slow clap

Edit: and I didn't even notice the Prince poster the first time

Zyklon B might not have been developed as a chemical weapon, but Haber was instrumental in developing and advocating for the use of chemical weapons explicitly on humans for Germany and Spain both during and after WWI (source)

To elaborate, if it's relevant and they want you to know, they'll tell you without being asked.

If they don't offer, it's none of your business

I COULDN'T QUITE HEAR YOU OVER THE SOUND OF MY CRANKED HOG, BUT I THINK YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT DEFINING GENDER!!!

THE PACK IS ALL ABOUT INCLUSION!! I DON'T CARE HOW YOU MF'ERS SELF IDENTIFY, YOU'RE ALL MY BROTHERS AS LONG AS YOU LOVE CRANKING THAT HOG!!!!

AROOOOOO!

I must have been remembering that his research between the World Wars lead to the development of Zyklon B muddled that up with some other chemist (maybe Otto Ambros?). I'll see if I can find my source.

Edit: probably Richard Kuhn who fell into line and fired Jewish coworkers at the direction of the Nazis or Herman Kolbe who was an outspoken German nationalist and anti-Semite. I use all three of them as examples of prominent scientists behaving badly in my O-Chem course.

Don't get me started on the Haber process. My students will tell you that I can and will go on for half an hour about how it prolonged WW1 and is one of the first commercial processes to make use of Le Chateliers principle.

Also, probably best not to spend too much time idolizing Fritz Haber, ~~as I'm pretty certain he went on to become a staunch supporter of Hitler.~~ edit: I mixed up Haber with someone else, but his research was foundational in developing many German chemical weapons, including Zyklon B

Edit 2: probably Richard Kuhn who fell into line and fired Jewish coworkers at the direction of the Nazis or Herman Kolbe who was an outspoken German nationalist and anti-Semite. I use all three of them as examples of prominent scientists behaving badly in my O-Chem course.

Really a fascinating bit of science history

Fun fact: German Chocolate Cake is actually from Texas. Either the cocoa company or the baker (I can't remember which) was named "German" and I think the original name was "German's chocolate cake"

People coming from privilege can still be progressive and want to enact change. I'm not sure why you're denigrating this man and his actions based solely on the circumstances of his birth.

If there's anything that would get Congress to enact gun control laws, it's targeted gun violence against the 1%.

The article discusses how that change is not statistically significant and other possible reasons for the results.

1. Pulp Fiction: Perfection
2. Reservoir Dogs: he did so much with so little, and I love the idea of a heist movie that doesn't show the heist
3. Inglorious Basterds: Beautifully cast, and Tarantino's first collaboration with Christopher Waltz is just amazing. Plus that scene in the bar keeps you on edge for an unimaginably long time before letting the shit hit the fan.
4. Kill Bill (1+2): just an amazing soundtrack and he perfectly captures the essence of both samurai films and revenge films.
5. Django Unchained: somehow perfectly fuses blaxploitation and westerns. Plus, more Christopher Waltz
6. Jackie Brown: the least "Tarantino" of the Tarantino films, but still a pretty good flick.
7. Once Upon A Time In Hollywood: pretty good and I love when Tarantino rewrites history, but I don't generally like Hollywood movies about Hollywood as they usually feel a little too much like a circle-jerk.
8. Death Proof: I like it for what it is, but it's not really a feature-length Tarantino movie, so it doesn't really scratch the itch.
9. Hateful Eight: I grew up on Westerns and love Tarantino, so I really wanted to love this one, but it wasn't really very good. The premise of closed-room Western is fascinating and it was almost great, but the last third/quarter was a huge letdown

It's the same reason you never see Hannah Montana and Miley Cyrus in the same room...