metalslug

Trump has certainly been flattering of Putin in earlier times, but you would do well to take an actual look at "these days"; Barely a month ago Trump was asked during an interview with Piers Morgan if he would now agree that Putin was a "...an evil genocidal monster?" and responded with "I do, for sure, and who wouldn't? What’s happening is horrible." , in addition to stating that he regarded Putin's threats of nuclear strikes as unacceptable and would counter them with reminders of the West's superior arsenal. Therefore; these days it's not the 'best mates' narrative that lefties continue to sell. I dislike Trump myself, I've said it several times, but he should be disliked for valid reasons rather than outdated narratives.

Well, not that person, as you've curiously used a photo of a crying lefty.

Well let's not be sanctimonious about this. Short of helium balloons; everyone here who skydives depends on fossil fuels to do it. Next time you buy that completely necessary jump ticket, give a nod to the oil producers.

Amongst the Star Wars fan fiction it had been pondered if the character of Yoda had any other names. It had been suggested by one that his family name was Layheehoo.

Right, because Musk is a rookie and couldn't possibly have considered this point in massive detail already .

This from the guy who was asking how a public figure can be cancelled by one person? As noted in that thread even yourself and bill had different perceptions of cancel culture, as did I. There was a lot of that going around.

Then it's conceivable to you that an increase in 'climate change' deaths is actually not an increase, as a relative percentage to population growth. In absolute values there's been an increase in pretty much every cause of death over the same period, notwithstanding that 'climate change deaths being largely spitballed values with regard to determining direct or indirect cause of death.

'shift' or 'extend' ? Is there a reason they cannot continue agriculture in the present southern locations?

Brent and I are different forum members responding to different posts. In other news; Water... wet ! How does that value compare to global population growth over the same period? ...and what was their 'cause of death' determination based on? How about this;

Thanks for finding these and due credit to these forecasters. It would be great if we could have reliably similar forecasting today in the mainstream media instead of the kind of forecasts that bring impressionable children and nutters to tears of despair over their own imminent doom in their lifetime. From the scattergun of forecasts out there some pellets have hit the target. That NASA guy got it right twice, if not yet retired he'd be good enough to work for SpaceX now.

Yet books exist from respectable companies that don't have that content, possibly one's now adopted by Florida. Will this mean that Florida students will be incapable of learning mathematics without the banned content? Time will tell, I suppose, but I doubt it.

OK, you may need to help me here; Is mathematics a mandatory subject for Florida students at any stage in their curriculum? By comparison; is scripture or religious studies mandatory for Florida students at any stage in their current curriculum? Surely you concede that difference is important is determining what to ban? Why would a mathematics textbook need to introduce that context at all? Why does it require visual cartoons? Is it relevant to the mathematical problem as to what race the characters are? The "Joe wants to buy a book..." scenario would seem perfectly adequate, the reader is free to make their own (imagined) determinations as to the race or even the gender of 'Joe', if they somehow felt that it was relevant to the mathematical solution. "Disagree respectfully"? Certainly that's a fine attitude to have, but it has no place in a mathematics textbook, so why introduce it in the content? If Florida had accepted a mathematics textbook containing visual cartoons of exclusively white males they would get absolutely panned for that, so leave them all out I say.

Are you seriously comparing a mathematics textbook to the Bible in that context? Surely you would agree that there are many ways to teach mathematics without ever needing to reference scripture or politics or any ideology outside of the pure sciences. Would you be happier if scripture were allowed in mathematics textbooks? I have as much contempt for scripture as you do but by comparison it would seem to absurd to ban scripture from the Bible because the entire book is scripture and it's optional reading as opposed to mandated curriculum. Seeing the difference?

Hmm.. you're not perhaps one who's quick to cite Godwin's law when it suits your purposes, right ? I would expect that skydivers from both sides of the argument have the same choices in Florida and that is to "go jump", either literally or metaphorically.

Those seem great. I'm rather a fan of modern nuclear at the moment. In fairness though; Joe was referring to powering vehicles specifically, not remote sites. Those don't seem quite suitable in that respect.

Well, Joe B is optimistic he can save a bit more of the earth with a climate friendly military fleet , considering all those recharge stations on the battlefield and the time that can be afforded to stop and use them. Or perhaps hydrogen? Large tanks of it on a battlefield? Sounds splendid. Maybe the mid-air refuelling of other aircraft will soon be an electric cable dropped from a KC135 Tesla big battery... 'cause climate change is a graver concern than an enemy at the gate.

You're behind on events. Lefties already did this. https://nypost.com/2020/08/01/protestors-burn-bible-american-flag-as-tensions-rise-in-portland/

I'm wondering if Ron is yanking their chain on this, as in; "If you believe that then you might believe this..."

After your history in this forum? I can afford to be wrong here. You'd like the 'win' on this one? Take it; bill is dead right. I concede that the mainstream understanding of cancel culture includes boycott action. I'm disappointed that it does but I'm unable to deny it. 'The right' is trying to 'cancel' Disney. Or in the presence of social pressure. The decision still falls to individuals in those cases. This is where I find myself now, feeling that cancel culture is neither good or bad. It's a synonym for common and predictable market phenomena and therefore quite uninteresting.

Fair enough. Seems there's a few differing opinions on what constitutes 'cancel culture'. I concede I may be on the wrong side of what constitutes the more popular definition then. It is said that Will Smith now fears being 'cancelled' as several pending movie deals are now suspended or cancelled. The individuals making those contract decisions did not put out a national poll on the matter before deciding that. They subjectively determined that he was just not good business right now and unilaterally decided, as is their right. It's entirely possible for a handful of people to scuttle someone's career, whether deserved or not.

You're sure? I recall a separate thread on this subject mentioning (by bill or olof) that it was barely profitable to recycle them and that a only small percentage of existing batteries get recycled. Then there are solar panels and wind turbine parts, potentially many millions of them in a global future. A fair bit or extra landfill, excluding what ends up in the ocean. Not keen to rehash that same thread here though, may be better to go back to it if needed.

Hah ! I like that. Well played. However; Is the timeline fairly comparable? ..in so far as nobody at that time was declaring "Net Zero horses by 1830 !" Automobiles and fuels evolved over time at the rate determined by market and took several decades before automobiles surpassed horse & cart. The latter exists even today in a small number of rural communities as they were never outlawed. I have said at least once in this forum that I would be pleased to see green solutions if they were sufficiently economical and reliable. I don't imagine any one of us looks at smoggy skies or oil-soaked marine life or polymer pollution and thinks "Aah, great ! " . On some level I have to believe we all wish for something that is genuinely cleaner. My own concern is rather that proposed legislation is attempting to push the process faster than it can actually run and that there are negative impacts that have not been transparently accounted for. Also; a hope that we won't see fossil-related pollution replaced by vast swathes of discarded batteries and 'green' hardware.

In so far as most (if not all) 'cancelled' public figures were cancelled by a single individual or a small body of decision makers based on a small sampling of subjective judgement. If boycotts count as 'cancelling' then one might that say drivers who dislike Ford vehicles are 'cancelling' the Ford motor company. I don't regard the word as an appropriate fit there. I also refer back to my Joe Rogan example; I would not accuse lefties of 'cancelling' Joe Rogan if they refused to listen to his work, but would if they fired or banned him.

?? OK... to help you then; I'm using the OP as the goalposts; 'The right' has not made any effort to dismiss Disney from their employ. Potential arguments so far seem to be that boycotts equate to 'cancelling' (which I'm not really convinced by, listeners boycotting Joe Rogan does not equate to cancelling Joe Rogan.) and/or that the state governor might revoke 'special privileges' from Disney. The latter could be a good argument for the OP if we had a clear measure of what these 'special privileges' actually are. Comparable to child tax credit or something else?

?? Rosanne was cancelled by her employer. Are you implying that Disney is in the employ of 'the right'?