*lies

Pure Bull Shit.

I expect nothing less from CNN.

POTUS pushing law and order against rioters and looters. How wrong.


If any POUTS was out on the street. The path would be cleared.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/cia-veterans-who-monitored-crackdowns-abroad-see-troubling-parallels-in-trump-handling-of-protests/20
20/06/02/7ab210b8-a4f6-11ea-bb20-ebf0921f3bbd_story.html

A taste....
Other former CIA and national security officials rendered similarly troubled verdicts.

Marc Polymeropoulos, who formerly ran CIA operations in Europe and Asia, was among several former agency officials who recoiled at images of Trump hoisting a Bible in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church in Washington after authorities fired rubber bullets and tear gas to clear the president’s path of protesters.

“It reminded me of what I reported on for years in the third world,” Polymeropoulos said on Twitter. Referring to the despotic leaders of Iraq, Syria and Libya, he said: “Saddam. Bashar. Qaddafi. They all did this.”

without doubt, the garbage that was tested is worthless - but the testing presented was a bit naive. Alpha particles do have a very short path-length - the alpha radiation that he was detecting (while the emitter was covered) may well have been from radon gas that is being produced by the the thorium in these devices. The threat from skin exposure to directly generated alphas is likely negligible - but the threat from ingestion of the thorium oxide coming off these dangerous trinkets is likely much greater than he recognized. A significant fraction of lung cancer deaths are from inhaled radon daughter products that occur naturally - all these products are part of the decay series for thorium...

Your video, How to get past a fallen log - Blocked Path, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

So, we're up to at a minimum of 4 impeachment investigations now.
1) publicly asking and privately extorting multiple foreign powers to investigate American citizens to help his campaign, with mountains of evidence, including direct quid quo pro that isn't a necessary component of the crimes but compounds them.
2) a second whistleblower report from the IRS accusing multiple appointees of interference in the audit of his taxes.
3) hostile foreign powers bribing him directly through his properties by booking and paying for hundreds of rooms at multiple properties without even staying in them, or violating the emoluments clause if they're found to not be bribes..
4) multiple unequivocal obstruction charges, born out by both his statements and the administration's flat refusal to comply with subpoenas.

These almost certainly aren't the only investigations into his increasing criminality, but any one is more than enough for removal and prison.

There's a new move to push for anonymous ballots if it gets to the Senate. Without fear of reprisals from Trump and his cultists, up to 35 Republican senators have already privately indicated they would impeach today, but they're terrified he would ruin their careers, which they put ahead of their nation, or that his zealous followers might try to murder them or their families.

But that doesn't matter because some of the 4%(+-2% margin of error) of support he has in the black community made a rap.

Edit: Oops! Another report this morning indicates Perry, along with Giuliani and multiple Trump officials and Trump himself were pushing Ukraine to install Trump's friends on the board of a huge Ukrainian natural gas company in an unsurprisingly strikingly similar fashion to what they falsely accuse the Bidens of doing (it is his MO to accuse his enemies of the crimes he's involved in). That makes impeachment path #5 to be exposed, and explains the missing 18 minutes of the transcript of Trump's extortion call with the president of Ukraine. This is why we need the full, word for word, unredacted transcript of the call that Trump, in his idiocy, has already admitted exists.
Sorry @bobknight33, it's looking bad for daddy Donny. He also lost his case trying to block New York from his taxes this morning by claiming absolute immunity from prosecution, and claiming even a private examination of his tax returns would do him irreparable harm. Wonder why that would be.

? Are you implying that famine and/or water shortages somehow preclude war and disease? I think they're major causes.

No, that's a myth. We have resources enough to do some amazing things if we properly apply them, not anything, and without the will to apply them, almost nothing. Having everything you need for success besides direction is a guarantee of failure.

Depends, if you remove the human factor and look only at total resources vs global need, there are still major logistic hurdles to just feeding everyone, not to mention resource problems if we want the biosphere to be healthy and not homogenized down to humans and our farm animals.

Odd, international law has been enforced since ww2 with only few exceptions with no WW3, only sanctions, bribes, and relatively minor skirmishes. I don't know where you get the idea that only a gun to the head might be coercive when a gun to the economy has worked so well for so long.

You should be hysterical. If you aren't shitting your pants over the state of the world, you aren't paying attention or you're absolutely delusional. Civilization and the habitatability of the planet are both on a clear path to collapse and people are busying themselves with arguments over will it be 50 years out or 100, or maybe 150 instead of making substantive changes to mitigate what's now unavoidable....or even prepare.
A hysterical voice is the only one I think indicates an understanding of the problem and total lack of a working solution.

@newtboy,

"Every IPCC report has vastly underestimated their projections"
Hogwash

IPCC AR5 predictions we can go check out are here: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter11_FINAL.pdf

Surface temp is in Fig. 11.9 page 981. They only graph for their 'middle' 4.5 case, not the worst 8.5 case that you call wildly optimistic. You can see even at the time they graphed it, the instrumental record sat on the extreme cold end of their projections, almost threatening to leave the margins of error. If you take today's today for 2019 and check it out we are sitting about dead center on their projected path. Doesn't seem like current temperature data shows their 'middle' case scenario underestimating anything, let alone their worst case.


If you look at the same for sea level rise in AR5 here:
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter13_FINAL.pdf

You can look for fig 13.11 on page 1181. Again, it shows projections approx 100mm sea level rise from 2000-2020, which more or less matches the instrumental record as we approach 2020 to verify. Again, not grossly underestimating.

The sea level rise is especially important to your alarms over Greenland being grossly underestimated by the IPCC. If they did grossly underestimate Greenland, it seems likely they also grossly overestimated something else if they more or less are on track with the overall sea level projections.

Again, if you just cherry pick a couple results and declare everything the IPCC did has been proven to over/under estimate things so they must be ignored, you aren't helping.

*Heavy sigh*
No. They don't say that. The science has evolved in the last 5 years. (Edit: Might check how old and out of date that ipcc report is, btw. Please note you ignore all science done since the 2014 IPCC report you reference that used melting equations and extrapolated rather than measured data sets, data and models they admit are incomplete. They have not updated their sea level estimates since the fifth assessment, which itself raised them approximately 60% over the fourth, which raised them significantly from the third...... Other nonpolitical scientific groups have adjusted the findings to include up to 6.5' or higher rise by 2100 under worst case conditions, the path we're firmly on today.)

Even if you were correct, and I don't agree one bit you are, is just under a 3' rise not bad enough for you in the next 70 years? That's at least 140 million people and all coastal habitats displaced, with more to come. I and others expect worse, but surely that's disaster enough for you, isn't it? The world couldn't deal with one million Syrians, 140 million coastal refugees, and whatever number of non coastal climate refugees fleeing drought or flood sure seems an unavoidable planetary disaster. That doesn't consider the two billion people who rely on Himalayan glaciers for their water, glaciers in rapid retreat.

I guess you dismiss the science from NOAA based simply on it being presented in Forbes without reading it then....so I should just dismiss the IPCC, another non scientific economically focused group discussing science?

Here's some more science then. Edit: Seems most CURRENT projections using up to date data are more in line with my expectations than yours.

https://phys.org/news/2019-05-metre-sea-plausible.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48337629

https://time.com/5592583/sea-levels-rise-higher-study/

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5056

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/10/sea-level-in-the-5th-ipcc-report/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise
Note the updated chart near the top showing more current projections compared to ipcc predictions.

*my content?*

Yes, we're overpopulated. That doesn't invalidate my arguments.

I gave examples of multiple cultures that do what you claim is impossible. I never implied Americans would accept a lower standard of living, only that it's the right thing to strive for, and coming like it or not.

I grow 75% of the produce for two people on 3/4 acres.

Masses of people are going to die unnecessarily. Period. This could be avoided, but won't be. Our choice is accept less now, or have nothing later.

The dependence on fossil fuels for agriculture could be quartered with some minor changes with little drop in output. The western world won't make the investment needed to make that a reality. Also, the fossil fuel needed to make fertilizers is not a significant amount....maybe as little as 3%of natural gas produced.

There are millions of hungry people now without access to the artificially supported agriculture system who relied on natural sources that no longer exist. Aren't you concerned about them?

Name one I listed not supported by science.

Food shortages are preferable to no food.

The 3' estimate is old, based on estimates already proven miserably wrong. Like I said, Greenland is melting as a rate they predicted to not happen until 2075.

When tens of millions must flee low lying areas, and all low lying farmland is underwater, and much of the rest in drought or flood, what do you think happens?

By 2100, all estimates show us far past the tipping points where human input is no longer the driving force. Even the IPCC said we have until 2030 or so to cut emissions in half, and we are not lowering emissions, we're raising them. 50 years out is 75 years late....but better than never.....but we aren't on that path at all. Investment in fossil fuel systems continues to accelerate thanks to emerging third world nations like China and India making the same mistakes the Western world made, but in greater quantities.

The IPCC report said if we don't immediately cut emissions today, by half in 11 years and to zero in 30, then negative emissions for the next 50 that we're on track to hit 3-6C rise by 2100 and raising that estimated temperature rise daily....4C gives the 3' sea level rise by 2100 with current models, but they are woefully inadequate and have proven to be vast underestimation of actual melting already.

We may develop the necessary tech, we won't develop the will to implement it. Indeed, we're at that point today....have been for decades.

Yep, sure, no sacrifices needed. You can have it all and more and let the next guy pay the bill. What if we're the last guys in line?

Funny, isn't that what the Paris climate accord is? Sane leaders giving such stupidity serious consideration, because they understand it's not stupidity it's reality. Granted, they don't go nearly far enough, but they did something more than just claim it will be fixed in the future by something that doesn't exist today and ignoring human behavior and all trends, because using/having less is simply unacceptable.

We need a nice pandemic to cull us by 9/10 and a few intelligent Maos to drive us back to sustainability. We won't get either in time.

@newtboy,

If North America is to adopt the Amish lifestyle, how many acres of land can the entire continent support? The typical Amish family farm is something like 80 acres is it not? I believe adopting this nationwide as a 'solution' requires massive population downsizing...

If you want to look at the poorest conditions of people in the world and advocate that the poverty stricken regions with no access to fossil fuel industry are the path forward, I would ask how you anticipate selling that to the people of California as being in their best interests to adopt as their new standard of living...

You mention overpopulation as a problem, then invent the argument that I think we should just ignore that and make it worse. Instead I only pointed out that immediately abandoning fossil fuels overnight would impact that overpopulation problem as well. It's like you do agree on one level, then don't like the implications or something?

The massive productivity of modern agriculture is dependent on fossil fuel usage. Similarly, our global population is also dependent upon that agricultural output. I find it hard to believe those are not clearly both fact. Please do tell me if you disagree. One inescapable conclusion to those facts is that reducing fossil fuel usage needs to at least be done with sufficient caution that we don't break the global food supply chain, because hungry people do very, very bad things.

Then you least catastrophic events that ARE NOT supported by the science and un-ironically claim that it's me who is ignoring the science.

You even have the audacity to ask if I appreciate the impacts of massive global food shortages, after having earlier belittled my concern about exactly that!

The IPCC shows that even in an absolute worst case scenario of accelerating emissions for the next century an estimated maximum sea level rise of 3ft, yet you talk about loss of 'most' farmland to the oceans...

Here's where I stand. If we can move off gas powered cars to electric, and onto a power grid that is either nuclear, hydro or renewable based in the next 50 years, our emissions before 2100 will drop significantly from today's levels. I firmly believe we are already on a very good course to expect that to occur very organically, with superior electric cars, and cheaper nuclear power and battery storage enabling renewables as economical alternatives to fossil fuels.

That future places us onto the IPCC's better scenarios where emissions peak and then actually decrease steadily through the rest of the century.

I'm hardly advocating lets sit back and do nothing, I'm advocating let's build the technology to make the population we have move into a reduced emissions future. We are getting close on major points for it and think that's great.

What I think is very damaging to that idea, is panicky advice demanding that we must all make massive economic sacrifices as fast as possible, because I firmly believe trying to enact reductions that way, fast enough to make a difference over natural progress, guarantees catastrophic wars now. Thankfully, that is also why nobody in sane leadership will give an ounce of consideration to such stupidity either. You need a Stalin or Mao type in charge to drive that kind change.

Kurzgesagt has a history of taking something overly complicated and simplifying it to the point where it looses it's meaning and slips into fantasy-land. With this video, it bridges too many concepts and strings them together, until it becomes unsure what the actual path is.

It does handle a more complex occurrence, so It tries, but it loses it's momentum as it gets going because it consists of too many gaps in facts to complete a proper narrative.

I cannot fathom how one would use their constitutional rights to smuggle someone into the country, but I did already state I don't think smugglers are doing good, or the right thing.

I would, however, fully support someone standing on their legal rights to help people who are deserving asylum, or at least to help offer the opportunity to apply for it.

I don't get the same feeling, that this guy (hero) flaunts the law to help people flaunt it. I got the idea he used the law to protect them....within the law. Without a signed warrant or conviction, they aren't yet illegals any more than you are after speeding but not being caught. They aren't even named suspects.

Note, I never said anything close to "by any means necessary", because I don't support any such thing. You said that. I said because democracy is broken and the majority is stymied by the minority, stopped from legislating solutions, sometimes "flaunting the law" is the only method left to avoid callously walking away and letting innocents be returned to certain death. A far cry from any means necessary, which would have people murdering border agents to let in everyone. I didn't even say "ends justify the means." I said "Sometimes the wrong method is the only path to the right outcome." That's desperation, not justification.

It might be if republicans weren't such chicken shit obstructionists that they flee their own states and threaten to murder police in order to obstruct the legislature from even voting on legislation they can't defeat by democratic means.
One party abandoned democracy and the rule of law....it wasn't the Democrats. It's a bit unfair to insist they keep playing fair and getting steamrolled when the other side doesn't. Sometimes the wrong method is the only path to the right outcome.

No...the gift of being violated is not precious. The gift of mistrust might have kept me out of trouble to some extent, but I could and would have learned that lesson without a gun to my head and knee in my neck, and without the threats to my freedom if I told on him.

I don't KNOW....I said I would bet. Please read more carefully before making assumptions and accusations. It's far more likely he's not remorseful, I said why I think that.

They wouldn't take a report or complaint, and I don't remember his name. That makes checking in on the thug a bit difficult. Your suggestion is like asking someone to look up their uncaught mugger to see if they feel bad decades later. I would love to face him as an adult, but he's not my white whale like you want him to be....he's just one more dangerous whale in a sea full of them, he just happens to be the one that bit me, they all bite. Nothing special about him.

I have zero need to give him forgiveness nor to take away the mistrust. I don't care a whit about him. Hate implies he's important to me, he's just not except as an example, an instance where I learned some harsh reality, that police are not there to serve and protect citizens as I had been taught.

Please don't presume to tell me what I need or how I feel. I find it insulting. You obviously don't know me a bit or you would never take that path. Assuming I'll react, think, or feel like an average, normal person is about as big an insult as I can think of.

I'm no cop. I'm not assaulting those I'm charged with protecting and serving. I'm not abusing anything by having an opinion.
Just stop, please, you're becoming dismissively insulting with your naive assumptions. Love isn't all you need...obviously....or you would be in line for your lobotomy right now and happily spend your life loving whatever you see without thinking. Remember, the group that told you that lie was broken up by love.

Know who you take advice from....
Just gonna leave this here....

Wiki-
Dr Michael Klaper-In August 1993 Klaper issued a medical certificate for the insurers of two movies that River Phoenix was working on at the time, Dark Blood and Interview With the Vampire. The certificate was signed by both Klaper and Phoenix and stated that Phoenix had never used "LSD, heroin, cocaine, alcohol in excess, or any other narcotic, depressant, stimulant or psychedelic. At the time Phoenix was deeply into the drug scene and died from a drug overdose two months later on October 31, 1993. Phoenix's death resulted in Dark Blood being scrapped, and his role in Interview with the Vampire being replaced by Christian Slater. A total $US5.7 million was paid out by the insurers of both movies as the result of Phoenix's death. Since Phoenix's death, insurance rates have increased significantly, medical certificates are no longer accepted, and actors are required to undergo more rigorous medical examination prior to being insured. [23]

According to oncologist David Gorski "Klaper subscribes to the all-too-common claim that a vegan diet is better than any other and supplements that claim with a belief that undergoing fasts, in which one consumes only water, is a major part of the path to health and wellness". He supports multiple pseudoscience medical claims such as acupuncture, chiropractic, naturopathy and border-line "germ theory denialism". Klaper also gives "highly dubious advice for cancer patients, even claiming that fasting can shrink malignant tumors. Klaper claims that fasts will clear up inflammation, eczema, arthritis and other issues. "The situation" according to Gorski, is "way more complicated than Dr. Klaper paints it". As a surgeon himself, Gorski is appalled that Klaper claims that fasting encourages "faster wound healing" a statement that Gorski calls "Bullshit!". Magician Penn Jillette reported on multiple podcasts that he has lost over 25 pounds on Klaper's water fast diet, Gorski responded that of course he will lose weight on a water-only diet. In Gorski's opinion as a medical doctor himself, "Jillette has fallen "hook, line, and sinker for a whole lot of dietary pseudoscience and promoting it on his show with a credulous interview with someone like Dr. Klaper". Gorski hopes that Jillette will eventually realize "that Dr. Klaper is peddling highly dubious claims (at best). Basically, the product Dr. Klaper is peddling in terms of science is a massive exaggeration based on dubious science, cherry picked cases, and bad evolutionary analogies. Worse, fasts, even when supervised by a physician, are potentially dangerous"