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'.

Sorry. I have to call bullshit on that.
Each one costs as much as 500 average teachers salaries, not including operating costs. ;-)

Why are they trying to make the Osprey 2.0 anyway? We already have better, more capable, cheaper, tested aircraft in our fleet. I think someone is just infatuated with Avatar...Someone who doesn't care about the national budget or military readiness but loves being the only kid with a new toy....now who could that be?

Edison was a well known patent and credit thief.

I find it ridiculously suspicious that he "invented" the phonograph shortly after the invention of the exceptionally similar paleophone. Charles Cros submitted a sealed envelope containing a letter to the Academy of Sciences on April 30, 1877 detailing the design of the paleophone, the first device capable of recording and playing the recording back as sound, later that year an account of his invention was published on October 10, 1877 a month before Edison claimed credit, then Edison patented it the next year..
Suspicious to say the least if you consider how many other inventions he "invented" after someone else had already done so....like the light bulb.

Edison always seemed like the Trump of late 1800's inventors imo, constantly taking credit for other people's work, patenting their inventions without even crediting them, and was a total shady but successful business man thanks to a total lack of ethics.

Wizard of Menlo Park? Please. Just another backstabbing rat from New Jersy if you ask me.

I'm team Tesla all day long. ;-)

@newtboy,
" Sane policy makers DO assume the absolute worst modeled outcome"

Here we disagree. When you have a high degree of unknowns in your modelling, you don't always just go off the worst case. Let me argue from the extreme to demonstrate that in principle.

If we are looking to mitigate the risk of an extinction level asteroid strike, we don't solely look at the worst case. The worst case is at a minimum assuming another KT extinction level asteroid out there on it's way to us. Space is big enough that it's still possible one is out there undetected on it's way here in our lifetimes. The probability of that may be low, but it's still a worst case not impossible outcome.

With that known worst case, should we bankrupt the global economy building either a defensive capability to detect and destroy/redirect it, or the capability to abandon the planet in our lifetimes because of this worst case risk?

The answer to me is of course not, you must ALSO take into account other variables like the probability of it happening, the unknowns in the equation that prevent us picturing the problem with full accuracy, and other factors.

Self *promote because without the thumbnail, the title makes little sense.
Matt Tomasello uses broken skateboards to create boards capable of impossible tricks....hinged boards, sideways boards, rotating trucks, even rotating boards. His skating is just as inventive.

Kinda gonna disagree with YOU here.

So, you think nuttiness directly correlates with violent tendencies? But you then admit the nuttiest Christian group is Westborough, who has not been violent, just outrageously disgusting. You seem to think these democratic socialist people are nuttier than the moronic right, yet you admit they have yet to become violent, unlike many on the right. Even if it's also a function of numbers, there should be some violent acts if not murders coming from both outrageously nutty groups, right? But there just isn't.
Remember, Manson's family only had a few members, but a ton of nuttiness. They murdered many trying to start a race war.

Today, the left has more members than the right. Why, then, is the right so much more violent and terroristic? Simply because the far right has more members than the far left? That still doesn't jibe.

Granted, the lunacy on display here is over the top, but less so than the disgusting and divisive dehumanizing rhetoric coming from the right's leaders, spokespeople, and splinter groups. Indeed, this groups nuttiness is based on not upsetting others, antithetical to mass murdering.

There's FAR more crazy anger on the right. For every triggered democratic socialist or ANTIFA there's a dozen seething right wing white supremacists itching for a race war. Look at the numbers here, 500-1000 active democratic socialists?...how many right wing neo Nazis were in Charlottesville?

It follows to me that group murder rates come from not just the level but the type of nuttiness, number of members, uncontrolled anger/rage/hatred, group acceptance of violence, and access to weapons capable of murder. The right is miles ahead on every count besides membership. That's why, imo, there's got to be more to the equation than just nuttiness times membership.

As a weird side note to this, and how good Canada's SAR is, we just launched three satellites this summer. They're going into a geosynchronous orbit above the Atlantic. They're going to be able to track ship signals, create hi def images for rescue, and keep communications with vessels in distress.

I'm always impressed with our SAR capabilities. I wish we still sent DART teams to other countries to help.

Do you not understand that he gave you a very precious gift. He gave you his problem whether you know it or not.

How do you know he's not remorseful now? It's been 30+ plus years.

You're a fact guy. Check the facts if that's what you need. But that means you'd have to face your fears. Find him. That's the only way you will know for sure if he remorseful. Do you have the guts to face him again? I doubt he would send you a greeting card.

But you still have another problem. If he's dead already you will still need to forgive him. You will still have his anger. His death will not take away the hate.

You need to do this for yourself otherwise you will pass the anger onto someone else to find the answer you're not capable of. You may even pass it on to the people you love the most.

In short, you're just another bad cop. You have become the very thing you hate. You are abusing the power you have.

SHIT! Look at the clock. We're never going to make it to OZ on time!

Write that down. We can use it later.

Let's start with your comment about stupid people. Do you think smart people are capable of fooling themselves?

"I'm making the point that stupid people don't need Machiavellian levels of subterfuge to be fooled, especially when they're already biased and primed for it."

What is your solution for your problem with "stupid" people with all the knowledge you have?

So, we should treat all pious people as failed born agains because chances are 99.9999999 (repeating)% that's what they are. Humans are not capable of purely proper and pious behavior at all times, and strictly speaking even a moment's lapse in belief or a disparaging thought dams one to hell.

Also, you do understand that, in practice, it's used to excuse the inexcusable by allowing people to believe they can do anything they like as long as they let Jesus in their heart before the last moment of life and are good afterwards. That's why this theology is evil, it excuses the most vile and evil actions and requires nothing in the way of restitution or contrition. That is evil, not good.

That is certainly what your ilk is hoping, and it is why they politicize any science they dislike in order to attempt to discredit it.
Sadly, so many don't have a grasp of the science and are so entrenched in their political team they simply take their lying spokesperson's word for the truth and never look for themselves...they couldn't understand if they did, they aren't scientists. (Neither are your spokespeople)

Climate change is a great example. You won't find a scientist who's a climate change denier that doesn't or hasn't gotten funding from energy corporations or their cohorts, often washed through donation companies to hide the source because they know it discredits them. What you apparently fail to grasp is the right is the group politicizing and confusing these issues, usually for monetary gain....sometimes over ancient divisive doctrine....never to reveal the "truth" or facts about a complex situation, that's simply not important to the right anymore, not a whit....I wonder if they're even capable of comprehending something complex anymore, certainly doesn't seem like it.

Carnivore, which intercepted all of any targets internet traffic without a warrant, was fully implemented by 1997 and has since been replaced with software like NarusInsight that records all internet traffic through any isp....again with no warrant.
If you believe governments aren't capable of seeing everything you've ever done online, you're fooling yourself. There's no such thing as real internet privacy.
This is hardly new, but it remains upsetting.

Typical lefties, screaming racism where there is none (Religion is not a race) and becoming uncivil because they aren't capable of disproving factual claims.

This is Charles Murray at Middlebury College all over again. Thankfully this time nobody got injured when the lefties lashed out.

Once again lefties do not understand a nuanced subject so they cling to moral outrage which quickly escalates to violence when they don't get their way - silencing free speech.

The senator was not blaming muslims for the attack, he specifically said there is no justification for the attack, and CONDEMNED THE ATTACK. He was saying that lefties are silencing free speech, and that in turn radicalizes right leaning people - which is a problem, because the last thing the world needs is right leaning people being radicalized into full blown racists - because nobody is allowed civil discourse, which divides people into extremes.

And this egging is a perfect analogy for the problem the senator was describing.


-----

The lefties have got people so scared to have civil discourse about immigration, integration and other similar issues that the only people not afraid to talk about it are genuine racists. This is a huuuuuuuuuuuge problem. And as a centrist, this frustrates me to no end, because I have racists on one side of me, and lefty fascists on the other - both of which foaming at the mouth.

Oh HELL no. Anyone who accepts her endorsement or worse, her "help" should be run out of the election immediately, don't pass go, don't collect $200. Go away Hillary, you already cost us 4 years of Trump, if you do it again you deserve the lynching you'll receive from his base.

Like many ideas that might have saved the planet, they only stood a chance of working if you removed any choice.
Since that's not the norm in most places, I've understood we are doomed almost since I first heard of over population exceeding the sustainable food production levels, then along came global warming and ocean acidification. I understand that most people today are not capable of long term responsibility....making decisions based on how they effect their great grandchildren. It only took one century of living for today to set up a situation that threatens to destroy the planet. I see less than no hope of staving off disaster, instead of even trying we're firing all rockets at 110% to speed up the process and arguing over possibly turning down the thermostat next year.

Wow, do you have the characters wrong.
Bob is not master Poe, Bob is one of the scapegoating cattleman demanding the head of that halfbreed Chinaman for the crime they won't admit they committed themselves.

Even Obi wan took up arms against active stormtroopers.

There is no winning your opponent to your side when your opponent doesn't even believe their own argument. Bob applauds what he angrily railed against just 2.1 years ago and denounces the exact same tactics he defended. His arguments aren't rational or capable of contradiction, they're feelings he won't defend against facts except with occasional whataboutism....feelings he hopes will make you distrustful of all right wingers, I think that's why he's comes here, he thinks he has an audience of lefties that will believe the right is as silly and deluded as he claims, and some are, but the purpose certainly seems to be sewing division, not comprehension, certainly not unity.