Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Rob Dekker

Pages: [1] 2 3
The rest / Re: SpaceX
« on: March 22, 2020, 09:20:19 PM »
Well-researched, with lots of data.

“CO2 emissions from all commercial aviation in 2018 totaled 918,000,000 tonnes of CO2. Compare that to the 22,780 tonnes from the aerospace industry in that same year, and we realize that you would have to fly 40,300 times more rockets per year to equal the output of airliners.

CO2 emissions from the airline industry were only 2.4% of global CO2 emissions!!! So that means in 2018, the global CO2 output of rockets was only 0.000059% of all CO2 emissions. In other words, there are a lot bigger fish to fry.”


Text version:
How much do rockets pollute? - Everyday Astronaut

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: January 04, 2020, 11:16:26 PM »
Its reminiscent of when Steve Case Jobs was a genius & AOL Apple was worth $1.25 1011

Fixed that for you.  ;)

You are okay with just these two choices?
I would prefer a multi party system, of course. But the U.S. system is by its mathematically primitive design a 2-party half-democracy. We have seen that often enough: Green votes are effectively GOP votes. Ask Al Gore and Ralph Nader... That system needs to be changed first. Right now they can't even tackle gerrymandering.

By equating Dems and Reps (a false equivalency IMHO) you effectively work for Trumputin. With your lofty polit-theoretical demands you are pushing the worst neoliberal available (even if the Donald has no idea of economic theories) PLUS the most corrupt one PLUS the most incompetent one PLUS a Putin puppet. Maggie Thatcher at least read the neoliberal bible...

Just swallow it and shut up, right?
To the contrary.

It's the stupid voters over-represented by a stupid vote counting system. Yes stupid, stunningly stupid they can be. Even Bernie Sanders can't tell the difference between social democracy and democratoc socialism. They need some eloquent basic education... The only good thing with Trump: People are getting more politically active and don't swallow it anymore. E.g. without Trump no AOC.

The only reason I would vote 3rd party is if Gabbard gets the nomination. She’s on the right politically. Trump is far right.

But centrist/corporate Democrats are also on the right politically, because they serve their donors and not the American people. So, why would you vote for that? Any Blue won't do, when it isn't really Blue. Haven't the right-wing Clinton and Obama presidencies taught people anything? Identity politics doesn't make you left-wing, it's the economic policies. When these serve concentrated wealth, they are right-wing. Leftism has ceased to exist in the USA after Jimmy Carter. Only Sanders can bring it back.

Idk how many times I have to say this. I AM VOTING FOR SANDERS ffs. That being said, if he does not win the nomination I will begrudgingly support whoever comes up next.

The politics / Re: Russia, Russia, Russia
« on: December 20, 2019, 06:22:28 PM »
<No smearing of independent journalists Maté and Taibbi on this forum, thanks; N.>

Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: December 03, 2019, 08:02:31 PM »
Has the life of the humans digging up important electric car resources improved? Do you empathize with them?

The worlds major suppler of lithium is Australia.
Oct 17, 2019 - A mid-career Miner with 5-9 years of experience earns an average total compensation of AU$122,607
I don't think $122.607 a year is in need of much improvement.

Cobalt is usually the target when they talk of child labor and horrific conditions.
The Democratic Republic of the Congo supply's around 50% of the worlds cobalt
Only about 15% of the cobalt mined in the Congo comes from the Artisanal mining  responsible for the human rights abuses.
Tesla the worlds biggest manufacture of electric cars is making an effort to insure its cobalt is  ethically sourced.
Tesla have also reduced the amount of cobalt used in their battery's and are working to do away with it entirely .

The oil industry uses much of the worlds cobalt in the process to refine petrol.
We never hear about their ethics.

You have been mislead by the campaign to discredit electric cars by the oil industry.

Policy and solutions / Re: But, but, but, China....
« on: November 29, 2019, 08:24:09 PM »
....So we'll end up somewhere by 1.5C and 2.0C temperature increase before looking at options for carbon dioxide removal (CDR).

When people think of CDR, they usually think of artificial leaves or other large machines to suck CO2 from the air and pipe it underground (or deep under the sea).  However, there are much better options that can be used to increase global carbon sinks from better agricultural practices, which are increasingly being used.  Look up regenerative agriculture, biochar, sustainable grazing, renewable natural gas, or reductions in methane from rice farming. 

My favorite solution for carbon capture is the one Mother Nature has used, and can be adapted for the climate emergency:  weathering of olivine rock.

Olivine against climate change and ocean acidification

" It is expected that the cost of olivine will drop below 15 € / ton for large
mines in low-wage countries and limited transport distances. The cost per ton of CO2 will
then be around 10 €/ton, as one metric ton of olivine captures 1.25 tons of CO2. This
compares very favorably with the cost of CO2 capture by CCS, which is 60 to 90 € / ton
according to a recent report by McKinsey & Company (2008). "

Crush it, spread it, and it will turn CO2 into carbonates. 

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: October 25, 2019, 07:21:06 PM »


No I'll tell you what is insane.  VAG, BMW and Mercedes spending 100bn over the next 10 years, on which they will see virtually no return other than not going bust, compared to today's operations.

Why? Because they ignored the whole situation until it was almost too late and let Tesla take an unassailable lead.

7bn to enter a business worth around $1tn a year and take a niche lead? Peanuts.

Ford and GM spend this kind of money regularly.  The only reason they don't show a loss is because their business is big enough to absorb it.

Tesla is now reaching that critical mass and will be able to self fund everything somewhere in the decade to come.

Of course GSY, you shout and yell and stamp your foot, call us idiots and fools with mental deficient IQ.

All the fools and morons need to do is wait.  Because the fools are aware that, year on year, Tesla proves us correct.

When was it Tesla was going to crash and burn again?
When were they going to run out of cash?
What was the number of Model3's it was going to be impossible to produce?
Gigafactory3 was never going to be built, let alone produce a single car.
The list goes on.

Don't you get tired of being proven wrong?

For 2020, we have the pleasure of your

Model3 is a fraud
Semi is a fraud
Roadster 2.0 is a fraud

To look forward to also being destroyed. 

Not by faith,  dear me no.  Just by waiting for Tesla to do it.

We'll be here.  Don't wait up.

The rest / Re: SpaceX
« on: August 29, 2019, 03:46:28 AM »
Just a few weeks ago, SpaceX announced polar, sun-synchronous (SSO) ride-sharing flights, to be offered annually, for as low as $2.25 million for 150kg.,2582.msg219424.html#msg219424

Today, they have updated that program to have monthly flights, starting at $1 million, for up to 200kg, and going to mid-inclination orbits as well as SSO.  It all starts in March 2020.

H/t for top image:

The rest / Re: SpaceX
« on: August 28, 2019, 12:53:15 AM »
Woot!  SpaceX’s stainless steel “Starhopper” test vehicle for its all-new-design, more powerful Raptor engine, just completed its ultimate “hop” flight.  This paves the way for the Mk1 & 2 Starship prototypes to begin their own tests in weeks.

Here are the essentials:
SpaceX Starhopper Rocket Prototype Aces Highest (and Final) Test Flight

Drier reading, but more details:
SpaceX's Starhopper completes 150 meter test hop

You will believe a water tower can fly!  :o ;D

The politics / Re: Russia, Russia, Russia
« on: August 25, 2019, 05:35:01 PM »
What's good for the American people is fixing health care, reducing inequality, supporting the marginalized, action on GW, addressing gun violence, etc. 

But none of the candidates ever runs on those issues so whatever Russia did is immaterial?

Sanders and Warren have most of it covered.  What Russia did was help Trump get elected.  I don't see how that could be immaterial.  Maybe what Russia did was help set up the coming backlash against the right.  If so, it will have been a painful 4 year lesson.

The politics / Re: Russia, Russia, Russia
« on: August 25, 2019, 02:44:15 PM »

I get it now.  It works a lot better when the words make sense.   ;D ;D ;D

Great. And do you agree with it, ie that Russian interference has been blown out of all proportions for various reasons, none of which benefit the American people?

No, I do not agree.  But there is a lot to unpack, and my level of disagreement wasn't high enough to make it worth a response.  That said, I'll try to make a counterpoint now.

What's good for the American people is fixing health care, reducing inequality, supporting the marginalized, action on GW, addressing gun violence, etc.  We are so far from that right now.  We are in the middle of a slide to fascism.  So, what's good for the American people is anything that stops or slows that slide.

Russian interference is a focal point for resistance to Trump.  Anything that energizes the base and pulls in more borderline voters than it loses is good for the American people.  I think it is a winning topic for the anti Trump side.  Also I think there is enough there that it deserved some attention.  It has faded after Mueller's report was released, mostly because Mueller failed to wrap a pretty bow around his findings.

Is there so much else going wrong that at its core is more important?  Absolutely.

Policy and solutions / Re: The Hyperloop
« on: July 23, 2019, 07:36:04 PM »

Before SpaceX, there has never been a rocket that reached orbit (orbital velocity) and survived re-entry to land.  Let alone was launched to orbit and re-landed a second time.  Or a third time!

Tesla changed the electric vehicle universe, transformed EVs to be sexy, desirable, and widespread, and forced the entire industry to begin a transition it has resisted for decades.

Tesla installed what was the biggest grid-tied battery in the world in Australia, and changed the view of such an installation from impossible/unnecessary to one of being vital for grid resilience.

Just having an idea for something, or making a prototype, or doing something in a limited way or for a limited time, does not move the world forward.  I doubt a person afflicted with a neurological disease would agree to have your friend’s electrodes implanted in their brain!  Mass manufacturing of cars, or rockets, is a hundred times harder than making a prototype — witness all the EV startups going broke trying to bring their idea to market:  of all the attempts, none has survived since Ford.  Except for Tesla. 

If you don’t see the difference between what was then, and what is now, then I can’t explain it to you.  Google is your friend.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: July 22, 2019, 08:31:19 PM »

The day Tesla makes a profit over a period of several years and payed their debts down to a level that is withing the healthy range.

For a rapidly growing company, profit over several years without exception is very unusual.
As for the debt point, at what level would you consider “Healthy”?  And how would you measure it?

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: July 11, 2019, 02:28:20 AM »
U.K.:  Tesla Model 3 wins, not only as Auto Express Premium Electric Car of The Year, but also as the overall Car of The Year.

Tesla Model 3 Wins 2019 Auto Express Car Of The Year Award

U.S.:  Motor Trend:  2013 Model S is Best Car of the 2010 Decade, and the Ultimate Car of Motor Trend’s 70-year history.

Tesla Model S beats 70 years of motoring legends to win MotorTrend’s Ultimate Car of the Year award

The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: July 10, 2019, 11:12:41 PM »
I nornally don't post in these garbage/pure politics threads, but I must say Abradolph Lincler's username requires an explanation.
I haven't seen anything racist or fascist in his posts, and Trump voting is not a crime (though imho a mistake). But his username is mighty suspicious. I don't find it funny.

Well, I just figured it's an amalgam of Abraham Lincoln and Adolf Hitler, before reading the Rick and Morty reference. I don't know them. But I do know who Adolf was. Anyone who calls himself a half (ass) Hitler, is out of his mind. Well, voting for Trump proved that as well.

I do not care if his name is taken from a cartoon character. Outside that sketch (and probably within it as well), just not funny.

The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: July 10, 2019, 11:01:38 PM »
AL, what would it take for you to not vote for Trump again? And does AGW play a role in how you vote?

This was directed to someone else, but as I also voted for Trump, I will give my own answer.
It would take Trump switching to a pro-choice position on abortion, or a candidate on the Dem side who is both for stopping AGW and stopping abortion.

I would like Neven to add a dislike button.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: May 21, 2019, 07:12:16 PM »
-I never said Giga 3 would remain a muddy field until next year...

Denial Level: Terminal

What is happening with the Giga3 is pretty straightforward. The chinese get a factory, partially paid for by Tesla. Tesla gets to pretend it has a growth story.

In 1 year, Tesla will own 0% of the mud field. And Tesla will be seen as a mix of Enron, Theranos, and DeLorean.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: May 12, 2019, 08:12:24 AM »
So MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology the home of scientists like Noam Chomsky is now considered out of bounds for References by the "know-it-alls" on the ASIF.
No one has questioned the validity of the report.
They are questioning the interpretation of the article you shared and how you ran with it as evidence that autonomous taxi service isn't viable.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: May 12, 2019, 04:05:37 AM »
Appeals to authority hold very little sway in ASIF. That's good.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: May 11, 2019, 02:59:43 PM »

The guidance for this thread calls for quoting articles written by others. What to do when these articles are utter garbage?

Sadly another Lurk Mountain built from a house of cards.
I was suspicious of the source when I saw the quote from the infamous climate change denying, oil and tobacco industry funded Fred Singer. 

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: April 23, 2019, 03:32:31 PM »
Nvidia Corp. said in a statement Monday that Tesla Inc. was wrong in describing its self-driving computer as more powerful than Nvidia's, which Tesla used until it began developing its own chip.

"Tesla was inaccurate in comparing its Full Self Driving computer at 144 TOPS of processing with Nvidia Drive Xavier at 21 TOPS,"
a spokesman said in an email. "The correct comparison would have been against Nvidia's full self-driving computer, Nvidia Drive AGX Pegasus, which delivers 320 TOPS for AI perception, localization and path planning."

The statement also contends that "while Xavier delivers 30 TOPS of processing, Tesla erroneously stated that it delivers 21 TOPS. Moreover, a system with a single Xavier processor is designed for assisted driving AutoPilot features, not full self-driving."

And the SEC were listening.
Apologise up front for the length, but this is highly technical in nature and will not fit into a few words; even with the links.

Actually the Wiki page on Xavier gives 20 TOPS for a single core.

If you do the extrapolation, 7 Xavier cores give the same power as the Tesla chip but consumes  200W to do it.  The Tesla chip is 75W, only 15W more than the Tesla Autonomous 2.5 hardware, but with 21 times the compute power.

Nvidia states that Pegasus gives 2.2 times the Tesla compute power with 2 Xavier cores.  This is true.  However it also consumes 6.6 times the power.  In case nobody was listening, the presentation explicitly stated that the Tesla computer environment was a heat constrained environment.  In other words you cannot just increase the compute power by bumping up the power input, because more power consumed == more heat emitted.

There is also a specific piece of information in the presentation which is critical to the operation of the system.  Batch size.  It was stated that the batch size of Google hardware is 256.  In other words the Google processing environment waits until it has 256 operations before executing.  The Tesla is a batch size of One.

What does this mean?  In pure TOPS measuring the Tesla processor is significantly slower than competitors which batch to a higher value.  However in an Autonomous driving scenario, Tesla outperforms all rivals which use a higher batch value because it responds on even one operation required.

There is an aspiration to increase performance by 3* in the next iteration.  This might seem to be a difficult goal until you realise that the hardware is based on 14nm.  Current mobile processors are on 7nm today.  14nm was, almost certainly, chosen for reasons of cost as 7nm is cutting edge.  But in 2-3 years time 7nm will be mainstream.

Tesla will achieve its speed improvement with the same thermal level, or even less.

Nvidia is not even in the same country, let alone the same ballpark.

If you understand what was said in that presentation, you realise that to use Nvidia Tesla must:

Use the Nvidia compilers
Run code the way Nvidia want them to
Be constrained to the way Nvidia want them to execute code and use their processors.

The advantages of ASIC's is that they are Application Specific (Application Specific Integrated Circuit).  Meaning that the processor has been specifically designed to run Automotive AI functions.  Unlike Nvidia who use Graphics processing CUDA cores and force them into the mould of AI.

Tesla didn't just create a new processor.  They created the compilers for it, the language for it and they did the reverse engineering to allow code written for Nvidia chips to be recompiled to run on the new Tesla chip.  This is almost certainly inefficient and significantly less efficient than the Fully Autonomous Self Drive Tesla code which will have been specifically written for the Tesla chip.

Whilst it is not specifically stated, each Operation on the Tesla chip, with Tesla software designed for it, will be more efficient than the same code written for the Nvidia chip.  Hence why Tesla states Images processed as well as TOPS, along with the relative number of images processed by the prior system.  Notably I can't find any data for Images processed for the 320 TOPS Pegasus Nvidia chip.

The Tesla processor is almost certainly processing images at a higher rate than the same software on the Nvidia hardaware.  When Tesla optimise the software and triple the performance, that will increase this differential and make the Tesla chip even faster than the Tesla processor for the equivalent TOPS.  All for the same 75w.  With the current state of Nvidia hardware that would take 675W. 

Think that through and for every hour you drive the Nvidia Drive PX Pegasus, Self Drive is stealing 0.5KWH of your battery.  Or put another way, after 10 hours of driving with the current Nvidia Pegasus (100kwh/340 miles), you have lost 17 miles of driving compared to the Tesla equivalent of 2.5 miles.

Take that same Tesla future 3* extension, to the current Nvidia technology and you are losing around 23 miles of range for the same 10 hours driven.  Think I'm talking BS?  Look back at that Nvidia Drive Wiki Page and you will see that Nvidia are making almost no reduction in power consumption per hardware iteration, for a given TOPS value.  Tesla, on the other hand, is at 1/3 the power on the first iteration.  On the second it will be around 1/6th unless Nvidia makes a revolution in the way they produce their chips; which is not likely because Nvidia has multiple customers and they would all have to do a complete software refresh to gain the benefits.

Musk is not lying when he says that the Tesla processor is the best self drive processor in the world today.  What he is not saying is that only Tesla can use it and that is the main reason it is so much better.  In this market vertical integration beats horizontal every day of the week.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: April 18, 2019, 04:19:58 PM »
Is it so bad that a Model 3 has a carbon footprint comparable to the most efficient hybrids?

That is the conclusion he reaches only after picking cherries. A Model 3 (or any EV) powered by sunlight /wind has zero emissions. A model 3 powered by gas has about the emission of one of the most efficient ICE vehicles in the market, but only if one ignores the emissions of producing new oil with fracking and ignores the initial CO2 expenditure of the Camry as that liar did.

As the Grid greens with the most cost effective new energy (solar/wind) The average efficiency of EVs will increase while the average efficiency of Camry will decrease. So even in the worst of cases the Model 3's emission will decrease while the Camry's emissions will increase.

These shorts will destroy the world if it earns them a few pennies.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: April 18, 2019, 03:52:01 PM »
These days, the only plausible justification for vehicle electrification is reduced CO2 emissions, but that justification is more smoke and mirrors than substance.

Since investing in smoke and mirrors is rarely successful in the long term, this article highlights the grave intellectual flaws in sustainability myths fabricated by Tesla (TSLA) and explains why its long-range Model 3 has a heavier CO2 footprint than Toyota's (TM) humble but highly efficient Camry Hybrid.

The Model 3 and the Camry Hybrid are both classified as mid-size cars

The long-range Model 3 and the Camry Hybrid are both classified as "mid-size cars" in the US and "D Segment cars" in Europe. My first table summarizes the salient details.

Thank god for analysts and internet refs by experts hey? Where would we be without them? Totally lost obviously! :)
Is it so bad that a Model 3 has a carbon footprint comparable to the most efficient hybrids?

Even so, getting to that conclusion requires some interesting assumptions, such as this one:
The marginal fuel to charge an EV anywhere in the US will always be natural gas; and while increased renewables may improve grid average emissions, they cannot change the marginal fuel source for EV charging.

According to the US Energy Information Agency, natural gas turbines emit 599.8 grams of CO2 per kWh while more efficient combined cycle plants emit 512.4 grams of CO2 per kWh. Since combined cycle plants typically operate as baseload facilities and gas turbines typically fill the gaps between baseload and demand, I believe 600 grams of CO2 per kWh is the best figure to use for EV charging analysis.
He seems to think that baseload cannot be used for EV charging, and so he ignores all renewable energy. I find this ironic because the argument against renewables for so long was that it can't be used as baseload. Increasing EV adoption will surely increase baseload demands and supplies over the long run, which will be made up of a greater proportion of renewables as time goes on.  The author even says that most EV charging is done overnight (when marginal use is lowest), but then proceeds to argue that only marginal natural gas is used to power EVs.

Although just one anecdote, my personal situation is a counterexample to his claims. I have solar panels on my roof that cover electricity demand for my home and Model 3 over a year. In my state, we are not allowed to put more electricity onto the grid than we pull from the grid in a year, so I would not have been able to install as many panels without the Model 3.  In my case, the marginal increase in electricity demand has been filled by renewable energy.  I think my case may serve as a microcosm for the national grid's future.

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: April 17, 2019, 03:52:10 PM »
Definitely a glory

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: April 01, 2019, 04:23:08 AM »
Norway: No other car has had the number of sales the Tesla Model 3 attained in March.  Nothing even close.

Lasse Edvardsen (@nasalahe) 3/31/19, 4:06 PM
Ok. It’s March 31. and 10pm in Norway. I guess registrations is over for this month and quarter
So what happened in March? I will sum up in the comments ;) Hint: Tesla broke almost every record there is to break  :o
This happened in March:
- Top 8 days of registration ever in Norway is in March 2019. All of them are Tesla Model 3.
- Tesla Model 3 is, by far, the most sold car ever in Norway, of any kind, with 5305 cars. Broke Nissan Leafs old record at 2387.
- There was more than twice as much Model 3’s registered in March (5305) as Jaguar I-Pace total registrations ever (2004)!
- Jaguar I-Pace had 442 registrations in March. Model 3 had 551 in ONE day. March 26th!
- Model 3 most sold car in March with 5305. Next on the list is e-Golf with 957!!
- Model 3 most sold car in 2019.
- Model 3 10th most sold EV ever.
- Total Teslas registered was 5818. New record!

Dag Levkowetz (@zhell666) 3/30/19, 7:00 AM
 In a litle bit more than a month #Tesla M3 has a reached a market share of more than 2.5% of total EVs sold in Norway.

Bernie Decimates Multiple Trump Lies In Epic Video

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: March 17, 2019, 03:11:32 PM »
China: Gigafactory 3 update
Dozens of pile-drivers have been working day and night for weeks to prepare the site for construction.  Now the above-ground construction really gets underway.

The first steel, prefabricated load-bearing column has been erected and duly celebrated.  Visible progress will happen quickly now!
Interesting to note that this phase of Giga3 looks quite like the facility Tesla is building in Lathrop, California….

Vincent (@vincent13031925) 3/16/19, 4:05 PM
Now Tesla Shanghai Gigafactory construction is moving to the next level!
Translation: “Congratulation to Tesla Gigafactory GF3 Shanghai for successfully installing the first steel pillar in phase one” …
Image below.

Kelvin Yang (@KelvinYang7) 3/16/19, 3:30 PM
Some additional information:
This first column is for General Assembly building. 11.5 meters,10.8 tons.
General Assembly building is 450m x 48m x 15m in size.

Giga 3 rendering below is from the Tesla Model Y unveiling on March 14.

The politics / Re: The Empire vs Venezuela - News and History
« on: March 09, 2019, 11:03:29 AM »
Neven, it is just that this issue touches me closer and somebody opened this thread.

Is Maduro/Chaves neo-con (yes yes at least their pockets are). Is Putin neo-con? (maybe). Is Xi? Sí. The Norwegians? (perhaps)

All in common is human greed, just as those far left guys that fly around in private jets.

The politics / Re: The Empire vs Venezuela - News and History
« on: March 08, 2019, 08:39:28 PM »
As I've understood it, US mainstream media is selling the narrative that people in socialist Venezuela are starving because there's no food and therefore Trump/Bolton/Abrams/Pompeo are sending humanitarian aid, whereas they are meddling and pushing for regime change to force Venezuela to join the neoliberal economics party, so they and their oligarch buddies can enrich themselves with Venezuelan oil.

If you are implying that it's all because Maduro can't handle the hyperinflation, and so now some Harvard agent can rightfully proclaim himself king, with the entire world simply ignoring international law and accepting him as such, then you are wrong.
Didn’t want to come back to this thread but curiosity killed the cat... and Wow I must say I am surprised you believe these distorted facts just like that. I thought I had seen everything from the MAGA tribe, but apparently the far left cant escape from their own stultifying set of myths...
Anyway this is an interesting video of a venezuelan living in America and trying to explain reality from confusion in the least possible ideological position.
And I lie you not, I have heard narrative along same lines told to me by Venezuelan refugees in Madrid, people that left their country with not much apart from willing to have a life with dignity. This Already started going south from the times of the other mofo, the insufferable Chaves, now happily sleeping the eternal dream after screwing all he could.
Confy in your cab in Northrn Europe? Enjoy! We are really lucky people.

The politics / Re: The Media: Examples of Good AND Bad Journalism
« on: February 18, 2019, 08:10:01 PM »
Jimmy Dore loves BS, fails to check sources and facts:

Meanwhile I have a WaPo subscription. The Dave Weigel piece mentioned above has a link to an RT piece and explains why it is BS.
Required reading for those who haven't yet sorted out the DNC-Bernie thing - and more evidence for my recent statement here about spreading Trumputin propaganda.
Quotes later.

The politics / Re: Russia, Russia, Russia
« on: February 15, 2019, 02:51:35 PM »
Bellingcat will tell next week how they found that Fedotov's real name is Denis Sergeev. Meanwhile Russia has started to erase the internet traces that led to the discovery.
More about "Fedotov":
The Telegraph had previously reported the existence of a third member of the Russian intelligence hit squad and a trawl of flight records by the Fontanka news agency matched it to Fedotov.
Fedotov’s passport number differs by only a few digits. It is of the same ‘64 series’ linked to not only Chepiga and Mishkin but also to other suspected agents such as Col Eduard Shishmakov, who is accused of the failed plot to assassinate the prime minister of Montenegro before its referendum to join Nato.

According to Fontaka, Fedotov previously travelled to the UK in March 2016 and March 2017 and again this year. It said he also flew to the Czech Republic with Mishkin in January and February 2014 ahead of an apparent operation to monitor the movements of Col Skripal, who at the time was said to be briefing Czech secret services.

It raises the prospect that Col Skripal, who had been living in the UK since a spy swap in 2010, had been a GRU target for at least four years. Chepiga and Mishkin returned to the Czech Republic in October 2014, the same month that Skripal travelled to the country to advise local intelligence officers on Russian espionage activities.

Looks like a huge conspiracy of anti-Russian media :) :)

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: February 06, 2019, 06:34:26 PM »
Image below.

The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: January 20, 2019, 02:46:09 PM »
Sounds like this may be fake news:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg Is Not Fighting ‘For Her Life’ With Pneumonia, Despite Outlet’s Claim

The politics / Re: The Media: Examples of Good AND Bad Journalism
« on: January 16, 2019, 08:55:21 PM »
@Neven. Why ask for evidence when you consistently refuse to accept it?

I've tried and tried, and you appear to be so wedded to your opinion that you wouldn't accept anything you don't like. Your treatment of Rob Dekker who does provide sources and facts is an example of what happens to people who make the effort.

I expect this from climate deniers, and in that field you are irreproachable. Why not import that objectivity and tolerance to your opinions here?

Your attack language is mild, but it is still attack. Your acceptance of opinions from people making biased assertions, and dismissal of those trying to point to information that corrects this, is the reason so many of us no longer make the effort.

The only thing I am willing to do at this point is to post examples from other resources and parallels that might, just possibly might, get you to investigate your bias and treat the majority of us in the US as fellow humans, not people to be defeated and/or ordered to follow your lead.

What this world needs is people working together to solve problems, not people finding fault with allies who fall short of a demand for purity in a narrow spectrum.

Fact is, I suspect we agree that we need a radical remake into a sharing, caring society that regards waste with abhorrence and is desperately concerned about the way we are trashing our planet at speed. I just don't think you can achieve that by attacking allies who are trying to find practical ways to enlist a broad range of humanity in saving our planet.

Indulging in hatred and bile will not achieve anything except more hatred and bile.

This probably belongs somewhere else, but is a reply to your most recent reply. I don't have the time and energy to keep on trying to find sources that you will respect to show you what is actually happening when you dismiss it all and return to the unappealing opinions of the few, the proud, who are dragging this small posse into hatred and exclusion. I expect that from the fake Christians whose arrogance and victim blaming would disgust their putative leader. I didn't expect it from someone I've always admired and respected, who does amazing work in the cryosphere.

The politics / Re: The Media: Examples of Good AND Bad Journalism
« on: January 14, 2019, 10:01:54 PM »
The predominance of a very small cadre of intolerant commenters, with Neven's passive assent if not participation, is counterproductive. He's made the point, which is of some value, that we should go to the cryosphere where knowledge is growing rather than bother with this sump of single-minded self-righteousness. But I cannot help trying to find, from time to time, ways to convey how this posse might ask themselves if they are making things worse. In general, I'm using other's words to avoid being distorted or misunderstood. I'm trying for some cognitive dissonance in the hope of jolting good people from bile-infested attacks to consider working together.

One of the pieces of this is the way that bad people exploit muddy thinking focused on finding fault with people who are not 99% perfect according to some inflexible canon.

Terror's Advocate: Barbet Schroeder directed this fascinating, appalling documentary portrait, from 2007, of the French attorney Jacques Vergès, who represented such clients as Klaus Barbie and Carlos the Jackal. Vergès discusses his life and work, starting with the discrimination he faced in his youth (his mother was from Vietnam, his father from Réunion) to his first major case .... With probing interviews and intrepid legwork, Schroeder shows how the anti-colonialist movement was secretly hijacked by Nazis and other anti-liberals, and regretfully traces modern terrorism to the tactics of Algerian independence fighters. The story Schroeder unfolds is also his own—that of a generation that had its humanistic sympathies manipulated by unscrupulous people with agendas of horror.[/size]

The point is, whether you are using or being used, be careful not to let your hatreds eat you alive, as you execute the agenda of those who wish to destroy and sow chaos, rather than work together to solve problems.

The rest / Re: More stupid questions
« on: January 12, 2019, 09:16:26 PM »
The internets dictionaries aren't yet advanced enough to translate the wörd "bullshit" into Latin :( Any suggestion?

I arrived at bovistercus via google-translate and remembrances of heavy drinking sessions with a roman catholic theologian. (Amazing how the classical dictionaries avoid fecal vocabulary :).. But I almost failed school due to Latin.

Why would me (Mars J.P. Florifulgurator, a Latin hating DaDaist and natural philosopher) arrive at such a question?

The Late Homo S Sapiens currently stands at a crossroads of cultural-cum-biogeophysical evolution and will split into Homo Sapiens Erectus (who tries to walk his brains upright) and what some name "Homo Sapiens Trumpensis". But this is doing the paradigmatic Donald too much honour, who is not standing (pun!) on the shoulders of giants, but an astronomical pile of bullshit. So I propose Homo Sapiens Bovistercus or maybe Bovisterculinii for the whole heap. I'm not yet sure about bovis...

(And then I might plug this to Yuval Harari...)

The politics / Re: The Media: Examples of Good AND Bad Journalism
« on: January 12, 2019, 06:35:37 PM »
I hesitate to classify the following as BAD journalism, because Jimmy Dore doesn't seem that stupid to me to warrant an application of Hanlon's razor ("Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity") and not classify his stuff as professional bullshitting. Who is he working for?

Jimmy manages to make fake news out of old news - by the lamest and easiest detectable trick of the bullshit trade: leaving out context. And so he piles up more of the alt-right trope: "But but Obama also did it! {So, why not Putin?}".

BTW Germany also has sock puppets operating in Islamist and Nazi social media.
I will not comment on that elderly "Intelligence Veteran for Sanity" theory regurgitated by Jimmy. It enhances the impression that this is a professional bullshitter at work for alt-right Putinists. 

Revealed: U.S. Intel/Military/Spy Operation Manipulating Social Media! 13 mins
Automated software creates FAKE User profiles on Facebook and other Social Media platforms to promote and spread Pro-American Propaganda in other nations around the world.

The key question is : "The Innocent Victim OR the Original and the Best Perpetrator?"


Please note that the term "bullshit" has long been accepted in philosophical discourse. There are entire books on bullshit.

Someone who lies and someone who tells the truth are playing on opposite sides, so to speak, in the same game. Each responds to the facts as he understands them, although the response of the one is guided by the authority of the truth, while the response of the other defies that authority and refuses to meet its demands. The bullshitter ignores these demands altogether. He does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar does, and oppose himself to it. He pays no attention to it at all. By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are.
--Harry G Frankfurt, On Bullshit (my emph, reflecting my impression of Jimmy Dore.)

Bullshit gets you noticed. Bullshit makes you rich. Bullshit can even pave your way to the Oval Office.
--James Ball, Post-Truth How Bullshit Conquered the World


I do think its crucial that more money goes into, e.g., a green New Deal.  This can and should happen within a sane, sustainable fiscal approach.

And if it can't be done within a sane, sustainable fiscal approach (MSNBC/FOX/CNN: How ya gonna pay for it, Steve? How ya gonna pay for it? How ya gonna pay for it?), then of course, it shouldn't be done. And thank God, those pie-in-the-sky progressives can be stopped with paygo.

Every single year, a budget gets set by Congress.  Every single budget is a description of the national priorities.  The question really is never "how are we going to pay for this," it's "what items do we choose to fund."

If interest payments are allowed to increase every single year, then *all* discretionary items eventually get crowded out.

If you can access this, it's a good short summary of what happened with PayGo.

Posting caricatures of Nancy Pelosi won't work with anyone rational in the US at the moment. She's a good manager. That is not a bad thing. Ocasio-Cortez is working with her, not in opposition. Argument is healthy, and I agree that the optics (and it's just optics) of PayGo are lousy given the liberties Trumpistanians have taken.

I doubt this will transmit across the pond, but it's worth a look. Get a load of the real woman, not the caricature that you've worked so hard to hate.

Both Kulinski and Dore display a severe ignorance of fiscal policy issues.

Yes, they're dumb and you're the smartest boy in the classroom. Pat on the head.

I explained my perspective on their short-sightedness.  Did you have something substantive to add to the discussion, maybe an explanation of my error?  A critique of CBO scoring methodologies?  An explanation of how Pay-Go serves the interests of donors, rather than stymieing them?  An alternative view of escalating national debt? 

PayGo sounds like a really bad idea (and with that I mean bad for the American people, great for the donors):

Both Kulinski and Dore display a severe ignorance of fiscal policy issues.
Among the most severe governance problems in the US is the massive annual deficit and accumulating debt.  Roughly $1 trillion.  Thanks, in large part, to Trump's tax cuts for the rich, as well as increased Defense funding.

With each passing year, more and more spending must then go to interest payments on the debt.  If allowed to continue, debt payments would eventually consume the entire discretionary budget.

Kulinski asserts that Pay-Go should be ignored because Democrats' spending would "expand the economy."  But economic impacts are included in projections by the Congressional Budget Office.  For any program in which this argument makes sense, adoption of Pay-Go is not an obstacle.

Pay-Go does not serve the interests of donors.  It restricts funding for the donors' pet interests.

Pay-Go is a commitment to discipline.  If we want tax burdens to be shifted back towards the wealthy, we should support Pay-Go.  If we want to restrain Defense spending, we should support Pay-Go.  Yes, fiscal discipline makes it more challenging to enact free community college (etc), but it also demonstrates that he Dems are the adults in the room.  That's a real alternative to the Republicans' irresponsibility.  We shouldn't be seeking to emulate these Republicans.

I had promised myself to try and untangle and post a response on behalf of friends and colleagues here, while untangling the mildly offensive and incorrect responses - particularly from Neven - that caused me to leave in August. However, the more I tried to be fair, reasonable, and accurate, the more defiled I felt. So here's a response to ageism and sexism from the NYTimes comment section today, with a tip of the hat to the effective progressive leadership of Nancy Pelosi, affirmed and acclaimed today. The ~15 (vs. 220) who voted against her or "present" were mostly to the center-right of the Democratic party or from Republican districts that demanded a public show of opposition to her. The demonization which seems to have taken strong hold here bears no relationship to the actual woman and her work.

The readership of the NYTimes is to the left of its reporters, who attempt to represent the full range of US citizens, not an easy task in the face of the criminal psychotoddler cowardly greedly bully-in-chief and his enablers. If you think these are not good enough, welcome to the 1% of purity mongers who prefer Republicans to the vast majority of good people here in the US. I have chosen here a few at the top of "Reader Picks":

silver vibes, Virginia

Unlike the outgoing, enabling and water-carrying Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi will stand up to this president and call him out for any abuse of power or deliberate misinterpretation of the Constitution.

The president is in over his head in any one-on-one encounter with Pelosi and he know it. Pelosi is this president’s and Republicans’ worst nightmare. For the first time in his dysfunctional administration, the president will now be held accountable for his missteps and wrongdoing. Ryan gave him a pass for two years but those days are long gone.

Jessica, Sewanee, TN

I am reassured that we have Nancy Pelosi poised to reclaim her post as Speaker of the House.  She is smart, experienced, and cares about the nation and all of its people.  It is clear that Republicans do not, that they are comfortable with blatant lies, corruption, and boosting the fortunes of the 1%. 
William Menke, Swarthmore, PA

As a landscape architect, I worked for a woman owned business (ha - my wife's).  I also am old enough to have witnessed, and supported the inclusion of women in all male bastions such at the Rotary Club.  Such vehemence at the changes, and now, it seems all like so much about nothing.

Kudos to Pelosi for getting where she is, the tough way.  She has her toughest job now.   Wish her the very best.  You go, girl!

Fester, Columbus

And so it begins, Mr. President. Just try threatening or buying the silence of this woman.  Go ahead, make Nancy's day.

Bob Burns, McKenzie River Valley

I've always thought that the greatest modern Speaker of the House was Sam Rayburn. I'm not so sure anymore. Nancy Pelosi is the Republicans' worst nightmare come true.

She will shred the opposition not by combat but by persuasion. She is no firebrand. She is a consummate person of the House and knows how it works.

May God bless and keep her in these trying times. She is the right person for the moment.

Vicki lindner, Denver, CO

I'm a new Pelosi fan! When people say she needs to make room for new younger leaders they never specify exactly who those leaders are or what they should accomplish that Pelosi can't when and if  they take charge. Alexandra Ocasio- Cortez is clearly on the list of charismatic newcomers -- and I applaud her idea for a committee on Climate Change-- but she is by no means as experienced politically as Pelosi was when she got the gavel.  Right now, in the age of Trump, we need a time-tested  powerful leader in charge of the house . Pelosi is right to hang on for now.  Plus she is providing a good model of what the first woman President should look like.

arusso, OR

"...long a target of Republicans who have demonized her as a San Francisco liberal..."

My question is,  what is the basis of this demonization? What had Pelosi done or stood for that is so distasteful? So terrible? So harmful? I can think of a dozen male GOP officials who have done things from sleazy to criminal off the top of my head with little effort and Republicans do not seem to care. And no one can clearly articulate to me what is so terrible about a "San Francisco liberal", as if that phrase alone should be explanation enough.  What a world we live in where over a third of the country supports Trump and believes Pelosi is the embodiment of evil.

There are hundreds more. Anywhere she comes up, people who know her and are served by her have nothing but praise. Her biography is admirable.

The politics / Re: The Media: Examples of Good AND Bad Journalism
« on: December 21, 2018, 04:52:43 AM »
Again, your source has been described as 'neo-conservative'

You seem to be rather addicted to far-right, white-supremasist, and fake-news sources for your information.

I can't help but wonder if these are the kind of posts Neven wants, crowding out science based, fact based, and non-hate based sources.

I, as do we all, of course, leave it to him. But the more that these kinds of posts and posters are tolerated, the fewer sincere posters are like to frequent this once very valuable forum

Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: December 15, 2018, 12:10:37 AM »
Why Can’t OEMs Dial It Up And Overtake Tesla In The EV Race?
In what must be one of the longest headlines in history, Bill MacDonald asks, “Why don’t bigger car companies such as Ford start producing electric cars, eliminating Tesla’s presence in the emerging market, thus claiming said market share for themselves?”

The answer, as MacDonald reveals in a recent article published in Quora, is simple: Because they can’t.
Many have mocked Tesla for “bleeding cash,” although Tesla would probably rather describe what’s been going on as “investing in new products.” As the legacy automakers expand their EV offerings, they will soon be bleeding cash as well, as one after another Big Auto exec has admitted.

Shifting production from ICE vehicles to EVs can’t be done by simply flipping a switch on the assembly line. “New battery and powertrain tech has to be engineered,” MacDonald writes. “Manufacturing for those parts has to be established. Supply chains for new types of raw materials have to be established. Platforms that accommodate efficient EV operation have to be engineered. Branding and marketing strategies have to be figured out. Shipping, sales, and service logistics and training have to be established. And in the end, the product can’t just be any EV. It has to be competitive with a Tesla.”

The old-school OEMs can choose to bed down on a rock – build new factories and logistics networks for EVs – or on a hard place – dismantle existing facilities and retool them to produce EVs. Either option is going to require massive new investment. How much? MacDonald figures it will cost “roughly the time and money that Tesla spent, minus some savings for being more efficient about it than Tesla has been. Even if you can do it 30% more efficiently than Tesla has done it, you are still talking about 11 figures [tens of billions].”

If and when the automotive giants do start producing EVs in volume, their woes will be just beginning. The greenie and techie early-adopter buyers have already gone electric, so once the volume market gets rolling, every buyer of an EV will be one less buyer for a dinosaur-burner. That means the automakers will be cannibalizing the ICE business that they are still paying big money to operate. Right now, they’re enjoying huge margins on gas cars, especially trucks and SUVs, but they aren’t able to earn anything like those margins on EVs – indeed they’re lucky to make any profit at all.

MacDonald sees that situation reversing over time. “The minute your EVs become competitive, you will slowly start making less and less money on ICEVs, as the volume drops and economies of scale reverse. The margins on ICE will dry up much faster than the margins on EV will grow. There will be a gap. During this gap, you will still be pouring cash into EV factories and logistics, while your profits have suddenly dried up.”

The worst parts of the story for the majors have to do with battery supplies and sales and support logistics. Today, only Tesla and BYD have control over their own battery cell supply chains (although Daimler has taken a step in the right direction with its acquisition of German battery-maker ACCUmotive). In order to secure enough batteries at a competitive price, the legacy brands will have to make massive investments of time as well as money, long before they start seeing much profit from EV sales.

Furthermore, the majors’ business model is based on franchise dealerships, which MacDonald calls “a way of subsidizing the sales and support logistics of making cars, via the heavy cost burden of routine service and non-warranty repair.” But service revenues for EVs are sure to be much lower. As Tesla has shown, they may turn out to be virtually non-existent. How are the automakers going to respond when their dealers lose their most reliable income stream? “If they have a higher cost of routine maintenance than Tesla, their cars will be seen as inferior and people will buy Teslas instead. If they match Tesla’s lack of maintenance [requirements], their sales operations will go out of business and they will have to spend even more money to build a non-franchise sales and service operation just like Tesla had to do.”

In the end, the old guard will end up in the same situation they’ve been knocking Tesla for: “burning cash and being unable to generate profits, staring at a massive chasm of time and money that stands between them and re-established profitability.”

Tesla just barely managed to cross this Valley of Death three times, and the giant automakers, which have access to plenty of capital, should be able to do so as well. But some current trends are ominous. Auto sales are slowly contracting as more people opt not to own vehicles. Trade wars and high tariffs are also hurting, as are the costs of trying to keep up with rising emissions standards in some key auto markets. Some of the smaller and/or less well capitalized brands may disappear.

As MacDonald sums up, the legacy automakers are facing a hard choice: “Keep making ICEs and slowly watch your profits get eaten by Tesla, BYD, Nio, etc, or risk a dangerously expensive crossing through a transition period of cash burn and negative margins.”

The politics / Re: Empire - America and the future
« on: December 08, 2018, 02:33:58 AM »
NATO Will Not Stop Itself 
. . .
The Kerch Strait incident and attempts to leverage it as a pretext to place NATO warships in the Sea of Azov is a dangerous provocation – the Sea of Azov is not “international waters” and is considered by both Ukraine and Russia as an inland sea they share control over.

I don't think so.  Control by two states means that the Sea of Azov is, by definition, international waters.  So is the Black Sea. 
Even if the Kerch Strait were solely within Russian territorial waters (this is disputed by most nations), being the sole strait between international waters, then the Law of the Sea says that all vessels must be permitted free access through the strait.
No exception for that military vessels may be intercepted.
No exception that having a bridge over the strait affects the law.

"Transit passage exists throughout the entire strait, not just the area overlapped by the territorial waters of the coastal nations. The ships and aircraft of all nations, including warships, auxiliaries, and military aircraft, enjoy the right of unimpeded transit passage in such straits and their approaches."

Ukraine, in this matter, was not the chief provocateur.

The forum / Re: Forum Decorum
« on: December 06, 2018, 06:05:04 PM »
wouldn't it be better to invite the proponents of mainstream thought to either restrict themselves to the Arctic Sea Ice part of the forum that is entirely free of politics, or leave the ASIF?
I don't think so, but this is exactly what has happened.  Rob, Buddy, AbruptSLR, JimD, Bob Wallace and Susan Anderson have left the forum.  So now the echo chamber will consist of you, Lurk, Terry, and Red patting each other on the back.  You want to be an activist, but you're just shrinking your audience.

Yeah, I was never any more than a lurker and only commented very sparingly, but you're right, and what I see here are just more grown-ups adopting the least effective social approaches possible. It's sad, and it diminishes the real contributions people have made. 

Science / Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science and the Environment
« on: December 05, 2018, 06:23:04 PM »
Trump to Lift Carbon-Capture Mandate for New Coal Plants


The Trump administration will propose scrapping an Obama-era mandate that new coal-fired power plants use carbon-capture technology, removing a major barrier to constructing the facilities, according to a person familiar with the plans

The Environmental Protection Agency is slated to unveil the measure on Thursday, during an event at its headquarters in Washington

The EPA is set to assert that the requirement for carbon capture and storage technology fell short of a legal standard that it be "adequately demonstrated," mirroring an objection raised by power companies, coal miner Murray Energy Corp. and industry associations that have challenged the mandate in federal court.

The proposed replacement would raise allowable carbon dioxide emissions from new and modified coal power plants.

The move dovetails with the EPA's separate effort to dramatically weaken an Obama administration regulation limiting carbon dioxide emissions from existing coal-fired power plants. President Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to bring back coal jobs and lift regulations he said were throttling the U.S. economy.

Yet the effort is unlikely to bring about a coal power renaissance in the U.S., as utilities increasingly shift to cheap, cleaner burning natural gas and zero-emission renewables. Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to retire at least 630 coal plants in 43 states—nearly 40 percent of the U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.

Consequences / Re: Weird Weather and anecdotal stories about climate change
« on: December 04, 2018, 07:42:57 PM »
You don’t need science fiction to build machines that directly affect the weather:

NWS Omaha: "It's been confirmed that this snow band is originating from 2 plants in Norfolk. The steam produced there is essentially acting to add moisture and warmth to the clouds creating the snow. Had reports of large flake and up to 1in. ...”
Image below; GIF at the link.

The politics / Re: Empire - America and the future
« on: December 04, 2018, 05:30:58 AM »

Buddy, Rob, and now bbr.

A triad of the trite who support the strong as they harangue the helpless.

They defend the indefensible, assured that the powerful have their back.
Their research is a cursory scan of the front page of an Operation Mockingbird publication. Not surprisingly the editorials, even the op-eds are in agreement. An amazing confirmation!

If their position is assailed, they may go as far as the Atlantic Council, or some other CIA or MIC approved NGO in search of verification. Confirmed Again, and this time by Acronyms, Amazing!

Very little thought is required, and absolutely no introspection. Thinking may not come easy, and might produce undesired results. Troubling results that disagree with the consensus spouted by all of the major (news)? sources.

Their thoughts are of such value that they are hoarded, hidden away 'neath the mass of drivel that the MSM has injected into their oh so willing conscious minds - if consciousness is the correct word to describe this state of binary acceptance or rejection of ideas, based solely on what a favored talking head has just intoned.

Feel free to spout your nonsense, and don't feel personally rejected when others reject your conclusions. It's not you're ideas we object to, it's the trite crap that has been planted into your mind, that you expel virtually unmolested by your own grey matter.

We've never been exposed to you're ideas.
You seem like an angry prole who does not consider the ramifications of your idealism. Idealism does not work. Calling Ukrainians fascists and Nazis won't justify another Russian invasion, either, as they have been consistently under Russian's oppressive thumb throughout history (it seems like the Holodymyr is outright forgotten by you and many others).

It is easy to sit on the sidelines from some random place in Canada as you contribute nothing to society and kvetch about its failings. This is your fault, not society's.

Just when did these past "Ukrainian Invasions" by Russia occur? You're surely not referencing the Allied defeat of Fascist Ukraine?

The Poles and Jews killed by order of Ukraine's hero Stepan Bandera's certainly believed they were being "exterminated" by fascists and Nazis, but perhaps their surviving relatives are just too personally involved to be rational. I'd considered the Waffen SS flags and the Swastikas they march under to be adequate proof of their affiliation, but some deny their own eyes.

I'm amazed that you're aware of my small contributions to Canadian society, congratulations on your research. There are a few however that might take issue with your conclusion that they are entirely without value. Perhaps even some still posting here who assisted by providing charts and graphs for various lectures.
I've no idea what it is that you believe I, and not society should take the blame for. A hint might help?

Should I assume that you're referring to the Holomodor, when so many Soviets suffered from the crop failures so prevalent during those dust bowl times? It was certainly a good thing that Canada was able to supply wheat to the Soviets in the mid 50's, the next time the Soviet crop failed. It cost us an ambassador killed by the CIA, but it's something almost all Canadians take pride in.
I'm sure I'd have remembered a word like Holodymyr if only for the unusual spelling.

The Ukrainian spelling is Holodymyr. But you don't acknowledge Ukraine as a country or a culture and instead continue labeling it as Soviet. So, enjoy your ignorance. 

Fun fact: my family was personally victimized by the Russians upon their third-to-last invasion in 1939 (another fun fact: Russia re-invaded in 1944 and is currently invading once more). They left before they could come back again to finish the job. Ukraine has been invaded 3X in the last 75 years alone by the Russians. You are a fat boob.

Pages: [1] 2 3