I don't mind a bit of silliness, but the aftermath for this prank is just not worth it. I don't care about Kimmel, but his staff don't deserve the cleanup.

I mostly stick to Colbert, Meyer & British humour for my comedy fix now, it's more biting than just... loud.

ROTFLMFAHS!!! Projection is absolutely the MO of the right, and of yourself. You’re trying to blame Covid on Biden, and accept zero blame for dismantling the office created to avoid exactly pandemics like this, no blame for not quarantining and letting it in the country after knowing how deadly it was, no blame for denying it’s existence, it’s danger, it’s virulence, it’s mortality rates, or for actively opposing any and all public health measures to minimize it…but now want to blame Biden for the outbreaks among morons that listen to antivaxing right wingers rather than Biden’s public health professionals.
You know there were hundreds of Republican plots to fraudulently vote or intentionally deny valid votes in the last election, yet with no evidence you still claim there was fraud on both sides (and imply there was far more from the left but still can’t show a single example), and despite all evidence to the contrary you still claim Democrats stole the election through fraud.
That’s called projection, Bob, blaming others for disasters and crimes you are actively causing. Derp.

Liar. There’s no way in hell you are even 100IQ. You have no reasoning or problem solving skills at all, zero verbal/English skills whatsoever, and you do not think like an an engineer, never methodically going step by step without glossing over the important bits and ignoring pertinent details….but we know you’re a proud liar already, one that applauds perjury. Test again. I think the mindset you’ve fostered in yourself for decades now has lowered it significantly if it was honestly ever above 100. I retested around 4 years ago for fun, scored one point higher than in school.

I’ve known engineers that weren’t all that intelligent….just not extremely successful ones. Dad owned an international high tech insulation company with dozens of engineers on the payroll. The less competent end up being maintenance techs and cleanup crews rather than R&D techs, designers, and inventors. Somebody has to load and drive the hazardous materials truck to the disposal site, somebody has to do maintenance on machines, somebody has to check dates on inventory to be certain chemicals don’t oxidize, etc, they don’t give those jobs to the best engineers.

What lockdowns? Biden just reportedly had the best job creation year in the nation’s history. Over 500000 jobs per month since he took office (and rapidly rising wages), how many jobs were lost under Trump? Estimates range from 10,000,000-18,000,000. Holy shit, you think that’s bad for Biden?!! Mental defectives with 75 IQ can see how wrong you are….but you can’t.

The tax cuts came in 2017, growth didn’t come until 2021, jobs didn’t come until 2021. It’s utterly ridiculous to try to claim the tax handouts for the wealthy had a thing to do with the economy getting better, especially since they expired for non billionaires before the upturn. I thought you just claimed to be intelligent. 🤦‍♂️

-3.5% Bob. Trump’s last year was -3.5% GDP growth. NEGATIVE.
Overall Trump managed 2.33, 3, 2.16, -3.49 =4% / 4years = 1% GDPY under Trump, who didn’t start in a major recession but left one. Lol! What’s that IQ again, buddy? Obama GDP > Trump GDP

It’s likely, because they never had a real majority thanks to 2 DINOs, so didn’t perform great, so many Trump era disastrous policies and appointees are still in place, and there’s no chance that’s going to change this term thanks to Democrats not actually having a majority. Sadly, too many morons won’t look at why there’s so little progress and just won’t vote, ensuring things won’t change and Republican obstructionism will rule the day. The party “in charge” always loses the midterm. What makes you think I don’t see that. I do not underestimate the stupidity of the American voter.

Lol. I notice you didn’t list any failures, and actually admitted some you listed last time are nonsense (now admitting “Biden economy is doing great” VS earlier claims “failed economy”). LMFAHS!
You get one talking head on CNN agreeing with you and one pro-Republican poll and suddenly you think everyone wants Trump back. You are so silly. When the polls don’t support you, you say they’re worthless, when they do, they’re gospel.
If Garland was doing his job and prosecuting senators and representatives, Democratic numbers would jump by double digits. It’s lack of action that’s losing them support. It’s certainly why I’m dissatisfied….but to assume that means most would vote Republican because they’re dissatisfied with Democrats performance is asinine, par for the course from you.

PE of 360 Bob. Anything over 25 is overpriced, over 100 is a bubble. Duh….again, you just claimed to be intelligent, but have repeatedly proven that false already. They made under 1 million cars last year out of around 75 million. Ford sold almost as many of one model, F150’s as Tesla sold of all models, and would have sold more if they had the chips to make more. They’re doing well, but are still a little minnow in a big pond, and if they lose their battery monopoly they’re toast. They aren’t the only, or even the best choice for electric cars anymore. If you think they won’t have competition, you’ve proven a lack of intelligence once again.

Summer time when you lost over 1/4 of your value overnight must have been scary. It won’t be the last time.

Good luck. In 5 years I expect they’ll be near worthless once more stable, more energy dense batteries are developed. I’m happy making more money from a diverse portfolio that’s not insanely overvalued.

To be fair, most of your complaints were addressed in the piece.

For instance, medical implants, fairly stable, yes, but not in extreme heat like cremation, so as used they’re toxic to the environment despite being considered stable and inert.

The reason to ban them all was also explained, banning one toxic substance at a time means one chemical bond difference and the company can go ahead with Cancer causer 2.0 for a decade until it’s banned for being toxic, and then repeat. It’s how they’ve operated for decades.

I’m fine with outlawing the entire class and putting the onus on the chemical companies to prove any new variants are safe instead of forcing the hamstrung epa to prove they’re unsafe. I also think any company that dumped it into waterways should be instantly and completely forfeited to pay for cleanup. No company has the funds to pay for cleanup, but their assets are at least a start.

Ohhhhh, Bob! Cleanup on aisle 1!

My guess is that they need to measure the forces that the weapon, and its internal components, are subjected to if it falls out of a transport or if it goes off course and subsequently impacts the ground. This will help them predict the likelihood of and unintentional detonation of the conventional explosives, and I suppose the likelihood of a nuclear reaction resulting from this. It will also help them predict the kind of cleanup task that will be necessary. It might also be useful to know how much secret technology survives after an impact if the weapon does not detonate.
Anyone know the back story on Sandia Labs appropriating the thunderbid symbol? It seems a poor choice for a weapons lab of colonizing nation to use the symbol of a people that nation has displaced.

If you have the option of burning rainforest to build a sad farm (they are poor, temporary farms created from rainforests), then you already have the clean air and orangutan habitat. Sell it as carbon offsets to existing polluters until a better system is created, don't destroy it permanently to make far less money for a short time. Duh.
Again, this bullshit idea that thoughtful conservation is antithetical to economic gains is pure, utter bullshit. Not destroying and polluting is almost always better economically if you force polluters to pay for cleanup, or if you look at the big picture. Burn the Amazon or starve aren't our only choices.

Congratulations! Your video, The Ocean Cleanup Launches To The Great Pacific Garbage Patc, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 105 Badge!

Your video, The Ocean Cleanup Launches To The Great Pacific Garbage Patc, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

"Cleanup on aisle three"

What part of "do not have a choice" do I not understand? How about the subject of the 'choice' you are denied. Now that you have clarified that you don't have a choice about how the electric company pays you, or how solar works, I'll reiterate, you still DO have a choice about how to use the power you generate. Making better use of that choice would serve you well, but you seem intent on claiming it's all out of your control (and that you're forced 'at gunpoint' to sell all your production cheap and buy it back expensive rather than find a way to use it directly). I'm intent on making the best use of the choices available to me (and I bet to you) in order to make intelligent choices about my energy, choices that have saved me thousands to date, and should save me tens of thousands in the long run, and save uncounted tons of CO2 from being produced. You have instead invested in a system that now serves your needs terribly, and now want to tell others how solar is not economically viable or green, both of which are absolutely backwards from my experience and research.

You were not kidnapped, you walked into that guys home and put his gun to your own head. I wonder if you've even investigated 'net metering' in your area, it could make your system work for even you.

OK, so energy cost VS energy produced is ALL you want to compare. Then you MUST include all energy costs to be reasonable, including the energy cost of cleanup of coal waste failures (that right there already totally tips any scale against coal, it can't come close to making the energy that cleanup takes), the energy used in upkeep of coal waste storage for centuries, the energy costs of habitat destruction/reconstruction by coal mining itself, the mining itself, transportation of the coal, power plant operation (construction, upgrading, and maintenance), and the cost of mitigating the 20-40 times the amount of CO2 pollution, health issues, loss of sunlight (solar dimming is real), etc. The list of energy costs goes on and on for coal, while the list for the energy cost of solar panel production and use in some cases is damn near zero (where it's made with leftover chip wafers in solar powered factories it barely takes any extra energy at all, but I do understand that most aren't made that way now).

Double return VS coal, because you get twice as many KWH per dollar with solar PV, or better.

Again with the 'spend more energy to produce one KWH of PV than with coal', show me some data. Everything I can find shows you're 100% wrong if you look at the lifespan of panels which become energy neutral in well under 3 years on average (some much sooner) and last 20-30 years, while coal continues to need more energy to produce more (filthy) energy. Perhaps in the extremely short term you have a point about cost/production, but any time period over 3 years puts PV ahead of coal in energy costs/energy produced, and in their 20-30 year lifetime they do much better.

Coal made power is NOT cheaper than solar made power. If it was, I would not save money with a solar system. I have already saved money with solar VS buying the same amount of coal produced power, therefore solar PV is cheaper than coal. Period. If it wasn't, our electric companies would not be 'farming solar' here as fast as possible, they would be building more coal plants.

Some people support coal because they have been misinformed about alternatives. That's why I have continued our discussion here, because your information is wrong based on my personal experience and research, and I fear you might convince someone to not even look into solar enough to see how wrong you are, how much money they could save (if they do it properly), and how much pollution they could not create.

Um...I DO grow my own vegetables in my backyard too. It's cheaper, and I get far better produce with zero carbon footprint. Another statement you've made that I take personal exception with. It's not a HUGE effort, but is some effort, but the returns are great and totally worth it. I think many people stopped subsistence farming because they're lazy, overworked, and/or live without any place to farm. I've been doing it since I was 12 and ate my first self grown corn, and I've never had reason to question that decision. I've read about people spending $50 to grow $5 in tomatoes...I'm not one of them. I spend $50 on manure to grow >$1000 in produce yearly, and have enough to give >1/2 of it away.

Not a single one of your examples are 'more viable' than PV in every situation, and private owned home solar doesn't take public dollars away from public power projects. I looked into wind-it's way more expensive for the same generation power along with numerous other issues, nuke-also far more expensive with other long term major issues, solar thermal-hardly working as hoped yet in the few, hyper expensive plants in existence, wave-not yet but fingers crossed, hydro-DISTEROUS for the environment and short lived. (You left out geothermal, which is excellent where it's possible.)
Also, most of your examples are not viable for residential use (what we're talking about here), as you said are more expensive (so are bad economic choices), and/or have other serious ecological issues that PV does not.

Money is the only reason to stick with coal or nuclear, and that's only because the companies that use it get away with not paying for most of the true long term costs, and even with that it's now FAR more expensive to buy that coal/nuke power than it is to make your own with PV, leaving NO real reason to stick with coal or nuclear....so what are you talking about?

Up next: Mentos in Cola Light, in space!

(I wondered what experiment they did that required the most cleanup afterwards)

Completely counter-intuitive, but, on average, this amount of effort usually comes back in less actual cleanup work required. People go in thinking that they're in someone's home, not a glorified ditch. It takes a colossal douchebag to mess something like that up.