search results matching tag: preservative

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (195)     Sift Talk (16)     Blogs (15)     Comments (867)   

Stay In School, Kids...

newtboy says...

Only delusional cultists would say they failed to prove his motive was personal and against the national interest. Deal with it.
His "transcript", a heavily edited summary that put the best possible spin on his call proved it handily by itself, and not one word, action, or piece of evidence contradicts that conclusion.
His defence was "as president, I'm essentially king and can do no wrong, and everything is permitted. My party is in control and are too scared of me to convict." So much for faithfully preserving, protecting and defending the constitution, he can't even read one sentence from it, said it was a foreign language. (That's fact, not opinion, btw) It's obvious he has no idea whatever it says.
There was no amount of indisputable proof that would have convinced the cowardly sycophantic"republicans" to turn on Trump, they ignored all evidence provided and refused to look at any, much less investigate because they know he now owns what's left of their party and therefore their futures, and they also know the slightest step out of line makes them his target, which means losing their job, power, and family's safety because his cultists include thousands of potential domestic terrorists just itching for him to set their target.
Edit:"The strength and power of despotism consists wholly in the fear of resistance." Thomas Paine

Edit: my theory is they reserved the dozen indisputable criminal acts they can prove until the Democrats run the Senate next year just in case he wins by hook or crook, knowing there is nothing, including cold blooded public murder, that the Republicans would convict him of.

Jesusismypilot said:

That's a lot of TDS in one post. I wish there was video to go with the frothy typing.

It was a big show that hinged on one exceptionally weak plank... motive. Dems failed to prove the motive of President Trump's quid pro quo was to meddle with the 2020 election. The Dem running of the impeachment was as poor as their running of the Iowa caucus. Deal with it.

Sir Attenborough explains global deal to protect ocean

newtboy says...

A good, even *quality idea....for 40+ years ago.

It took 100+ years to mortally wound the ocean by 1000 cuts. A bandaid on one wound is not going to turn it around, and we almost certainly aren't going to do it anyway. Countries that don't buy into the plan will simply harvest most of the fish left by those who do. This only works in small scale preserves that are guarded against poaching, often by a military.

Fish stocks are disappearing at an alarming rate, many going extinct. For those species, it's too late, and they are numerous, and they are largely the fish humans prefer. Many others are in such decline fishing for them is already off limits or severely curtailed, like commercial salmon, abalone, and crab fishing in California. Even those actions have failed to revive their populations year after year.

Diatoms, phytoplankton, and other similar biotas are at the limit of acidity and temperature they can tolerate, and they are the base of the ocean food web, feeding most fish when they are fry or larvae. The gasses in the atmosphere today will push diatoms over that precipice with a massive ocean extinction following soon afterwards, and we continue to add more greenhouse gases than we added yesterday every day.

Then there's habitat loss, coral reefs and kelp forests are both being decimated by temperature rise and acidification. Together they are food and habitat for 25%-50% of all ocean fish and shellfish.

Less over harvesting of the ocean is a good idea, but pretending it alone can save the oceans is pure fantasy. The ocean has absorbed as much as 90+% of the excess heat from global warming, causing oceanic heat waves that destroy habitats both directly and indirectly. There is NO plan that solves that problem, it's well beyond our capabilities under the best conditions with worldwide maximum efforts.

Just sayin'.

Michael Knowles Calls Greta Thunberg Mentally Ill

newtboy says...

What a disgusting piece of shit and outright liar.
Her achievements already outweigh his by miles...he's only managed to get himself kicked off Fox, impressively hard to do if you're right wing. Fox has apologized for his disgraceful ad hominem attacks against a child who he couldn't factually contradict....but Laura Ingram has also personally attacked her on her show, as has Trump on Twitter.

Being on the autism spectrum, she says she has aspergers, is a developmental disorder NOT a mental illness.
Being a pathological liar, that's a mental illness apparently now shared by an entire political party.
Being a fecal golem is a personality disorder he clearly has in spades.

The Carnegie Mellon study he sites said no such thing, and it's authors have stated that it's a total misrepresentation of their findings....repeatedly.
The study actually said certain produce at it's worst might be more ecologically harmful per calorie than some kinds of white meat eating by comparing things like bacon vs lettuce on a calorie to calorie instead of serving to serving rate, so 4 strips of bacon were compared to > 40 cups of lettuce. Get real.
To compound the confusion they chose a calorie poor produce like lettuce with high greenhouse gas emissions instead of kale, broccoli, rice, potatoes, spinach and wheat (just to name a few) which all rank lower than pork in terms of greenhouse gases.
The same argument holds for water usage...they chose lettuce, with high water requirements, instead of things like corn, peanuts, carrots and wheat which all use less water than all non-seafood meat.
It's also assumed the produce will be wasted at exponentially higher rates than meat, which can be preserved more easily. That may be true, but they don't include the preservatives or energy to refrigerate and/or freeze meat on the bacon side of the equation.

Of course the lettuce takes more resources if you eat 40+ cups instead of 4 thin bacon strips, just like when you compare a single fish stick to several giant pumpkins.

*rant over*

The sky is not the limit

newtboy says...

I've become torn about drone nature videos.

On the one hand, the views they can get are unique and stunning, the adrenaline pumping rollercoaster rides through impossible obstacle courses are heart pounding.
On the other, I'm all too aware of the efforts people make to have a single day in the peaceful majesty of nature, and having what sounds like a fleet of leaf blowers hovering overhead, whirring back and forth through the scene can ruin the experience completely.

I really believe there should be designated days/weeks when drones are allowed in public parks, reserves, preserves, wilderness areas, etc and they should be banned other times to make it fair for everyone.

I was a repeated victim of drone pollution in Iceland.

BACON CAUSES CANCER!!!! MCDONALDS IS GIVING FREE CANCER!

Mordhaus says...

The cancer arm of the World Health Organization has some serious concerns about some of Americans’ favorite foods. The International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies processed meat as a carcinogen, something that causes cancer. And it classifies red meat as a probable carcinogen, something that probably causes cancer.

Processed meat includes hot dogs, ham, bacon, sausage, and some deli meats. It refers to meat that has been treated in some way to preserve or flavor it. Processes include salting, curing, fermenting, and smoking. Red meat includes beef, pork, lamb, and goat.

Twenty-two experts from 10 countries reviewed more than 800 studies to reach their conclusions. They found that eating 50 grams of processed meat every day increased the risk of colorectal cancer by 18%. That’s the equivalent of about 4 strips of bacon or 1 hot dog. For red meat, there was evidence of increased risk of colorectal, pancreatic, and prostate cancer.

Overall, the lifetime risk of someone developing colon cancer is 5%. To put the numbers into perspective, the increased risk from eating the amount of processed meat in the study would raise average lifetime risk to almost 6%.

----------------------------

Read the study. The average raises almost 1 percent. This was copied straight from https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/hot-dogs-hamburgers-bacon.html.

transmorpher said:

Also your stats are way off it's not 1% it's 18% for every 50g according to the WHO after reviewing 800 studies.

https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr240_E.pdf


Lovely of you to claim propaganda, but of course, the bias is all yours here - or are you going to tell me you don't enjoy bacon?

Susan Collins - Women will be believed

Meet the Man Trying to Save Lost Video Games

The Stone Age Tribe on a Banned Island You Can't Visit

ChaosEngine says...

"they were doing just fine with stones"

Were they? What was the average life expectancy? How about childbirth mortality rates? Hell, how's their dental health?

Obviously, a bit of iron isn't going to fix those problems, but it might make them more efficient hunters. Maybe their diet has improved because of this?

"Now there aren't any known pure stone age people left at all now"

Is that necessarily a bad thing? We had the stone age, we grew out of it.

I feel like it's easy for us to want to preserve their way of life, but no-one is giving them the option. If presented with a choice, most people wouldn't opt for a neolithic lifestyle. Even the so-called "paleo" adherents aren't really living that way.

I completely get where you are coming from, but part of me also feels like we are keeping humans in a zoo.

I honestly don't know what's the right answer.

newtboy said:

they were doing just fine with stones. Now there aren't any known pure stone age people left at all now, are there?

How the Alt-Right Trolls

entr0py says...

That was a good description of why that form of argument is successful, but the proposed solution seems unsatisfying. I mean, if you just shut down all contrary views by deleting the posts, banning the posters or ignoring them, it makes it seem like you're just trying to build a comfortable echo chamber. I feel like you've got to preserve the willingness to consider that you might be wrong, even when confronted with trolls.

Cavuto: Loyalty works both ways, Mr. President

moonsammy says...

Well yeah - they're gonna be pissed if they don't at LEAST get tax cuts out of this whole fiasco. They also know he watches Fox all the damn time, so likely feel they should make every effort to preserve their agenda before the administration completely collapses in on itself.

makach said:

..wait, what? this is fox?

John Oliver - Confederacy

ChaosEngine says...

If any of these people defending the statues think they are "preserving history", I would invite them to go to Germany and ask the locals why there are no statues of Hitler.

"WHITE PRIVILEGE"...- A Message to Young Black (and white)

newtboy says...

Yeah, but ignore all the benefits society gave him to make those things easy and beneficial...forget that (forced) hard work, work ethic, and obedience are hallmarks of black history, forget that God and family are far more deeply ingrained in black culture than white (yeah, I expect you'll counter with 'they don't have families', and ignore the reason why so many are missing the father....disproportionate prosecutions and sentences, and ignore that poor whites are in the same boat but with a white life preserver that often keeps them out of prison, so in society and home). Forget that embodying none of these has helped them, because historically those traits are easy to exploit, and 'white America' has historically exploited them in black Americans....but you won't see that.

Edit: put more simply, doing those things isn't white privilege, but being secure in the knowledge that they'll benefit you is.

What gives me the right to know things about southern white people? Being one...born and raised in Texas. I notice you deleted "many" from my statement then lied by saying I "placed an entire group in derogatory terms", typical Bob.

You must be either unbelievably dumb or just frantically trolling again, Bob, your choice, but I would hate to see you banned.....but you calling someone racist for a quote you altered...oh Bob. That's terribly sad even from you.

bobknight33 said:

You are so blinded by your liberal mind... Truly shameful. But again truly predictable.



Hard work
Family
GOD
Obedience
Work ethic

These things are not white privileges ... These are the moral compass to life and all have access to it. Blacks included... But you can't see that.



What give you the right to claim that " white southerners are insanely ignorant and completely devoid of empathy for others or rationality."... That racist -- placing an entire group in derogatory terms/

You are the Racist newt. You should be banned !

The Battle Over Confederate Monuments

newtboy says...

Touche. You are correct, I overstated.
Treason is unpatriotic, period?
Edit:even then there's the likes of Chelsea Manning, who some would say was a patriotic traitor....so what is my point?

I'm not prepared to debate the morality of a different timeline, but I disagree that force wouldn't be justified to try to preserve the Union from armed secession....now if 2/3 of the state's voted to disband...or 3/4, whatever the line is, yes, monstrous to wage war to force it's preservation, but they didn't do that.

MaxWilder said:

I think it's silly to say "treason is wrong period." The USA was born of a revolt against England.

If the south had wanted to secede for almost any other reason but the right to own human beings, then Lincoln would have been a monster to pursue such a bloody war to hold the union together. It would be as if the EU sent troops to force the UK to stay part of the EU.

I think there are plenty of examples in history of groups justifiably wanting to replace their leaders or separate from a political union.

Robert Jeffress "There Is Not A Racist Bone In His Body"

newtboy says...

Racism isn't seated in your bones...it's in your mind.
There is a racist mind in his body.
It's clear to everyone which side of this white power struggle he's on, there's no question at all. He is firmly in the camp of the people that believe reverse racism is a bigger problem than racism. He's in the camp of people who stand for preserving statues of traitors to the United States because they also stood for racism. He's in the camp of people who stand arm in arm with violent Nazis holding torches and shouting hate speech, but he calls them peaceful quiet protestors calmly preserving their heritage.
He doesn't seem to understand that racism comes in shades of gray, not black and white. You don't have to wish all black people were dead to be racist, believing they all have less self control, intelligence, and/or morals does the trick just fine.

Seymour Hersh: Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria

newtboy says...

Syria is a prime example of a propaganda war. I have long thought this is why reporter's are being targeted by both sides, they interfere with the narratives of both sides by reporting facts.
We can't believe reports that come from those involved, they all clearly have an interest in preserving their narratives that excuse their actions. Without independent reporting on the ground, at best we're debating skewed versions of reality, and more likely pure fictions created by the involved parties.
That is their plan, because it denies a possibility of effective opposition to the actions they're hiding, skewing, or excusing.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon