“ my solution would be every able bodied Jewish man and woman join the French (or Polish, Russian, British) army and fucking fight…”

I agree that’s the noble thing to do, but I can’t condemn the ones that choose to seek safety in numbers with Jewish Palestinians as exclusively invasion minded aggressors. My 6 million tag was maybe a bit sharp, but you also know that the Nazi’s took Paris and as much as it sucked to be French or European under Nazi occupation, you also know adding Jewish to that carried a lot of extra consequence and danger to your family.

My POV is agnostic of everything save Isreali people today having a right exist as a nation. Which at this point from my POV leaves 1947 as somewhat academic.

It’s your insistence that Jewish people, and the existence of Israel, have always fundamentally been invaders that I was objecting to as it is so intensely at odds with factual history.

You gave a brief nod on not being a scholar of Palestinian history, but then proceed to just count all Jewish refugees as good as Zionist aggressors from day 1(or close enough), and the local Arab population as nothing but pure, kind caring victims of these invaders.

I will state again, that is ahistorical propaganda and NOT what actually happened. And for my POV, its enough generations back as to be Academic, but for your POV it is fundamental because without being able to writeoff Israel as invaders from day 1, nuance enters the calculus and suddenly the conflict is flooded with shades of grey because lots of parties all contribute to the bloodshed, and many with reasonable motivations from both sides yet too.

Please find me any reputable sources to refute the reality of 1920-1940s Palestine:
-Mass Jewish immigration fleeing European oppression raised tensions between Jewish and Arab Palestinians.(as one must expect)
-Arab palestinians were already chaffing and resisting British colonial rule(as one must expect)
-These tensions led conflict, initially more ‘civil’ with the Arab majority trying to refuse all business, sales and trade with all Jews.
-Escalation followed throughout that time, but in drips and drops and NOT a ‘surprise the Zionist army has arrived’! style of aggression

The violent escalation was a fight here, a beating there. Little individual fights, escalating into deaths. Retaliations slowly grew, with each side exchanging small escalations.

-the culmination of this was eventually all out civil war, and the Jewish side immediately accepting a UN mandated 2 state solution

-this culmination coinciding with the end of WW2 and revelations of the true extent of the holocaust can’t be ignored, it certainly shaped the Jewish mindset in the conflict.

-Their mindset was pretty clearly not inaccurate either, as the immediate response of all neighbouring Arab nations was a declaration of war on the new ‘state’, with bold claims of how quickly the Jews would be swept into the sea. The confidence was so high, a call was sent it for ALL Arab palestinians to abandon and flee the entire region of Palestine to better enable the complete cleansing of the land.

The above is all pretty much inarguably factual, and I’d bargain you could get an Arabic and Israeli scholar together to more or less agree on those facts which is saying alot.

——
Propaganda from both sides would like to declare that the Arabs harboured deep Nazi sympathies, and thus Israel was pure and true in all it did. Or from the other side, more or less your narrative of Zionist bad guys launching invasion from day 1(ish).

Both though are just sprinklings of half truths, with anti-British resentment naturally breeding some leanings towards the axis, and even genuine Nazi cleanse the Jews believers. And absolutely Zionists featured prominently within the Jewish population. Neither of those partial truths though make the propaganda of either side true, but instead just an incomplete and intentionally biased picture.


Again, please find me sources demonstrating I’m terribly wrong on all that, but the only ones I can find are clearly biased and the accurate accounts paint the picture above, the propaganda very, very clearly copies the real story more or less with just deletions of inconvenient bits

I love the Speed Racer-ish ladder and hose trucks.

1. Never trust anyone who says "basically" too much about things that aren't basic at all.

2. I don't see Taco Bells, Walmarts, and other terrible elements of suburban life. I don't know how that'll float (ho ho!) in South Korea, but it'd never hold water (ho ho!) in the US.

3. I agree with newtboy. I'd like to know what sort of people are on their payroll or board of directors. Do they have all the sorts of scientists ad engineers you'd want for a project like this or just a handful of pie-in-the-sky Silicon Valley-ish types?

I think you can promote but not double promote. Quality might also be off limits to keep voting fair…ish.

Howdy - I don't know if "addressed" is the right word. Commented on, but not given sufficient perspective. Having said that, the problem is incredibly complex, so there should be no expectation that Mr. Oliver's video or any other single thesis on the topic could possibly suffice.

Your "one chemical bond difference" is an appropriate consideration, but with recognition that once we reach on the order of C20-C40 length dispersable or emulsifiable molecules as surfactants / surface energy modifiers, the insoluble polymers come into play, with not 30'ish bonds growing one at a time, but leaping to 20,000 or more. No doubt the pool has already been irreversibly pissed into by the irresponsible producers that convert small molecules into very, very large ones, but with some control, responsibility, and integrity in our industrial process owners (yes, hell just froze over) there is no reason why we could not safely continue to produce the polymeric forms of PFAS. We do so for substantially more toxic chemical conversion processes today.

It's interesting to note the (usual) examples brought forward by others in this post (Teflon cookware), just waiting for someone to mention Gore-Tex, but by far the biggest impact won't be on consumer goods that we all touch regularly and recognize the name brands of, but will be on the industrial / commercial uses of these polymeric families that are pervasive in the systems / processes that we all derive benefit from every day. Ironies exist, that perhaps confuse the "all PFAS are bad" premise ... consider - effectively every seal, gasket and control valve in a water purification plant is most commonly made of a PFAS polymeric compound, PTFE included, all tested to rigorous specifications and compliance by specific agencies that do nothing other than deal with potable water (thankfully not the EPA - it's National Sanitation Foundation (the other NSF), or Water Research Advisory Scheme (WRAS) in the UK etc.) .

So my contention and the view of many in the end user community is that it's not the final form of some of these compounds that are bad, it's the horrendous messes we leave producing them. We can't unwind our Clock of Dumb, but killing the entire crop just to get rid of the long ago seeded weeds doesn't solve the actual problem, it makes it much, much larger.

Thanks for your comments.

had the same thought...kinda of.

"could he have said that better or is he letting us know in advance?"

strangely sort of legendary way of going. "he fell into the grand canyon". make grandpa seem more mountain man-ish.

but maybe not...
https://www.mygrandcanyonpark.com/park/faqs/falling-to-death-grand-canyon/

Music at the end sounds a little Hans Zimmer-ish. Think Batman.

I love that it is done frame-by-frame the same. Comparison:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryJuJuW_1Zo

I also love that it's a fantastic example of why hand drawn animation looks better than CGI for realistic-ish humans. I don't think it's possible to make a CGI version of Cheetaras sequence look better than the original hand drawn.

I remember the 80's in NYC. They polished the turd quite a bit since then, but it still is a shithole. I would have voted for this but it's sort of propaganda ish.

the subliminal message @ 10:20 (ish)

another method of diffusing tension in an argument about ideas is to locate a cat.

if someone says, "no, you are stupid and i disagree," etc, you can say, "yes but hey look, a cat."

and they'll say, "wow, that is a good cat." and you'll say, "yes, i know. let's stop arguing and be friends." and it's possible they'll say, "yes okay"

it's also possible they don't like cats, but then that friendship was never going to last anyway.

Hmm.

I think of "Michael Bay"ishness as a bad thing in movies.

Explosions for no reason. Narrative leaps that make no sense except to get to the next action. Plot only serves as a device to get from one explosion/action scene to the next with no character development or originality whatsoever.

If you've outgrown your teens and still like Michael Bay, I honestly feel pity for you. There is a world of brilliant filmmaking out there you're missing for this immature pablum.

To paraphrase, another film: Mr. Bay, what you've just made is one of the most insanely idiotic movies I have ever seen. At no point in your rambling, incoherent film were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational plot. Everyone in this theatre is now dumber for having watched to it. I award you no stars, and may God have mercy on your soul.

This is another example of Conservative thinking. All these guys are concerned with is the right now, and the near future. The next quarter. They have no idea what they're talking about here.

China is expecting their population to increase by 300 million in the next thirty-ish years.

I'll say that again for the folks at the back:

China is expecting their population to increase by one United States of America worth of people by the 2050's.

We're talking about a country with a government founded by a workers' revolution, that has had a widespread famine in living memory. (During the Great Leap era.) This isn't ancient history.

They cannot allow "market forces" to dictate how and where people live in North America where fertile fields are plowed under to make room for sprawling suburbs.

That's why they're building. That is why they are building UP.

Young families will not be able to just go any buy a house in the suburbs. China, for the most part doesn't build suburbs. Suburbs waste space.

They need existing farmland to be protected to manage their food security. They don't want a famine, that's how you get a revolution. They don't want a revolution.

They want stability.

China doesn't worry about next quarter because they planned for that a decade ago. It's the next decades that they're planning for now---a timeframe these Conservative talking heads are incapable of understanding.

You’re reading it wrong. The IPCC is showing temperature anomaly relative to a specific time frame, you have to compare against the same starting time frame or it is meaningless. Which is by the by an extremely frequently repeated trope used by the hard core denial side.

If you cant find comparable reference frames, use change from a common year. Go look at NOAA’s temps for 2000 and 2019 and take the delta, then compare that delta to the IPCC, you’ll find both fall around the sub 0.5C of change from 2000 to 2020, close ish at least to one another.

Edit:
That may have been a lazy explanation. I went and looked for your 0.83 for 2018, which looks like it is referencing a NOAA release, it lists it's values as calibrated against the 1951-1980 mean.
The IPCC however lists their own numbers as calibrated against the 1986-2005 mean.
Obviously, the mean temp from 1951-1980 is gonna be much lower than the the mean from 1986-2005, so you can't to a direct comparison. If you look at the instrumental portion of the IPCC results you'll see how much it 'under' hits the NOAA data too, just because it's calibrated to a warmer baseline.
Make sense?

I haven't heard, and I'd really like to know...

Has Trump instigated any new mass murdering?
Like, I'm not counting from military actions from troops already in-theatre. Non-status quo.

I mean, has he gone "Hey, lets bomb the shit out of Syrians. They're like the Mexicans of Eastern Europe, aren't they? No? Oh ok, nuke Turkey."

I mean, even Obama escalated actions and robo-killed hundreds (thousands?).

I mean, for all the sleaze and stupidity, has he done anything "war criminal"-ish?