U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

Post by iamnothere » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 4:14 PM UTC

urams wrote: post #267

runako wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you were playing basketball and Lebron James walked by and you threw the ball to him Yes, this is a terrible analogy for the war in Iran. Hugely unpopular, costing Americans vast sums of money daily, headed for possible catastrophe. Very much not a low-stakes "Lebron walks by" situation. Better analogy with Lebron would be: championship game with a title on the line. He gets possession as time runs down and the…

I will remember from now on that you can compare war to Lebron playing in a championship game but not to him playing in a pickup game. But to be clear, the comment I replied to was one in which you made an abstract point that it doesn't make a difference to someone if you can do something but in practice don't/aren't willing to and I think that this is obviously wrong (just because Lebron didn't dunk doesn't mean he…

Post by eudamoniac » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 4:22 PM UTC

adampunk wrote: post #424

eudamoniac wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, climate is perhaps my least aligned issue with this administration. I may end up voting Democrats next time, we'll have to see how bad their platform is again. I just wish I could vote to protect our climate and our borders at once.

What's your second least aligned issue?

Post by nixon_why69 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 4:23 PM UTC

dotancohen wrote: post #434

sofixa wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. Iran was rewarded with progressive sanction relief and progressive unblocking of their own money that was seized decades ago, as long as they continued cooperating.

They only had to cooperate until January 2026, then they were free to carry on with their nuclear ambitions.

Post by lostmsu » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 4:29 PM UTC

nancyminusone wrote: post #438

lostmsu wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, no quotes. But even as-is the idea of using ultraviolet to disinfect internal surfaces is not bonkers to any degree. Like I could see it working for nasal disinfection. 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.

have a read for yourself: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/re... As for me, I don't think you need a phd to read the warning stickers on bleach and isoproponal which say "do not injest" [2] [3] or warnings on germicidal lamps that say "do not expose to eyes or skin" [4]. If you do or have otherwise hidden knowledge why these should be ignored, say so. [2] https://www.thecloroxcompany.com/wp-c…

Post by lostmsu » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 4:37 PM UTC

alphager wrote: post #442

lostmsu wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, no quotes. But even as-is the idea of using ultraviolet to disinfect internal surfaces is not bonkers to any degree. Like I could see it working for nasal disinfection. 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.

It is absolutely bonkers to think about using UV to disinfect human skin, let alone the inside of the human body. Any UV radiation strong enough to destroy the cells of bacteria is strong enough to destroy human cells. We know that UV-radiaton that's not strong enough to kill bacteria is already harmful to human skin (we call the phenomenon sunburn).