Schoof’s hard right government has only been in power since June, and though they’ve voiced explicit support for Israel they have called for a ceasefire and urged Bibi to allow humanitarian aid to Gaza. So in that way, yes, they could have chosen not to call for a ceasefire or humanitarian aid at all.
Thank you.
Public polling is showing that Harris would get a big boost in voter support if she and Biden went for a weapons embargo.
Source?
edit: It’s absolutely amazing to me what y’all will downvote.
The recent NCAA conference kerfuffle proves money was only part of the problem, though. While there certainly have been declines in state support and endowment revenue, they’ve also spent decades prioritizing things like sports, facilities, and coaches over research and academic programs. And we can’t even justify it by claiming that Universities need to prioritize revenue-generating entities to support non-revenue generating entities, because sports lose a stupid amount of money each year. They’ve lost track of what Universities are supposed to be doing, which is education, and they’re doing it in a way that keeps them trapped in a financial doom loop.
Yep. Page 30 in the referenced study.
Yes, but the lede is why. They don’t really get to anything resembling a resolution until something like 1/2 to 2/3 of the way through the article. Even now I’m still unsure whether the 500k excess deaths were rabies infections or due to tainted water. They never got around to providing much clarity on that front. The paper only goes so far as to say a) more rabies vaccines were sold, b) people saw more dogs, c) fecal counts in water went up, and d) DO in water went down. But that comes with two huge caveats:
Feral dog data were collected after the ban and “do not allow us to reject that feral dog populations were already higher in the high-vulture suitability districts even before the collapse of vulture populations.”
Fecal coliform also has human origins. And the uptick in fecal counts (along with the decline in DO) was in areas where more people live.
Correlation between excess human deaths and vulture decline wasn’t actually teased out into any kind of causation, and the best they could do was link death upticks with spatially isolated poisoning nodes. Urban areas had a more pronounced effect, but urban areas have a lot of other factors that can cause death, and none of those factors were controlled for, or really even mentioned in section 6.2 or the conclusion. Overall the paper is crappy because the study is quite poor, so I guess the author did the best they could with a study that tried to do far too much with far too little data.
Blech. The opening to the article isn’t any better, and they clearly buried the lede to keep you scrolling. Here’s the gist:
Vultures eat cattle carcasses.
Anti-inflammatory cattle medicine Diclofenac is toxic to birds.
Price of Diclofenac falls in 1994, becomes widely used.
95% of vultures in India die over 1990s and 2000s.
Diclofenac banned in 2006.
Rotting livestock carcasses, no longer picked to the bones by vultures, polluted waterways and fed an increase in feral dogs and rabies.
Districts with no vultures saw uptick in human deaths. Districts with vultures saw no uptick. About 500,000 excess deaths across India.
What a fucking terrible article.
cAnCeL CuLtUrE11!!! fReEzE pEaCh!!!@
Israel ≠ Netanyahu
There’s a very big difference between what the broader Jewish community prefers and what Netanyahu’s right-wing government prefers. But, to be sure, the best way to make those one in the same would be to withdraw support.
Not according to the source I linked. His split with Biden and the Democrats has been years in the making, and has reached a point of no return. He wants Trump, and he’s willing to drag Biden through the mud to get Trump. This is not according to Bibi, this is according to people who worked for Obama and Biden, as well as Democrats in Congress.
Netanyahu wants Trump and will continue to ignore all attempts to intervene until Trump is elected, at which point Gaza will be annexed, the remaining Palestinians will be killed or “relocated”, and he will pressure Trump to bomb Iran. The ICJ, UN, Europe, and Democrats no longer have any influence on the Israeli right-wing government. This is all for naught.
Bibi will name it Trump Alley or something else equally ridiculous, just like he did with the Golan Heights.
This is a pretty big shift for the US, and it means the pressure is finally starting to really register with Biden. If the “uncommited” results in the Michigan primary were enough to get his attention, recent polling that puts him 8 points behind Trump likely changed the debate for the foreseeable future.
Fascinating, as I had no idea it could start to happen this quickly. This really helps explain how regional dialects like the Carolina Brogue emerged in isolated parts of the country/world.
Worse. Cocaine Sharkicanes.
Whatever the fuck you do in the comfort of your own basement is your business, chief.
How many different ways can I tell you guys that a doomsday clock is the most ludicrous and flatly ineffective tool for communicating the stresses we’re facing in the 21st century? Do you need me to send you a telegram? Maybe a passenger pigeon? I can have it written in the sky by a biplane if that’ll help. Maybe in another language? Hieroglyphics perhaps?
My dude, I studied this. I have two graduate degrees in these subjects. I’m no stranger to the very real problems we’re facing as a global species, and in fact I’ve dedicated my entire career to fighting environmental degradation, often at the expense of my family, my finances, and my health.
A DOOMSDAY CLOCK IS STUPID AND HASN’T HELPED ME OR ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES AT ANY POINT IN OUR ENTIRE PROFESSIONAL CAREERS.
God fucking damn y’all are dense.
The clock is supposed to be about impending doom.
Which I’ve already clarified is ridiculous and unhelpful even if a crisis deserves our utmost attention. That’s on both a pragmatic and a psychological level. If you want a long series of continuous eye rolls, by all means continue telling people the sky is literally falling.
Slow moving disasters can include many things and I used climate change as an example. But there are many others.
None of which include global annihilation as even a remote possibility.
Disease, blight and even an asteroid if it’s big enough.
Do you think telling people we’re seconds from an asteroid hitting will help them do literally anything? What if you tell them that every single day for 40 years? Do you think it’ll help them more in 40 years than it does today?
Since you completely avoided meaningfully responding to literally anything I just wrote and fell back on repeating yourself as if I somehow don’t understand English, I’ll bow out here. Enjoy your masturbatory doom fetish.
I have a graduate degree in climate policy and have worked in the environmental field for almost 15 years. We do not have a high chance of self-ceasing thanks to climate change, and I implore you to stop framing it that way. That kind of language is absolutely and unequivocally unhelpful when it comes to communicating the challenges we face. The fact that laypeople have spent decades saying climate change is going to “destroy the planet” or “kill us all” is exactly the kind of problem I’m talking about. It breeds paralysis because it’s something that you can’t possibly conjure a constructive response to address. If literal Armageddon is coming, then the solution isn’t to try to stop it, the solution is to live your life as best you can, while you can.
Do we face significant challenges as a result of climate change? Absolutely. Is some kind of global food crisis and/or localized famine likely? Absolutely. Will storms and sea level changes displace entire communities of people and worsen an already bad immigration crisis across the globe? Absolutely. Will infrastructure suffer and become increasingly expensive to maintain and adapt? Absolutely. Will changes stress local ecosystems such that extinctions become more likely? Absolutely. Will governments struggle to meaningfully respond when the public purse is constantly stressed by increasingly expensive natural disasters? Absolutely. Will some people die of heat stress, starvation, drowning, etc? Absolutely. Will we “self-cease” as a result?
NO.
So then given that I don’t accept your premise that global annihilation is in any way relevant to climate change, and given that the threat of nuclear Armageddon is something the individual is completely powerless to address, I’d like to counter that a “Doomsday” anything that constantly creeps closer and closer to an imaginary red line, is a completely fucking stupid way to communicate the challenges we face.
Let me put it to you this way: if someone told you an asteroid was going to hit the Earth 90 seconds from now, would you try to stop it? Or would you call your friends and family and tell them you love them?
I’m certainly not disputing that western governments have more leverage over some countries than others.