You might be thinking of the Fairness Doctrine, which has to do with the subject matter and not profits.
You might be thinking of the Fairness Doctrine, which has to do with the subject matter and not profits.
They analyzed how it would affect their numbers and determined it would turn off too many MAGA viewers and not attract enough other viewers to make up the difference. News for profit was always a bad idea.
The flaw of the question is assuming there is a clear dividing line between species. Evolutionary change is a continuous process. We only have dividing lines where we see differences in long dead ones in the fossil record, or we see enough differences in living ones. The question has no answer, only a long explanation of how that isn’t how any of this works.
A reminder that this is still how they think.
Here’s a fact check OF a fact check about Project 2025, something that has been stated recently will gut the National Hurricane Center.
USA Today’s fact check of that claim
Now when I first ran across this link, I thought, hmmm…are liberal Youtubers making up stuff to sell their position as a hurricane approaches? Maybe so. Then I read the article and actual text from Project 2025.
Project 2025 “does not call for the elimination of” the National Hurricane Center, Heritage Foundation spokesperson Ellen Keenan told USA TODAY.
Not in the text, this part of the fact check is correct. The text calls for review of it as well as other agencies and downsize or move resources around as needed. But then I see:
Data collected by the department should be presented neutrally, without adjustments intended to support any one side in the climate debate.
Well, that set off some alarm bells in my head. They aren’t actively proposing to shut it down, but there does seem to be an agenda here.
Project 2025 accuses NOAA of “climate alarmism” and calls for it to be "broken up and downsized.” “That is not to say NOAA is useless, but its current organization corrupts its useful functions,” the playbook says of the agency.
I read all this as exactly how MAGA Republicans in power have been treating anything tied to climate change. They aren’t completely cutting things out, only the parts that are inconvenient to their agenda. Which of course is terrible science, and will absolutely affect the ability to learn and respond to future threats.
USA Today is a tool for them if they are marking such claims as completely false.
Easy fix - “Are there any dead leaves to protect our eggs?”
So the comic is a lie to give us feelings.
But mulching leaves is so much better than raking and removal. All those nutrients, gone.
They wouldn’t be swing states if everyone could/did vote. Look at the typical voting percentage, it’s very sad.
The only plus from this approach is that it is using already extracted petroleum products to create energy instead of pulling out new carbon sources from the ground. But like others have said, burning plastics is nasty, and would require a huge proof of concept that the emissions are low and not dangerous. Which I guess they skipped over.
Correct, the differences make the analogy good enough to visualize the concept. It does however suffer from the same problem as the balloon one, in which someone can get the impression the expansion has a center. The wiki for the expansion of the universe goes through the various analogies and where they break down.
I would suggest Dr Becky’s Youtube channel for a number of excellent videos on the expansion as well as the current problem of getting an accurate measurement of the correct Hubble expansion rate. The James Webb telescope was hoped to solve that dilemma, but we still aren’t sure.
I was going to say, it does depend on the drug and person. My son had that experience where the insurance flip-flopped to cover generic instead of Adderall, but it did not work at all for him so we had to fight to get it changed back. Since then every year or so insurance plays their game and we have to go through the ritual explaining why it can’t be generic when that becomes the one covered. It shouldn’t be this hard, right?
Once he gets past this election he’ll settle down and start doing some things for the public, like helping build houses or whatever.
At the cluster level it will depend on the velocities and distances. For example, using very rough numbers the current expansion rate means that space between us and the Andromeda galaxy is expanding at 55 km/s. Seems fast until you realize the distance needed to see the effect build to this level. For perspective I found someone’s calculation to reduce it to solar system level to end up with ~10 meters/AU/year. But of course at this distance gravity dominates so we can’t measure that directly and it may not even be large enough to consider.
A larger and slower moving galactic cluster would be more affected than a tighter one. I don’t know what our Local Group would be considered to be, but there are a hundred or so galaxies around us that appear blue shifted, so they are moving towards us even with the expansion.
Seems like the prayers didn’t work once again. Maybe next storm?
Good visualization but inaccurate. Space between galaxies in a cluster and even the stars in a galaxy is also growing. The difference is in scale. There’s so much distance between galactic clusters and the largest structures of the universe that added up that expansion amount is so much bigger. The balloon analogy with galaxies as dots on the surface is closer since the dots also do grow some, but the balloon would have to be huge to capture a good scale comparison.
Even a hypothetically true artificial general intelligence would still not be a moral agent
That’s a deep rabbit hole that can’t be stated as a known fact. It’s absolutely true right now with LLMs, but at some point the line could be crossed. If and when, how, and by what definition has been a long debate nowhere near resolved.
It’s highly possible that AGI/ASI could come about and be both super intelligent and self conscious and still have no sense of morality. But how can we at human levels even comprehend what’s possible? There’s the real danger, we have no idea what we could be heading towards.
I would guess that hiking or trail maps are probably much more detailed than a road map, so that makes sense that it would still be a thing, although certainly digital versions have made some dent in them. Electronics are a bit more susceptible to the environment and the need for power though, so maybe not as much for those reasons.
That was the next layer, but they can’t get to that point if the voting isn’t close. I don’t disagree that elections is one of the many reasons why the court got stacked, but way before the SC there WILL be corruption attempts at the voting level. See Steve Bannon’s commentary on how they’ve put people in place in voting areas and have formulated a plan to question voter authenticity. They know they can’t win with a fair election, so they’re finding more and more ways to subtly cheat. Or maybe not even subtle now, since they keep saying everything out loud.
And the best way to counter this is drown the attempt in voter numbers, so that even if ballots are questioned or tossed or people turned away, the number still are high.
Alternate question: do any of you (maybe a bit older than 35) remember the last time you bought an updated paper map for your area, or one for a road trip? They used to be at most checkout lanes in many stores.
I can already hear the “maps on paper? How could you find anything?”
Looking that way. Vote anyway. Let’s see if we can break a record of voter turnout and margin of difference. No more of this stupid late night “still 50%/50% results, too close to call” because everyone thought it was a done deal and they didn’t need to show up. Amazing how when everyone thinks that, there aren’t enough votes…
Laughs in electrical tape.