Fractal illusions

Fractal illusions

Optical Illusions are back! Get ready to trick your eyes with some cool illusions that show the difference between visual perception and reality.

Sometimes we need to be told that something is there to be able to see it, and at times, you can spot it at first shot. Can you spot a distinct figure in the image below

Are you feeling dizzy seeing this  illusion? I love this one, it Trippy fractal optical illusion in and out, one moment it feels like the Fluid are moving . “I can’t live my life…understand…” So focus and see the image moving.

close the window

close the window

ohhh shit ....my Husband!

ohhh shit ....my Husband!

Batman vs Sherlock

Batman vs Sherlock

Can Sherlock Holmes solve the mystery of who the man behind Batman’s mask is? Read to find out!

I've for a long while been itching to see Batman race Sherlock Holmes to tackle a riddle. Then again, Batman's suppliers provide for him an uncalled for playing point over Sherlock Holmes, so... The race will eventually be set around 1890. Batman time-travels there some way or another. The homicide to explore is the wrongdoing from A Study in Scarlet, yet I don't think it truly matters what riddle they're settling. In the event that you don't need A Study in Scarlet ruined, you may not have any desire to keep perusing. The examination is of a man lying in a room, without any outer surface wounds or indications of battle, who is dead on the carpet. The statement "Rache" is composed on the divider in blood, however, there are no cuts on the dead man's body. The man has a wedding ring on his individual. For more data, quest for the book on the web. It ought to be some place free of charge, where you can read it as an on-line content. Batman doesn't have his tool cinch or gear, just an amplifying glass. Sherlock Holmes has an amplifying glass. Who understands the secret first? Perhaps all the more essential, who secures the executioner first? I'm altering my opinion. Initially I said Batman would win. Nonetheless, this is the reason I think Holmes would win: 

Despite the fact that Batman is more knowledgeable of everything, Holmes matches his level of information on location. All the more essentially, we have verified that Holmes has the capacity see more from a wrongdoing scene than most- -potentially considerably more than Batman. For this situation, while Batman would likely break down the body, derive the reason for death was toxic substance, and a afterword understand that the saying "Rache" means revenge, I don't think he would have the capacity to explain the puzzle just from that data. He would likely look to scrutinize the gatekeeper who discovered the body, and proceed from that point. Then again, Sherlock Holmes (in the book) has the capacity focus the stature of the executioner, his appearance, and above all, his thought process, all from watching the foot shaped impressions around the wrongdoing scene. Just for this first occasion in the examination, Holmes is now more distant than Batman. 

Batman's ruin is that he isn't ready to think "regressively." Holmes clarifies that that is the means by which he fathoms puzzles so capably. As opposed to utilize a procedure of disposal (narrowing down conceivable suspects), he perceives the suspect's characteristics before constantly reaching him.

GO Poke Yourself

GO Poke Yourself

Smile, it's better than a poke in the eye.
Stand-up comedy and comedy in general is the ultimate form of free speech, because you get to poke holes in all the pretentious bubbles politicians and pundits and popes and pretenders try to float over our heads.I actually regard Facebook as a huge bore, but I cannot refrain from participating in it. I guess I crave the feeling of hope it gives me to think that today will be different from yesterday, that I will find an interesting comment or poke or video, and on the extremely rare occasion when that happens, I am just thrilled.I want to poke holes in the erroneous beliefs about what fame provides. It won't raise your self-esteem, it won't create profound connection, it's not going to heal your childhood traumas, it's only going to amplify them. You're going to be subject to a lot of criticism and praise, both of which are violent in their own ways.

DO I have time for your bullshit

DO I have time for your bullshit....The contemporary proliferation of bullshit also has deeper sources, in various forms of skepticism which deny that we can have any reliable access to an objective reality and which therefore reject the possibility of knowing how things truly are. These "anti-realist" doctrines undermine confidence in the value of disinterested efforts to determine what is true and what is false, and even in the intelligibility of the notion of objective inquiry. One response to this loss of confidence has been a retreat from the discipline required by dedication to the ideal of correctness to a quite different sort of discipline, which is imposed by pursuit of an alternative ideal of sincerity. Rather than seeking primarily to arrive at accurate representations of a common world, the individual turns toward trying to provide honest representations of himself. Convinced that reality has no inherent nature, which he might hope to identify as the truth about things, he devotes himself to being true to his own nature. It is as though he decides that since it makes no sense to try to be true to the facts, he must therefore try instead to be true to himself.

But it is preposterous to imagine that we ourselves are determinate, and hence susceptible both to correct and to incorrect descriptions, while supposing that the ascription of determinacy to anything else has been exposed as a mistake. As conscious beings, we exist only in response to other things, and we cannot know ourselves at all without knowing them. Moreover, there is nothing in theory, and certainly nothing in experience, to support the extraordinary judgment that it is the truth about himself that is the easiest for a person to know. Facts about ourselves are not peculiarly solid and resistant to skeptical dissolution. Our natures are, indeed, elusively insubstantial -- notoriously less stable and less inherent than the natures of other things. And insofar as this is the case, sincerity itself is bullshit.

Gerhard Gluck

Gerhard Gluck 

Gerhard Glück (* July 1944 in Bad Vilbel ) is a German cartoonist .
Fortunately grew up in Frankfurt am Main and studied in Kassel graphic design and art education. From 1972, first cartoons in the Hessian general , cover pictures and illustrations for the magazine of the Süddeutsche Zeitung , the manager magazine , among other things since 1991 his cartoons are published monthly in NZZ Folio , the magazine of the Neue Zürcher Zeitung , and since 1994 in the satirical magazine Eulenspiegel . Occasionally we discover his illustrations in the weekly newspaper The time and in the magazine Cicero . His cartoon books were published by Lappan publisher , who is also his picture books and illustrated by luck gift editions of the poems of Heinz Erhardt , Ringelnatz and Christian Morgenstern laid. He also illustrated book covers and lyrics for dtv and other publishers. The work of Gerhard luck have won many awards and has exhibited recently in Frankfurt ("Good luck in Frankfurt", 2006), Zurich ("Gerhard happiness, art & Co", 2006), Cologne ("Gerhard happiness", 2008/09) Constance ("Gerhard luck: Art & Co.", 2009/10), Vienna ("Gerhard lucky: Lucky for the Arts", 2010/11), Satiricum in the summer palace Greiz ("Gerhard Glück: Art & Co." , 2011) and in Kassel (lock Wilhelm height: "Gerhard happiness, art & Co", Caricaturas: "That's the limit", 2014)