Oh, it is, I can't deny that. But my doctor has a birthday coming up in a few, and this is just the sort of thing he'll think is off the wall hilarious. Can't please everyone, but you can please some.
Sir, she is not spinning in either direction. "She" is a two dimensional object which is oscillating. This oscillation can be perceived as three-dimensional rotation in either direction, but the recipient's frame of mind must be right to see the change. But watch it enough and you will see it.
A poll to see how many see it clockwise and how many counter? I can't quite change her direction at will, but I can induce the conditions in my frame of mind that make the change inevitable.
Thank you, I am humbled by the certainty that you will make me famous. It is indeed no trick GIF, but rather a trick of the mind, and its propensity to inject a two-dimensional object into a three-dimensional interpretation based on the fleeting dominance of the perceiving lobe.
In the light of nashsolvesytmnd.ytmnd.com, don't you find the irony is thick enough to scoop with a mellon baller. And yet, here we are, and here I am, and here, my friend are you. In sum, the answer is yes, and it's because someone had to.
The news media keep referring to Gore winning an Oscar and a Nobel in the same year, but really he didn't win the Oscar; a movie that he was in won. Gore was not the director (that was Davis Guggenheim), and neither was he a producer (there were a dozen, his name was absent from that list). Whether or not its a good documentary, saying Gore won the Oscar is like saying Danny DeVito is an Oscar winner, since he was in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.
JohnForbesNash's recent comments: