CharonY

Considering he is also still blaming Obama (e.g., recently for the plane crash), one would need a very deep breath indeed.

As part of that, he is constantly lying on twitter as well as amplifying lies by others. And he is also dismantling important government agencies. Due to his inclinations to lie, it is not clear whether the way he does it is based on ineptness (thus causing more cost and damages than are saved) or whether it is is just nefarious callousness (e.g. to benefit his operations, or even something simple as exerting power without accountability). Also, he is a effing Nazi.

It was mentioned that Canada is interesting due to availability of resources. For example, more than half of US imports of crude oil comes from Canada. In addition Canada has some of the largest freshwater reserves.

There is a possibility that the protein is harmful to the cells. Are the proteins membrane proteins and/or is aggregation likely? Is the vector present in cells when not induced? And does it remain if you induce?

You are in the minority then. Things told by Trump are not depreciated, they are just fact-checked. If you cannot comprehend the difference, discussing your opinions is probably not very useful. It does look like you agree with the man who thinks that Ukraine should belong to Russia. Yet he decided not to leave the country when everyone thought that Russia is going to take over Ukraine within days. This is neither her nor there, but Churchill is a bit of a problematic character (as virtually everyone, which is a bit of an issue in itself) but he got lionized because of his resistance to the Nazis.

It all makes sense if you just assume that they are all projecting.

Well, it looks like that the US seeks to "normalize" relationships with Russia and hang Ukraine out to dry. Russia meanwhile is enticing businesses: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/19/world/europe/trump-russia-ukraine-putin-trump.html Blood money.

This is not my field, but there are a various studies looking at OC at extremes and how they might (or might not) contribute to creating potential precursor. A study discussing specifically at heating (as in atmospheric entry) is found below. The relevant part is that organic matter is not lost entirely (as in fully combusted) but sees some re-ordering of the organic components. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2020.116266

It is not a key step in evolution as such, as it predates evolution as we understand a fair bit (there is the concept of molecular vs organismal evolution, but they refer to different aspects. Also, time is not the real issue. The critical biochemical processes do not happen on geologial time scales. Rather, the issue is pinpoint the exact boundary conditions that have co-occured to make the formation of the first biomolecules possible. One fairly simple one is the question if abiogenesis actually happened on Earth. The findings of certain organic molecules on asteroids could indicate that completely different conditions than those on Earth might have given rise to them. On the other hand, it is possible that those are not related to life on Earth or that they had to come in via asteroids or other mechanisms and meet other conditions that were present on Earth.

Careful with the disrespectful posts. If the president could read, he could get upset. About that: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/two-cats-in-california-died-after-drinking-raw-milk-recalled-for-bird-flu-their-owner-says

Well then let's say historic lessons plus synthesis and advancement of that knowledge plus tech?

Sure, and the trick is to figure out how to optimize a system and also what the priorities are. I am sure there are different views on it. For example, what delay would be acceptable to, say, ensure that 0 lives are lost vs 1 vs 10? Folks calling for total deregulation usually are not the ones paying the price. Conversely, it makes sense to build in accountability mechanisms (and quite a few of those do exist) which check for unnecessary bloat. A bit of an issue however is when folks calling for deregulation have all the money and power, whereas folks who might be affected are the poor and powerless.

In addition, today we have improved information structures and are able (at least theoretically) to handle much higher data inputs. Assuming we have a good idea what to optimize for and by deploying appropriate algorithms it might be possible simulate free market price information. There will be huge challenges of course, and there is good reason to believe that it won't be as effective as a competitive system. But I also don't think that we can take the lessons learned from history without acknowledging the difference in knowledge and technology.

I stand corrected. It isn't tomorrow yet and it got worse. I shouldn't have read the news.

The only way the world can become more stupid is by whatever is likely going to happen tomorrow.