401–410 of 540 posts
Let's not forget those from the big tech (you know the names) who kneeled before the king.
77,302,580 Americans made it happen. 87,037,184 voting-elligible Americans sat it out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about if you don't know anything about rolling coal and you don't realize people like to drive loud cars. I've had several friends tell me they just couldn't drive an EV because it just doesn't have a soul, meaning it doesn't have that roar for its performance. It being nearly silent as it accelerates hard is missing half the point. It's a common thing among car enthusi…
[flagged]
I'd encourage you to pause and learn about the culture from the many posters here before making surface level assertions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's how the Chinese empire collapsed. They had scientists and explorers until one day the emperor decided that knowledge upsets harmony.
You don't know anything about China.
Obviously there are many differences, no question. But it's actions like this where a bit of the comparison seems apt -- fervent, nonsensical anti-intellectualism / anti-science actions done purely in the name of ideology.
Why else would one actually go out of the way to dismantle a working ocean observation system, which provides a rich amount of data for multiple purposes?
The only action that seems to make sense is that: A) Some of that data can be used to observe climate change issues. B) In Trumpism, it is not enough anymore to propagandize that climate change is not happening. One must also actively suppress anything that could suggest climate change is happening, no matter how much the cost, no matter how much it hurts other non-related things.
Just doing random evil things for no benefit? At this point it's just wanton vandalism. Punks in suits smashing windows and setting fire to cars. Can anyone here, hand of heart, say "I agree with this decision"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the senile grandpa was awakened and paraded around when it was strictly necessary, but for the most part, it was lunatics running the asylum Unfortunately now we have both. > just look at this for example https://xcancel.com/USDOL/status/1795879796599111997 and try to imagine the kind of people who wrote and/or approved that message. What exactly is your problem with it? "just look at this" while pointing to a norm…
Normal tweet? What dictionary is menstruators found in?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
77,302,580 Americans made it happen. 87,037,184 voting-elligible Americans sat it out.
Sat it out, or were forced out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_efforts_to_restrict...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> being exposed to a "very powerful light" Isn't ultraviolet sanitization a thing? Are you sure this quote isn't another bit taken out of context that would further prove the point?
He did not tell anyone to do these things nor do I claim he did. He did ask his staff to "look into" whether either of these sanitation methods "could be used inside the human body", which is a bit like if I asked my doctor if I could eat laundry soap and shampoo instead of showering and doing laundry. The very fact that these ideas exist inside a US president's skull is VERY SAD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS…
In fact that's so obvious, that given you get very sad that someone else could even consider that tells me that you don't really know what you are talking about. Ironically, unlike Trump.
Won't comment on the bleach one without a quote though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Normal tweet? What dictionary is menstruators found in?
You're saying your sole criticism of the tweet is that it uses "menstruators" to describe "people who menstruate"?
What really puts all of this into perspective for me is I work in academia and one of my friends works for a defense contractor. He told me the maintenance cost per flight hour of F-35 was a bit more than $40k, which is significantly more than I make in a year as a grad student. It's crazy basic science is what's been the focus of so many cuts while it's so cheap.
I wouldn't assume that this is about cost cutting. If the goal were saving money, the cheapest option by far would be to leave the hardware in the water and just stop funding the monitoring. Instead the plan is an expensive operation to send ships out to extract 900+ instruments from under two miles of ocean. It's clear that this is driven by performative climate denialism and a pro fossil fuel stance. The Trump admi…
Oil industry pays and Trump delivers.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/09/trump-asks-oil-exec...