Great video. I appreciate all the details, as opposed to most videos that just show the lava in silence.

From a reddit comment..

The guy seriously knows his Australian ecology.

I'll list out some of the amazing detail on flora and fauna he's put in there starting from the Allocasuarina littoralis tree the Black Cockatoos are sitting on. It's one of their favourite foods.

The frogs are probably Peron's tree frogs (Litoria peronii) based on the eyes and calls

Then the Angophora tree has the leaves in the right place

The spider orchid (Caladenia sp) in the grass

The waratah and sickle fern (maybe) in the possums hat

The old man banksia (Banksia serrata) as you stated

There's a lot more, but that's what stuck out to me. The guy's really done his homework while making that.

Edit: some of us would prefer the president be up to speed on day one, not as a spectator but as a leader. I get that a leader who's prepared to lead is a new concept, but we need one desperately.

You seem to be under the impression that distribution nation wide doesn't need constant supervision and revision. You are sadly misinformed.
The preparation from the Whitehouse isn't complete, distribution of most vaccines requires deep freeze shipping to facilities with proper sub zero storage, and all the equipment for each shot, and a system in place to offer it to only the most at risk (and to deny the asshole who won't wait), personnel, facilities, policies, and equipment. None of that is completed.

Edit: oddly you seem to think a program set up by the Trump team will be flawless and perfectly functional from day one, unlike every other program they set up. When it turns out they planned to use ice cream trucks for delivery, but they aren't cold enough so 30 million doses spoil on the docks, Biden shouldn't be prepared? When it turns out the vaccine that needs sub zero refrigeration is the only one that really works, he shouldn't have a backup plan ready? Why would you assume it will function adequately totally hands off when nothing works that way, especially the biggest mass vaccine program ever?

If you think the federal government isn't going to be in charge, you're again misinformed badly. Operation warp speed, the distribution policy/agency, is in charge... it's a federal program. It will need constant supervision and retooling. Biden will be directly in charge there and should be informed and prepared, not shooting from the hip.

You left out the federal government and manufacturers and manufacturers of needles etc...The most important players in distribution.


Lol...You act like the white house isn't directly in charge of the distribution, they are.

Biden is just now being told the details of the plan, who's involved, and how it's supposed to work. As the leader of the plan, he should be fully informed before taking charge so he can fix whatever the moron who's sycophants designed it screwed up. Until he knows the plan and where and how we are setting it up and what stage we are at, he cannot possibly make his own plans to improve and facilitate it. Duh, that's the point here. You can't be that dense.

Two months is not enough time to be properly briefed on everything he needs to know, as explained in the 9/11 report.

The army, cia, and other agencies had plans for Osama in spring 2001, but Bush was all but unaware of any issues because he lost a few weeks of briefing time during the transition. This is a MAJOR factor in the success of the attack, as he didn't take any action on a problem he was unaware of.

Same goes here.

I know you disagree, you do little else. Fortunately, people with your mindset won't be running things for long, then we can make progress on this and a multitude of fronts Trump screwed up...is it that you even disagree he screwed up his pandemic response despite America being the worst hit country, and despite Covid not disappearing November 4 like he promised? Edit: do you not think it likely a trump response plan could be improved on?

There's so much to fix, like a looming depression, looming homeless armies about to be evicted, payback of the payroll tax holiday, new war with Iran, revision of our Russian policies, international relationships to mend, internal civil unrest, complete erosion of trust in law enforcement, 4 more years of completely ignoring infrastructure, treaties to rejoin, etc. He needs every second available to be as briefed on everything so he doesn't repeat Trump's ignorance of policy and law leading to more trumpian mistakes of ignorance and bravado, costing more lives.

https://virginhyperloop.com/pegasus has some more technical details, including that there are airlocks, and it's only a medium vacuum (100 Pa, but still very dangerous).
Their newer maglev tech looks promising though.

Bullet trains are quite convenient, but I wouldn't trust any built/run/maintained by USA passenger train companies - safety record is abysmal.

in general, hindu eschatology resembles the big bang/crunch. the cycle of expansion from a single point only to collapse to another single point and another expansion. these cycles are billions of years apart. (also some idea - that's too fuzzy to recall in detail - about matter changing and slipping into an alternative dimension might be a model of the great beyond)

will use Russell Bertrand - although not a poet, have read poetry that echos this thought (not gonna search) almost verbatim - when he said, “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.” this was pretty much summed up the Dunning-Kruger Effect. (https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/355363-one-of-the-painful-things-about-our-time-is-that)

the other you noted. meditation is healthy. of note, Sufism tends to focus on intense focusing, in music and song...and some of the musicians are peachy keen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QRivHR0c28

and the poetry is beautiful (EX: Rumi). so religion has spawned some good things, too.

in short, religion is no more destructive than the person implementing it. do believe in ideas. whether it comes from a white cassock or lab coat. such is the freedom to keep a mind free.

or take it up w/René Descartes*. he seemed to be better at it than I.

*Descartes died when he was run over by a horse-drawn coach. This is where the saying "Don't put Descartes in front of the horse."

BTW: Earle song?

Yes, some brains rot faster than others, but religion is like aerating the compost and adding lime, it accelerates the rot of all minds exponentially.

Ok...you're going to have to provide more details when you say some astrophysics resembles Hindu theology. I studied Hinduism and astrophysics and see no correlation.

Some religious practices, like meditation, are supported by psychology as beneficial, but absolutely not for the reasons the religions claim, and most aren't supported by science by any stretch of the imagination.

Not a single supernatural claim from any religion is supported by any real science, maybe by pseudoscience, but that's not science, it's snake oil salesmanship.

Give specific examples of poets that perfectly described specific areas of psychology without any evidence to extrapolate from please, that's a wild claim to make without evidence. Please don't say Nostradamus.

What "source" are you referencing, you listed none I can see.

That which can be claimed without evidence can be discarded without evidence.

The language is Czech, and more details about the animation are in BSR's post.

Water wheel powered pumps like the one used to empty the dam have been used for 6000 years, and all of the techniques shown here were used in the ancient world.

That's all the details I had. Since it was supposed to burn I assume something like the former only multiple cuts. Obviously success was defined as no casualties and no property damage rather than no explosion.

The Polish MOD described it as deflagration and said: The object can be considered neutralised, it will not pose any more threat to the Szczecin-Swinoujscie shipping channel. https://twitter.com/Poland_MOD/status/1316282610071592960

If you look at this video covering the original attack, starting at around the 52s mark there is an explosion free splash which is probably this device https://youtu.be/vt4iqwkTJkQ

Technically correct: the Constitution does not provide specific details of how Supreme Court appointments are to be made. The fine details have been left up to the Senate and Executive (to a lesser degree, I believe). The executive branch has the right to nominate someone to the court, the Senate then has a duty to serve as a check on that. Technically there's nothing in the Constitution stating you're not allowed to advance a SC nominee weeks before an election.

It IS however, a naked partisan power grab. In 2016 one party argued, 8-9 months prior to the election, that their political opponents should not be able to have their SC nominee even get a hearing prior to the election. There was no actual precedent for this, but they insisted that the will of the electorate must be respected, and that we therefore must await the results of the election. So we did. Now 4 years later, the same party that insisted on respecting the will of the electorate in 2016 is taking precisely the opposite stance. Because last time they could potentially gain from the delay, and this time they almost certainly won't.

The CNN guy was correct: it is NOT unconstitutional to ram through a SC appointment. The authors of the Constitution didn't see fit to include that level of granularity in how the process would work. There is a process to clear this all up though: let's amend the Constitution! That's a super American thing to do! Let's establish, once and for all, the specific rules of the process. Then there won't be any back-and-forth like this about when a nominee can move ahead and when they can't. Nice and tidy.

The question then becomes: at what point in a President's term do they no longer get to nominate a replacement to the Supreme Court, when an election is pending? Should there in fact be no limit (like prior precedent, or lack thereof), and you believe that Merrick Garland should have been allowed hearings, and by extension the Amy Barrett hearings now are legit? Personally, I say we establish a cut-off to spare the political arguments in the future. Let's make it 100 days prior to the election: it's nice round number, bit over 3 months (so time for meaningful hearings and background checks), and should be after or at the end of primary season most cycles. That would of course invalidate both the 2016 and 2020 schemes by the Republicans, but I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

What's your take, Bob? How should this be handled? You posted the video, so I assume you have a stance on the issue?

You're right, this video is the problem.

In actual fact, we're capable of having fun with the stupid aspects of politics, while ALSO being interested in policy details.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits#from_embed



"Trump had known Defendant Epstein for seven years (New York, 10/28/02), and knew that

Plaintiff was then just 13 years old. Exhs. A and B.

10. Defendant Trump initiated sexual contact with Plaintiff at four different parties.

On the fourth and final sexual encounter with Defendant Trump, Defendant Trump tied Plaintiff

to a bed, exposed himself to Plaintiff, and then proceeded to forcibly rape Plaintiff. During the

course of this savage sexual attack, Plaintiff loudly pleaded with Defendant Trump to stop but

with no effect. Defendant Trump responded to Plaintiff’s pleas by violently striking Plaintiff in

the face with his open hand and screaming that he would do whatever he wanted. Exhs. A and

B.

11. Immediately following this rape, Defendant Trump threatened Plaintiff that, were

she ever to reveal any of the details of the sexual and physical abuse of her by Defendant Trump,

Plaintiff and her family would be physically harmed if not killed."


"On the second occasion involving Defendant Epstein, Defendant Epstein forced himself upon me and proceeded to rape me anally and vaginally despite my loud pleas to stop. Defendant Epstein then attempted to strike me about the head with his closed fists while he angrily screamed at me that he, Defendant Epstein, should have been the one who took my virginity, not Defendant Trump, before I finally managed to break away from Defendant Epstein."


@bobknight33 remember, this is only one of 35 different allegations, many of them in court now https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

Hmmmm...ok, that's not legislation but is what I meant. A forced buyback program is going to have issues.

1) I have no problem with companies having to answer for injuries caused by the prescribed, advertised proper use of their product. If shoes were sold as having the greatest shin kicking power, doing the most damage when you kick someone, shoe manufacturers should be sued by those who get kicked. If manufacturers haven't modeled and advertised in a way that suggests dangerous uses, the suits will lose. Lawyers don't take loser cases, so it won't be an issue imo. Special protections from liability are a problem imo.

2) I've never understood the endgame there. What is an assault rifle, and how are their capabilities special? That said, no one is clamoring for Uzis to come back. Without a legitimate reason for high capacity fast shooting rifles, and no attempts to ban semi auto rifles, I'm just not that bothered by it, but I do think it's placating not meaningful legislation.

3) I have zero issues with registration or background checks. That seems the right way to deal with "assault rifles". There's no reason it should be expensive or time consuming if records are up to date. If they make it expensive as a tax disincentive against ownership, I have a problem. Shooting isn't a cheap sport, $10-20 a year shouldn't bother those who spent $2k on one rifle.

4) No issue at all with voluntary buy backs. Involuntary buybacks are going to be a legal and practical nightmare.

5) one purchase per month, a bit much. One purchase at a time, I'm ok with, that's 3 a month, right? I'm suspicious of anyone who needs multiple guns quick before they calm down.

6) I'm all for universal background checks. I don't want nutjob and violent criminals buying guns they aren't allowed to own.

7) I'm all for not allowing those who can't handle day to day existence to buy guns. I'm even ok with TEMPORARY removal of their guns in some cases, but only if they're returned immediately after they're deemed competent.

misdemeanor hate crime? I thought hate crime was an enhancement charge that took a misdemeanor up to felony level. I'm definitely against taking gun rights away permanently for misdemeanors.

9) dunno what that is.

10) the problem is you can buy a receiver that needs to be finished, as little as one tiny drill hole is enough, with no serial number or registration. It's just a chunk of metal until it's finished. No problem with a background check for every purchase, but a maximum of one check per month seems a reasonable compromise.

11) with proper oversight and a system that ensures it's not abused, no problem for me.

12) Yes, strict guidelines and quick return seem necessary. 48 hours without a doctor stating it's necessary would work, but as of now they aren't ready for prime time on that it seems.

13) had that in cali forever, not an issue yet.

14) as designed, smart guns wouldn't be hackable, there's no reason for wireless connectivity. Battery? Make it charge itself by shaking it like some flashlights? I like the idea that guns can only be used by the owner, solves so many issues, mainly being shot with your own gun.

15) depends on what constitutes "safe". I agree, guns for home defense need to be available quickly.

16) some ghost guns are milled on professional cnc mills but unfinished. 3d printed guns, I'm not a fan. 3 shots is plenty to murder someone, and with no identification it's a near perfect weapon for crimes.
3d printing is advancing constantly. You can print in metal with fine details now on home equipment. I think it won't be long before stable guns can be printed if they aren't already.

Thanks for doing the research. I seriously doubt most could pass even a democratic congress but some would, and most won't pass court challenges, but I understand your reluctance to put that to the test.

If you're going to fight the swamp thing, I won't argue against leaving a few snakes in the black lagoon. Some opposition is healthy, but the ability to be obstructionist on every idea is gridlock. I don't see it getting better.

Thanks for the details.
I'm guessing, like the others tossed off planes for the same actions, she's now going on the no fly list?
I only wish it was a no public transportation list, bus and train passengers shouldn't have to deal with her either.