorrect trumpet playing which caused his cheeks and throat to deform. Ultimately, Gillespie was a prolific trumpet player because he was always playing the trumpet. Peers openly envied his stamina on stage as he was able to easily perform three hour concerts, often rolling one song right into another. This stamina in the live performance music industry was, and still is unheard of. Dizzy had built up his stamina by spending the majority of his waking hours with a trumped against his mouth.

      It is now known that Gillespie actually had what is more commonly referred to as "Glassblower's disease." His commitment to practice and performance would eventually lead to this "disease" which is essentially the extreme elasticity of a person's cheeks. As can be guessed from the name, it is not uncommon among glassblowers who spend a significant portion of their career blowing with high pressure through a narrow metal pipe. This condition can, and is taught to, be prevented in trumpet players by being shown correct embouchure during initial training. An embouchure is simply the form in which a person puts their mouth to a brass or wind instrument. While there is some small debate about what makes a "perfect" embouchure and how much it impacts a player's sound, range, or general ability to play, most have agreed that having a consistent and practised embouchure will generally create a better sound and help to prevent cheeks like Gillespie. Part of this training is the idea that the puffing of a player's cheeks should be controlled and should avoid any real stretching against the elastic limits of the person's cheeks. It is known among jazz historians and trumpet players that Dizzy Gillespie had a relatively poor embouchure which was likely never corrected when he first started playing. This poor technique combined with his exceptionally long hours of constant playing and training would eventually lead his cheeks to be, arguably, more famous than his playing.

      Pufferfish inflates with water?

      Yes... sometimes. They are commonly known by many names, but the most scientifically accepted common nomenclature are the pufferfish and the porcupine fish, these fish are members of the slightly different Tetraodontidae and Diodontidae families, respectively, and have all evolved to protect themselves from predators by quickly increasing their size by as much as three times their normal size.

      There are over 100 different species of pufferfish, with variations is diet, coloring, location, additional body attributes such as small spikes or ridges, and size. This latter trait actually has a pretty large range, with the smallest pufferfish, the dwarf pufferfish of Southwest India, measuring at less than inch and the largest, the stellate pufferfish, known to grow up to 47 inches in length. Both of these are before "puffing" and while the stellate fish is typically capable of relatively small expansion when compared to its smaller relatives, having a four foot long, 1.5 foot diameter fish, suddenly puff up to a three foot fish featured beach ball in front of you, would be quite the intimidating sight.

      "Puffing" is something that they instinctively understand the mechanics of upon hatching and will practice by attempting to puff despite them being largely unable to accomplish a complete "puffing" prior to adulthood. These "mechanics" involve the forced unhinging of their jaw in order to suck in more water... or air if the fish is out of water. Yep, they DO puff up with air if they happen to be out of water, alive, and attempting to puff themselves up. Initially all of this water, or air, is stored in the mouth allowing for easy expulsion in the event that the potential threat immediately retreats. If that is not the case, millions of years of evolution allows the pufferfish to essentially block off his mouth by moving the valve that would normally block his esophagus forward. Afterward, the body contracts forcing the water, or air, down the esophagus and ultimately inflating the stomach up to three times larger. Deflating is much the same process in reverse, obviously, however, because of their muscle structure, their ability to expel water, or air, from their stomach is a slower process which is typically done in multiple steps as opposed to the singular step of the forced inflation.

      It is important to point out that pufferfish are still fish and, while they have the ability to puff with air, they have not evolved to do so and it just happens to work because of their method of sucking in and swallowing water. This makes it very difficult for them to expel air in order to deflate and it is not uncommon for a puffer to swallow too much air during capture. The excess air can become trapped in the stomach which can, in many cases, lead to their death. With that in mind, @burnie is correct that puffers do, in nearly all cases, puff with water however they are capable, and have even survived, puffing with air instead.

      Blobfish at depth?


      Most of us know the blobfish from the unfortunate image on the bottom, which, I'll be honest, vaguely resembles my great-uncle Beep. This image, nicknamed Mr. Blobby, is of a 2003 specimen captured off the coast of New Zealand at a depth of over a kilometer. There are eleven known species of blobfishes, also known as fathead sculpins or psychrolutes, and all are typically found at extreme depths. Creatures living at these depths have evolved various biological and anatomical attributes in order to help them survive under immense the immense pressure. Some of these attributes include gas-filled swim bladders and, in the case of Mr. Blobby, malleable and spongy bones. It is these soft bones that cause Mr. Blobby at depth look like the fish in the top image because their jelly like bodies use water as their primary structural support. Unfortunately, this means that, when brought to the surface, Mr. Blobby collapses and becomes the jellied mass in the bottom picture.

      Interestingly, my research also led me to find out that the majority of blobfish photos online are not actually blobfish and, in fact, are usually not even fish. Because of their rarity, most images of "blobfish" are actually silicone replicas of Mr. Blobby based on the popular image above and a plasticine model. Due to the captured detail of this original model, the photos taken of their silicone molds are easily mistaken as real blobfish and have spread a false narrative that all decompressed blobfish look just like Mr. Blobby. However, because of their very soft bone structure, blobfish that go through decompression tend to have very different looks based on their individual anatomical traits and other various factors that can shift their appearance greatly.

      Nobel and dynamite?

      Alfred Nobel would hold over 350 patents across varying fields, including electrochemistry, optics, biology, physiology, and of course engineering. While it was Italian chemist, Ascanio Sobrero, who invented nitroglycerin in 1846, it was Nobel who recognized the unfortunate volatility of the explosive was hindering its uses. In 1863, Nobel would patent a safer blasting cap for nitroglycerin detonation and, in 1866, dynamite was born. Nobel created dynamite by mixing nitroglycerin with silica into a far more stable paste. He would later fashion this paste into hardened thin cylinders in order to easily slip them into established bore holes during excavation.

      This success came only a year after building the Alfred Nobel & Co. Factory near Hamburg, Germany and it was the mass marketing of Nobel's little controlled explosion stick which led to the construction of the United States Blasting Oil Company only a year later and the US patent on his invention would come the following year, in 1867. Nobel would go on to, as previously mentioned, invent several industry leading innovations including an improved blasting cap, or detonator, blasting gelatin, and smokeless blasting powder he referred to as ballistite. Ballistite, though not terribly successful in his industry would later be a key base in solid fuel propellant for rockets.

      Nobel would spend the next 30 years refining and inventing new forms of explosives but it is clear from all accounts about this time that the international political world, namely the growing levels of destruction which the countries of the world were attempting to reach, weighed heavily on the Swedish industrialist. In 1876 he would meet with Austrian countess Bertha von Suttner who would have a profound impact on this world view. While she largely preached about forced peace and protested the growing military machine, Nobel dedicated the last ten years of his life to working directly within that machine. Using his factories and connections to design and further military technology in the advancement of cannon and rocket design as well as, of course, explosive powders. During their conversations on the topic, Nobel would relate to Suttner that "Perhaps my factories will put an end to war sooner than your congresses: on the day that two army corps can mutually annihilate each other in a second, all civilised nations will surely recoil with horror and disband their troops." Nobel did not live to see the unbridled mutually destructive military machine released upon the world in World War I though, in some ways, though controversially, his prediction did begin to materialize with the advent of atomic warfare with World War II.

      Regardless, it was no doubt due to these conversations with Suttner that upon his death in 1896, the Nobel Prize foundation's creation at the direction of his will also included the Peace Prize. He stipulated that "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses," should be awarded the Nobel Peace prize. Nobel prize categories are in the fields of physics, chemistry, literature, economics, medicine, and peace. While all Nobel prizes are awarded to highlight a significant act of progress and/or research in a topic which, as a whole, is seen to "better" mankind, perhaps none are inherently controversial as the last category. Some of the more controversial include the "fan-service-like" awarding of the prize to Barack Obama only nine months into his first term or the 1994 honoring of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, whose award was as a result of Israeli peace talks which ultimately failed to broker any peace.

      Another prolific scientist who may be one of the few people able to truly empathize with Nobel, Albert Einstein, said of Nobel's Peace prize, "Alfred Nobel invented an explosive more powerful than any then known – an exceedingly effective means of destruction. To atone for this 'accomplishment' and to relieve his conscience, he instituted his award for the promotion of peace." While this is obviously much conjecture, it is likely not far from the truth.

      Did they wax Kit Harrington's ass for boat sex?

      According to a recent interview with Jonathan Ross, Harrington claims to have a "naturally hairless bum." Jon Snow went on to say that, upon learning of his butt's cameo, he "did his homework" and performed "lots of squats" in preparation; however, no waxing was necessary.

    • Fan Art Friday #93: Sugar Pine 7 Logo by Xuelder

      1 month ago

      Rooster Teeth Poppycock

      It’s time for our weekly look at the best Rooster Teeth fan art from our community, curated by the fine folks at BIGBITE!

      This week’s featured artist is Christian, AKA @Xuelder, for this Sugar Pine 7 logo.


      Christian lives in New Orleans, where he’s working on an indie game project and looking into freelance in the greater games industry and any art opportunities.

      To create this illustration, Christian used a program called Marmoset Hexels and traced over the regular Sugar Pine 7 logo to make a scalable vector. Using shaders, gradients, and post effects, he added the animatic VHS effects. The text was imported from Fire Alpaca.


      Want a chance to be featured in future Fan Art Fridays? Head over to the Fan Art Friday thread in the Art forum to find out how!

  • Forums

    Rooster Teeth Articles

    New Topic

    Frustrated that watching videos makes it too obvious that you're slacking off at work? Have no fear – our articles are much easier to hide.

    All Topics (1 Topics)