+
“A balm for the soul”
  review on Goodreads
GOOD PEOPLE Book
upworthy
Heroes

Firefighters are killed every year by wildfires. These scientists want to change that.

True
NC State

In November 2016, huge forest fires swept through eight southern states in the U.S.

They burned more than 119,000 acres and shrouded regions from Alabama up to West Virginia in smoke. Parks shut down, residents evacuated, and more than 6,300 firefighters were deployed to the area to try to contain these raging fires.

As devastating as these fires were, wildfires are actually pretty common. On average,the United States seesmore than 100,000 wildfires every year in fact, the U.S. Wildfire Tracker shows 45 large fires burning in the United States at the time of this writing.


Embers fly around a firefighter at the Sherpa Fire of June 2016 near Santa Barbara, California. Photo by David McNew/AFP/Getty Images

This means that right now, firefighters are putting their lives on the line as they respond to wildland fires. And because of climate change, the fires are becoming more frequent, intense, and long-burning — making them even more dangerous to the men and women whose job it is to try and put them out.

In July 2013, 19 firefighters were killed in an Arizona wildfire at Yarnell Hill, the worst wildfire tragedy in U.S. history since 1933.  

An aerial view of the charred landscape after a wildfire swept through the area on July 7, 2013 in Yarnell, Arizona. Photo by Laura Segall/ Getty Images.

When firefighters are overrun by flames and there is nowhere to escape, as was the case at Yarnell Hill, they have one last-ditch survival tool at their disposal: portable fire shelters.

These emergency shelters have been standard issue for wildland firefighters since 1977. They look a little bit like an aluminized sleeping bag, and they are made of layers of fire-resistant materials, such as fiberglass and silica fabrics, with a reflective outer shell. The current models are designed to withstand radiant heat temperatures of about 500 degrees Fahrenheit to shield against intermittent flames and trap breathable air.

So, if there is no other option available, the firefighters deploy one of these shelters — they only take about 20 seconds to open — climb inside, strap themselves in, and lie face-down to the ground, feet towards the flames. Then, they try to ride out the fire.

A portable shelter used by firefighters as a last-resort safety precaution. Image via NC State/YouTube.

If flames don't come into direct contact with the shelters, these shelters can provide precious minutes of protection. But if flames do directly contact them, they don’t hold up long. And, sadly, they were not enough to save the firefighters at the Yarnell Hill wildfire.

Roger Barker and his colleagues at the Textile Protection and Comfort Center have worked closely with first responders for decades, but after this tragedy, they decided to try and help.  

With funding from FEMA, they set about improving these shelters by developing new fire-resistant materials in their laboratory.

"This is one way that our research could have a real potential benefit in terms of helping protect them and perhaps even save some lives," Barker says.

Of course, this is no easy task.

A laboratory test at NC State. Image via NC State/YouTube.

Any new material has to be light and easily deployable, Barker explains. It also has to insulate so that the temperature of the air inside the shelter stays breathable. It needs to protect the firefighters not only from the radiant heat of the fire close to the shelter, but it also needs to hold up — at least for a few minutes — if flames actually reach the shelter. It also can't release any toxic fumes or gases as it heats up.

"We obviously can’t make anything that you could carry around be [completely] fire-proof," Barker says. But if you can make something hold up for a few minutes (instead of seconds) if it catches fire, he explains, "that would make all the difference for their survivability."

A camera view of the inside of a shelter during a lab test. Image via NC State/YouTube.

The team made several new materials and tested them. The first trials involved only small swatches, then they built entire prototype shelters and tested them inside a simulator — called the Fire Dome — that produces a fireball over 2,000 degrees and big enough to engulf the whole shelter.

So far, the materials they made are holding up.

"We've come up with several candidates of materials. We've fabricated them, and we've tested them," Barker explains, "and so far, we are really pleased with the results that we're seeing."

Next, he says, they need to test their prototypes in the field.

A view of one of the field tests of the new materials. Image via NC State/YouTube.

Working alongside NC State's College of Natural Resources and firefighters, the team plans to test their materials and prototype shelters during controlled or prescribed fires to see how they hold up in as realistic of conditions as possible.

These tests will give the researchers insight into what the conditions are like in an actual forest fire.

In fact, they have already observed a few smaller-scale tests in forests during prescribed burns over a nine-week intense summer camp, and the have learned a lot from their close partnership with working firefighters who actually use these shelters.  

"These are human lives. That’s what’s important to realize. You work in a laboratory, but it affects real people," John Morton-Aslanis, a research associate at the textile center, emphasized.

A firefighter approaches a wildfire in the Santa Cruz Mountains in California in September 2016. Photo by Josh Edelson/AFP/Getty Images.

"This is an extremely important project," said Joe Roise, professor of forestry and environmental resources at the College of Natural Resources. "And if we can get a better product out for them to use, it will change the situation across not just North America, but across the world."

Sponsored

How can riding a bike help beat cancer? Just ask Reid Moritz, 10-year-old survivor and leader of his own “wolfpack”

Every year, Reid and his pack participate in Cycle for Survival to help raise money for the rare cancer research that’s helped him and so many others. You can too.

all photos courtesy of Reid Moritz

Together, let’s help fuel the next big breakthrough in cancer research

True

There are many things that ten-year-old Reid Wolf Moritz loves. His family, making watches (yes, really), basketball, cars (especially Ferraris), collecting super, ultra-rare Pokémon cards…and putting the pedal to the medal at Cycle for Survival.

Cycle for Survival is the official rare cancer fundraising program of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK). One hundred percent of every dollar raised at Cycle for Survival events supports rare cancer research and lifesaving clinical trials at MSK.

At only two years old, Reid was diagnosed with pilocytic astrocytoma, a rare type of brain tumor.

Pediatric cancer research is severely underfunded. When standard treatments don't work, families rely on breakthrough clinical trials to give their children a real shot at long-term survival.

When Reid’s chemotherapy and brain surgery didn’t work, he was able to participate in one of MSK’s clinical trials, where he’s received some incredible results. “Memorial Sloan Kettering has done so much for me. It's just so nice how they did all this for me. They're just the best hospital ever,” Reid recalls.

And that’s why every year, you’ll find Reid with his team, aptly named Reid's Wolfpack, riding at Cycle for Survival. It’s just Reid’s way of paying it forward so that even more kids can have similar opportunities.

“I love sharing my story to inspire other kids to PERSEVERE, STAY STRONG and NEVER GIVE UP while also raising money for my amazing doctors and researchers to help other kids like me.”

Reid remembers the joy felt bouncing on his father’s shoulder and hearing the crowd cheer during his first Cycle for Survival ride. As he can attest, each fundraising event feels more like a party, with plenty of dancing, singing and celebrating.

Hoping to spread more of that positivity, Reid and his family started the Cycle for Survival team, Reid’s Wolfpack, which has raised close to $750,000 over the past eight years. All that money goes directly to Reid’s Neuro-Oncology team at Memorial Sloan Kettering.

In addition to cheering on participants and raising good vibes at Cycle for Survival events, Reid even designs some pretty epic looking merch—like basketball shorts, jerseys, and hoodies—to help raise money.

If you’re looking to help kids just like Reid, and have a ton of fun doing it, you’re in luck. Cycle for Survival events are held at Equinox locations nationwide, and welcome experienced riders and complete newbies alike. You can even join Reid and his Wolfpack in select cities!

And if cycling in any form isn’t your thing, a little donation really does go a long way.

Together, let’s help fuel the next big breakthrough in cancer research. Find out more information by checking out cycleforsurvival.org or filling out this interest form.

Education

Why didn't people smile in old photographs? It wasn't just about the long exposure times.

People blame these serious expressions on how long they had to sit for a photo, but that's not the whole picture.

Public domain images

Photos from the 1800s were so serious.

If you've ever perused photographs from the 19th and early 20th century, you've likely noticed how serious everyone looked. If there's a hint of a smile at all, it's oh-so-slight, but more often than not, our ancestors looked like they were sitting for a sepia-toned mug shot or being held for ransom or something. Why didn't people smile in photographs? Was life just so hard back then that nobody smiled? Were dour, sour expressions just the norm?

Most often, people's serious faces in old photographs are blamed on the long exposure time of early cameras, and that's true. Taking a photo was not an instant event like it is now; people had to sit still for many minutes in the 1800s to have their photo taken.

Ever try holding a smile for only one full minute? It's surprisingly difficult and very quickly becomes unnatural. A smile is a quick reaction, not a constant state of expression. Even people we think of as "smiley" aren't toting around full-toothed smiles for minutes on end. When you had to be still for several minutes to get your photo taken, there was just no way you were going to hold a smile for that long.

But there are other reasons besides long exposure times that people didn't smile in early photographs.

1800s photographsWhy so serious? Public domain

The non-smiling precedent had already been set by centuries of painted portraits

The long exposure times for early photos may have contributed to serious facial expressions, but so did the painted portraits that came before them. Look at all of the portraits of famous people throughout history prior to cameras. Sitting to be painted took hours, so smiling was out of the question. Other than the smallest of lip curls like the Mona Lisa, people didn't smile for painted portraits, so why would people suddenly think it normal to flash their pearly whites (which were not at all pearly white back then) for a photographed one? It simply wasn't how it was done.

A smirk? Sometimes. A full-on smile? Practically never.

"Mona Lisa" by Leonardo da Vinci, painted in 1503Public domain

Smiling usually indicated that you were a fool or a drunkard

Our perceptions of smiling have changed dramatically since the 1800s. In explaining why smiling was considered taboo in portraits and early photos, art historian Nicholas Jeeves wrote in Public Domain Review:

"Smiling also has a large number of discrete cultural and historical significances, few of them in line with our modern perceptions of it being a physical signal of warmth, enjoyment, or indeed of happiness. By the 17th century in Europe it was a well-established fact that the only people who smiled broadly, in life and in art, were the poor, the lewd, the drunk, the innocent, and the entertainment […] Showing the teeth was for the upper classes a more-or-less formal breach of etiquette."

"Malle Babbe" by Frans Hals, sometime between 1640 and 1646Public domain

In other words, to the Western sensibility, smiling was seen as undignified. If a painter did put a smile on the subject of a portrait, it was a notable departure from the norm, a deliberate stylistic choice that conveyed something about the artist or the subject.

Even the artists who attempted it had less-than-ideal results. It turns out that smiling is such a lively, fleeting expression that the artistically static nature of painted portraits didn't lend itself well to showcasing it. Paintings that did have subjects smiling made them look weird or disturbing or drunk. Simply put, painting a genuine, natural smile didn't work well in portraits of old.

As a result, the perception that smiling was an indication of lewdness or impropriety stuck for quite a while, even after Kodak created snapshot cameras that didn't have the long exposure time problem. Even happy occasions had people nary a hint of joy in the photographs that documented them.

wedding party photoEven wedding party photos didn't appear to be joyful occasions.Wikimedia Commons

Then along came movies, which may have changed the whole picture

So how did we end up coming around to grinning ear to ear for photos? Interestingly enough, it may have been the advent of motion pictures that pushed us towards smiling being the norm.

Photos could have captured people's natural smiles earlier—we had the technology for taking instant photos—but culturally, smiling wasn't widely favored for photos until the 1920s. One theory about that timing is that the explosion of movies enabled us to see emotions of all kinds playing out on screen, documenting the fleeting expressions that portraits had failed to capture. Culturally, it became normalized to capture, display and see all kind of emotions on people's faces. As we got more used to that, photo portraits began portraying people in a range of expression rather than trying to create a neutral image of a person's face.

Changing our own perceptions of old photo portraits to view them as neutral rather than grumpy or serious can help us remember that people back then were not a bunch of sourpusses, but people who experienced as wide a range of emotion as we do, including joy and mirth. Unfortunately, we just rarely get to see them in that state before the 1920s.


116 years ago, the Pasterze glacier in the Austria's Eastern Alps was postcard perfect:

Snowy peaks. Windswept valleys. Ruddy-cheeked mountain children in lederhosen playing "Edelweiss" on the flugelhorn.

But a lot has changed since 1900.

Much of it has changed for the better! We've eradicated smallpox, Hitler is dead, and the song "Billie Jean" exists now.

On the downside, the Earth has gotten a lot hotter. A lot hotter.

The 15 warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998. July 2016 was the planet's hottest month — ever.

Unsurprisingly, man-made climate change has wreaked havoc on the planet's glaciers — including the Pasterze, which is Austria's largest.

Just how much havoc are we talking about? Well...

A series of stunning photos, published in August, show just how far the glacier has receded since its heyday.

Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images.

First measured in 1851, the glacier lost half of its mass between that year and 2008.

The glacier today.

Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images.

A marker placed in 1985 shows where the edge of the glacier reached just 31 years ago. You can still see the ice sheet, but just barely, way off in the distance. In between is ... a big, muddy lake.

Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images.

The view from the glacial foot marker from 1995 — 10 years later — isn't much more encouraging.

Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images.

Even in just one year, 2015, the glacier lost an astounding amount of mass — 177 feet, by some estimates.

Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images.

Ice continues to melt daily, and while the dripping makes for a good photo, it's unfortunate news for planet Earth. Glacial melting is one of the three primary causes of sea-level rise.

Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images.

According to a European Environment Agency report, the average temperature in the Alps has increased 2 degrees Celsius in the last 100 years — double the global average.

Beautiful, but ominous, fissures in the glacier.

Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images.

It's not unreasonable to assume that that's why this mountain hut has been abandoned by the flugelhorn-playing children who once probably lived in it.

Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images.

Is there anything we can do to stop climate change besides look at scary glacier photos?

Climate change is, unfortunately, still a robust debate in the United States as many of our elected officials refuse to acknowledge that we humans are the ones doing the changing. As of last year, that list included a whopping 49 senators. Calling them to gently persuade them otherwise would be helpful. Not voting for them if they don't change their minds would be even more so.

There is some tentative good news — the Paris Agreement signed in December 2015 commits 197 countries, including the U.S., to take steps to limit future global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius. While it may be too late for the Pasterze glacier, if we really commit as a world, we might be able to stop ourselves from sinking whole countries and turning Miami into a swimming pool and stuff like that.

And who knows, with a little luck, and a little more not poisoning the sky, we just might recapture a little of that Alpine magic one day.

OK, these guys are Swiss. But who's counting?

Photo by Cristo Vlahos/Wikimedia Commons.

This article originally appeared seven years ago.

@dr.mattmcglasson/Instagram

Pretty sure every cat person feel the same way.

No one would get a dog expecting it to not bark, try to eat human food or need daily walks. And yet people regularly get flummoxed when their just-as-loveable cat exhibits completely natural behaviors like climbing tabletops or scratching at furniture.

Of course, cat people, who delight in adapting their life to make it as enriching as possible for their feline fur babies, know the flaws of this logic. After all, most cats spend more time in the house than their human counterparts. So shouldn’t the house belong just as much to them?

If you answered yes—then this clapback video (from a vet, no less), should have you feeling pretty vindicated. And if you answered no—prepare to see the error of your ways.

Dr. Matt McGlasson is a veterinarian in Kentucky, who also happens to be the proud dad of a 5-year-old special needs cat named Rupaul.

McGlasson recently was told by a viewer that it’s "disgusting" that he allows Rupaul on his furniture (as opposed to human butts only, which are okay, I guess?).

McGlasson’s response to this comment recently racked up over 11.8 million views, with good reason.

In a clip posted to his Instagram, McGlasson holds up Rupaul, who can’t use her hind legs, and shamelessly lists off all the other things he would allow for his kitty, including:

-Cosigning a loan for Rupaul

-Letting Rupaul do his taxes

-Giving Rupaul the passwords to all of his accounts.

-Capital Punishment, which he’s not normally a support of. But if someone hurts Rupaul, “that’s another story."

-Going into a business with Rupaul

-Giving Rupaul $20,000 for bringing him a dead mouse

-Making Rupaul the beneficiary on my life insurance policy.

And last, but certainly not least…letting Rupaul on the furniture.

Put simply: “My cat can do whatever she wants. It's her world. I'm just living in it.”

Down in the comments, fellow cat owners couldn’t agree more with McGlasson’s sentiment.

“My husband picked his new chair based on the cat , the arm had to be wide enough for her to sit whenever she chooses to have quality time with him.”

“I would donate my kidneys to Square if she needed them. Yes… I mean both 😂”

“‘You let your cat sleep with you?’ Ma’am, I’d let him represent me in court.”

“I bought my house for my senior kitties. I wanted to get out of our apartment so they could feel grass beneath their paws again before their time was up.”

Others reiterated how it’s a gift to be able to create a healthy, happy life for a pet, and freaking out about furniture is kind of missing the joint.

“Like I don't understand ppl who r so against cats on furniture. If ur against pets on furniture probably don't have them. Treat your pets with love and respect. When you take an animal into ur home it becomes their home and safe place. All of the things in ur house become a part of their world and cats like to naturally be elevated. My cats do what they want because they aren't pets they are family. They own the place I just live here. Lol,” wrote one person.

Bottom line: climbing is part of a cat’s inherent programming. And if cat owners truly want their home to be a safe space for their kitty, then this should be taken into consideration.

The good news is, there are plenty of cat-friendly ways you can coax them off of furniture, like making sure there are plenty of dedicated cat trees to climb and scratching posts to sink their claws into, or opting for furniture with fabrics that cats don’t love as much, like microfiber.

And as a general rule, cats respond to positive reinforcement, rather than punishment. Contrary to outdated, yet still popular belief, cats don’t “know” when they're being bad. And they will learn to associate their own with negative attention. That’s not fun for anyone.

As McGlasson, or any other pet owner can attest, having their presence in our homes provides so much fulfillment and connection, that small compromises—or large bank loans—are well worth it.

By the way, McGlasson’s TikTok and Instagram are full of hilarious cat content, so be sure to give him a follow.

Not so scary anymore.

Whether you’re a horror aficionado or your scary threshold is at a level 2, you’re bound to be familiar with at least a couple of iconic horror movies.

The horror genre is a huge part of our culture, allowing us to explore the darkest depths of the human psyche within the safety and comfort of home—or a theater, if you dare.

As counterintuitive as it might sound, watching horror movies can be more than stimulating entertainment for some people. It can act as a form of exposure therapy, helping reduce anxiety levels. Of course, this is not the case for everyone, but it certainly helps explain why the genre is so well loved and continues gaining popularity. Even in 2020—arguably an anxiety-inducing year for everyone—horror movies were the only ones to actually see a surge in ticket sales. Sometimes it’s just more cathartic to see an actual monster wreaking havoc in a fictional world than it is to think about all real-world worries that haunt our imaginations.

Still, not everyone can shake off that scary feeling that a horror movie elicits, and therefore might not partake in watching. Nonetheless, they might enjoy seeing the edge taken off with a bit of lighthearted humor. After all, it’s often recommended to watch a little comedy after a horror flick to clean out the heebie jeebies.

Jimmy Fallon asked folks to “take a horror movie and add one word to change the plot and tag it with #AddAWordRuinAHorrorMovie for his ever-popular Hashtags segment on “The Tonight Show.”

Granted, some people took liberties with the rules—occasionally replacing a word in the title, for example—but nonetheless, grammatical fun was had. And well-known horror movie plots did undergo hilariously drastic changes.

Below are 23 of the best ones. Enjoy, because even those who can’t handle anything too scary deserve a little spooky entertainment.

1. “The Blair Witch Project Manager” – @ ite_mumma

2. “House of Brazilian Wax” – @omg_is_oscar

3. "Awkward Smile" – @jimmyfallon

4. “Zoom Interview With A Vampire” – @Sohnzie

5. "The Snore Ring (you’ll never sleep again)" – @Janasvox

6. “The Hills Have Googly Eyes” – @DunLahfAtMae

7. “Freddy vs Jason Bateman” – @richg6

8. “The Craft Room” – @EvelynRobinson

9. “See SAW” – @BruceCountyGal

10. “Silence of the Lamb Chops” – @EfrainRSosa

11. "Children of the Candy Corn" – @DjDubay

12. “Man-childs Play” – @DantheDad87

13. “The Amityville Hoarder” – @PamelaMelnick

14. “Carrie Groceries” – @mitchbytes

15. “Hellraiser Burn” – @blumspew

16. “Invasion of the Body Shapers” – @LaughOutLander

17. “Final Destination Wedding” – @EmWilsonMartin

18. “The Invisible Man Bun” – @ryanBartholomee

19. “The Babadook Ellington” – @taradublinrocks

20. “Beetlejuice Cleanse” – @Sohnzie

21. “Rosemary’s Baby Shark…doo,doo,doo, doo, doo, doo, doo." – @seamirac

22. “Nightmare on Elmo Street.” – @elise_milsssss

via GIPHY

@Cantabrana_ added:

“Somehow, this is much scarier.

23. “The Shoe Shining” – @LauraLizVids


This article originally appeared two years ago.

Woman learns lesson in kindness after date apologizes.

How you treat people in the service industry is often used as a measure of what kind of person you are. Arguably, the same could be said for how you treat anyone in a customer-facing job, whether it be the sales associate at a department store, the cashier at McDonald's or the janitor in your office building.

While people may think that these jobs are not skilled positions, they do require an immense amount of skill that has to be learned. The skill just isn't as valued by society as a whole, and sadly, that often leads to people treating those in customer-facing jobs poorly. But when a woman recently went on a date with a potential partner, her poor behavior towards the waitstaff caused him to pause.

The story was shared by a woman by the name of Barbara NOT Barb on Twitter with a lengthy thread about her daughter's recent interaction. Though the details were juicy, it quickly became obvious that kindness is the way to go.

Barbara's daughter works as a server at a high-end restaurant in Los Angeles, and she was asked to bring water to a couple's table in someone else's section to help out. But according to the Twitter thread, when her daughter arrived at the table, the woman at the table started berating and insulting her.

Apparently, the couple, who were on their first date, were waiting for their drink orders from the bar. If you've ever worked in a restaurant, you know that servers don't have anything to do with how quickly your food or alcoholic drinks get made. They keep an eye out for the items as they care for other tables, but either this woman didn't realize that or didn't care, because she yelled at the server for how long it was taking for the drinks. The only mistake this particular server made was being kind to a co-worker and offering to drop off glasses of water.

After the server tried unsuccessfully to de-escalate the situation, the woman demanded to speak to the manager. It's not clear if this was the woman's first date ever, but it was her first date with the stunned man at the table. Since people generally attempt to put their best foot forward on a first date, it's not surprising that the man decided to end the date. But before he did that, he gave a lesson in kindness.

Before the manager could reach the table, the likely embarrassed man intercepted him.

"He asked to close out the tab. Explained it was a first date and that the woman's behavior disgusted him. He paid the tab at the bar and then requested my daughter and the original server come talk to him. He apologized profusely for his date's behavior," Barbara wrote. "Needless to say, everyone was floored, in the best way. The woman had somehow been informed that the date was over. She walked out, head down, and was no longer talking down to anyone."

Being kind to others is one of the easiest things to do. Maybe the woman in question was having a bad day—everyone has them—but our bad days probably shouldn't bleed over onto unsuspecting strangers. Hopefully, the servers and the date got a lesson in kindness and standing up for others.


This article originally appeared last year.