Expirement Gone Wrong

Miss-adventurers chronicled

trce:

instagram:

Capturing the Airplanes of St. Maarten’s Maho Beach with @samhorine

To view more photos and videos from Maho Beach, explore the Maho Beach, Sint Maarten location page.

Maho Beach on the Dutch side of the Caribbean country of Sint Maarten has white sand and turquoise waters, but that’s not why visitors flock there. The beach is famous for planes that buzz sunbathers at low altitudes en route to landing at the Princess Juliana International Airport. Arriving aircraft must touch down as close as possible to the beginning of Runway 10 because of its short 2,300-meter (7,500-foot) landing strip.

New York Instagrammer Sam Horine (@samhorine) recently visited Maho Beach while on a layover. “I walked down the airport road for 10 minutes and turned a corner to find a large crowd of people swimming, sunbathing, drinking cheap Carib beers and waiting for the jets to come in,” he says. “I first watched a few smaller island hoppers come in—a plane lands or takes off every 20 minutes or so. Then, a 757 pulled up for take off. People ran over to the short fence separating the beach and the runway and grabbed hold of the chain link. The jet’s engines turned on and it tore down the runway kicking up sand. Hats, sunglasses and other small items flew past me as the jet blasted down the runway for takeoff. It was truly an amazing, and sandy, experience.”

To get a great shot of the planes, Sam has a few tips:

  • I really liked the perspective of the jets coming in over the beach from the side. It gave a great perspective of how low the planes were and how many people were there.
  • If you’re shooting from the side, I found it helpful to frame the shot before the plane gets there to figure out exactly when you’ll need to start shooting.
  • You can also stand on the beach and let the planes come right over you or wade out into the water and eliminate the beach completely—at the right time of day the jets will cast their shadows down on the water.
  • Don’t underestimate shooting back at the crowd from the beach and catching the planes from behind as they come in above the crowd.
  • Shoot in burst mode if you can. It’s a matter of seconds between when the plane’s a small speck in the frame to when it’s roaring overhead. I missed a few planes at first because of the speed.
  • Lastly, I shot in the square crop on my phone so I could make sure I got the entire plane in the frame to post to Instagram.

THIS IS INSANITY. LIKE THOSE CLIFFS IN PRINCESS BRIDE!

tlcplmax:

Lurking in the shadows of your company office…

tlcplmax:

Lurking in the shadows of your company office…

gaymommy:

women are taught “don’t send nudes if you don’t want them to get leaked”

men are never taught “if a woman feels comfortable enough to send you a nude photo, keep it to yourself. leaking it could put her in danger.”

if you don’t see the issue here, you’re a part of the problem.

Am I the only one who believes that sort of thing is sent in the greatest confidence?

(via legendofrii)

ratrodsrule:

Ck this bad azzzz ratty dually!!!
#rat rod

ratrodsrule:

Ck this bad azzzz ratty dually!!!

#rat rod

If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also

Matt 5:39

This specifically refers to a hand striking the side of a person’s face, tells quite a different story when placed in it’s proper historical context. In Jesus’s time, striking someone of a lower class ( a servant) with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance. If the persecuted person “turned the other cheek,” the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed. Another alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect putting an end to the behavior or if the slapping continued the person would lawfully be deemed equal and have to be released as a servant/slave.   

(via thefullnessofthefaith)

THAT makes a lot more sense, now, thank you. 

(via guardianrock)

I can attest to the original poster’s comments. A few years back I took an intensive seminar on faith-based progressive activism, and we spent an entire unit discussing how many of Jesus’ instructions and stories were performative protests designed to shed light on and ridicule the oppressions of that time period as a way to emphasize the absurdity of the social hierarchy and give people the will and motivation to make changes for a more free and equal society.

For example, the next verse (Matthew 5:40) states “And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.” In that time period, men traditionally wore a shirt and a coat-like garment as their daily wear. To sue someone for their shirt was to put them in their place - suing was generally only performed to take care of outstanding debts, and to be sued for one’s shirt meant that the person was so destitute the only valuable thing they could repay with was their own clothing. However, many cultures at that time (including Hebrew peoples) had prohibitions bordering on taboo against public nudity, so for a sued man to surrender both his shirt and his coat was to turn the system on its head and symbolically state, in a very public forum, that “I have no money with which to repay this person, but they are so insistent on taking advantage of my poverty that I am leaving this hearing buck-ass naked. His greed is the cause of a shameful public spectacle.”

All of a sudden an action of power (suing someone for their shirt) becomes a powerful symbol of subversion and mockery, as the suing patron either accepts the coat (and therefore full responsibility as the cause of the other man’s shameful display) or desperately chases the protester around trying to return his clothes to him, making a fool of himself in front of his peers and the entire gathered community.

Additionally, the next verse (Matthew 5:41; “If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.”) was a big middle finger to the Romans who had taken over Judea and were not seen as legitimate authority by the majority of the population there. Roman law stated that a centurion on the march could require a Jew (and possibly other civilians as well, although I don’t remember explicitly) to carry his pack at any time and for any reason for one mile along the road (and because of the importance of the Roman highway system in maintaining rule over the expansive empire, the roads tended to be very well ordered and marked), however hecould not require any service beyond the next mile marker. For a Jewish civilian to carry a centurion’s pack for an entire second mile was a way to subvert the authority of the occupying forces. If the civilian wouldn’t give the pack back at the end of the first mile, the centurion would either have to forcibly take it back or report the civilian to his commanding officer (both of which would result in discipline being taken against the soldier for breaking Roman law) or wait until the civilian volunteered to return the pack, giving the Judean native implicit power over the occupying Roman and completely subverting the power structure of the Empire. Can you imagine how demoralizing that must have been for the highly ordered Roman armies that patrolled the region?

Jesus was a pacifist, but his teachings were in no way passive. There’s a reason he was practically considered a terrorist by the reigning powers, and it wasn’t because he healed the sick and fed the hungry.

(via central-avenue)

This is interesting.

Although another aspect to why He was considered a threat is that His claim to be God threatened the religious order in the area and could have caused conflict during the biggest religious holiday of the year. He went to Jerusalem just before Passover, and Passover is when basically everyone who could would go to Jerusalem. During this religious holiday centrally important to the Jewish faith, a “sect leader” claiming to be God, gathering a large following (by this point in His ministry, he regularly gathered crowds numbering in the thousands), and challenging the religious leaders could have caused a rebellion that would have reflected very poorly on Pontius Pilate, the Roman government official in charge of the area. This is why Pilate refused to take sides on the issue and gave the decision to the mob that the religious leaders riled up.

And yes, Jesus was by no means passive. When He saw people exchanging money and selling animals for sacrifice in the Temple, he literally flipped their tables and made a whip of cords which he used to drive them out.

(via fandomsandconservativelogic)

(via minniesalinas)