Oh Luke was definitely asking her about their birth mother, knowing that it was the same woman. The question here is that Leia didn't know what he was talking about. Since she gives him an answer about someone who died when Leia was young, maybe she's just thinking that Bail remarried later.

Before the prequel trilogy came out, it could have been their birth mother she was talking about, and she just didn't know that Luke was her brother; but after ep 3 came out, and we see Padme die, we have to assume Leia was adopted by the Organas, but Bail's wife died when Leia was young and he later remarried, and Leia is thinking about that woman after Padme and before Bail's new wife, thinking that she is her real mom.

And yeah, it's completely possible that Lucas originally intended for Padme to be the one Leia was talking about, but the point is, the movies don't actually specify if she meant Padme or the middle wife, so it can still be explained.

That detail wasn't in any of the movies so the line in ep 6 still makes sense the way you thought. I'm pretty sure anyone would assume that's what she meant, since we never hear that she knew she was adopted. Whoever made Bail's wife die in the explosion of Alderaan is the one who messed up, or Lucas ignored that addition when making episode I.

Mais l'alliance avec l'extrême droite, tout va bien ?

Sans avoir eux-mêmes la majorité, ils doivent bien faire des concessions soit à l'extrême droite, soit à la gauche, et on voit bien avec quelle facilité ils font leur choix (au grand dam de leur corps défendant !) et la confiance qu'ils ont que le RN jouera le jeu.

Le désistement en faveur de la gauche pour faire barrage républicain, ça n'aura pas duré.

A prendre avec du Toniglandyl non ?

A bomb that could destroy Earth's core would be an admittedly impressive technical feat!

Yup. I don't even get what "populism" is when mentioned in media. Isn't that-- democracy?

Populism is demagogy, it's repeating people's complaints back to them, to amplify them and place yourself as an apparent leader, but without actually bringing any solution - and when it does, it's immediately far right "beat everyone out". Democracy is actually creating policy and voting on it, which by definition implies people disagreeing in that vote. Populism is rounding up everyone with the same mind, excluding everyone else (not voting on anything) and trying to crush opposition with numbers and no policy. It's the antithesis to democracy.

Edit - it might depend on the region of the world, I don't think I've seen a lot of left wingers be called populists. Originally it just means the opposition between the people and the elite, so that would match what you say, and apparently some left parties are trying to return to that definition for some reason, but it seems the Pope is taking the other version that has become much more common.

The Galapagos weren't known to Christians until the mid 16th c. so there's a bit of a timing problem of over a couple thousand years.

The page itself is just a map with a legend that says that the red lines on the map are roman roads.

Except if you look at the legend, and click on the image for the red line, that white rectangle with a red line links to a file that is named "thin red line for nurses flag."

It's just a coincidence / lack of attention / someone picked a random image that looked good enough for a map legend.

Mythology is not a monolith. We're talking 3000+ years of cultural evolution across multiple cities that united and separated multiple times, each having their own local cult that rose to prominence or got supplanted by a different one.

When some of them got together and overlapped, they might have taken different facets of "death": Osiris is not strictly a god of death itself but a judge of your soul, and grants eternal life in death, while Anubis was a god of funerary rites and graves, so the physical aspect of handling dead bodies.

When a city took prevalence over another, either because the pharaoh set up shop there or because a temple in that city became more famous and gained influence, that city's major cult could overshadow other gods worshiped in other cities and take over their duties.

Then there were bigger gods that got cults that split into different aspects, like how Hathor and Sekhmet come from the same goddess but Sekhmet specialized in bloody war and the sun burning in the desert (an aspect she took from her father, a more general sun god) while Hathor specialized in motherhood.

Other aspects are passed around in the same way, starting with the role of sun, there are countless aspects of the sun that were embodied in different gods. Even the scarab is an aspect of the sun - because it emerges fully matured from the dungball of its parent the same way the sun comes out from the underworld in the morning, so there was a god for that. Death is a major aspect that remained a big constant in Egyptian religion, that's why those two are seen the most often.

If you look at which city becomes the center of Egypt's rule as time goes on through the different kingdoms and intermediate periods, and check which major temple is in that city, you see which cult takes over more duties.

Buried, Ryan Reynolds is the only one on screen (not playing multiple characters, just one), though there are voiced characters from other actors on the phone.

Cancer-causing radiations don't cause wolves to develop cancer resistance, they cause wolves to develop cancer. Those that were more resistant survived, those that weren't didn't, now we have wolves that are different from those that we had before. They are mutant wolves, but the radiations didn't make them mutants. The mutation happened before in some wolves, and their descendants survived better than those that didn't have it. Evolution has always been like that.

That's what natural selection is. We focus on those that survived because they developed resistance to something, but it has always meant that everybody else died and the species as a whole has moved forward.