Yeah no disagreement.

My comment was more being practical. IE the real world we live in. If it was not for conflict ( first ww2 then cold war ). Rockets and space travel would never have seen the funding needed to develop. This goes on the pretty much everything - GPS, communications, weather n and on. All of it was funded mainly due to the military.

Without that it is hard if not impossible to imagine the wealthy considering the investment in tech worthwhile. And at the end of it. Real world the desire for the rich to protect or grow their position is the cause of all the above throughout history.

Honestly, I’m not saying this is a good thing, it’s fucking depressing.

But without war. I doubt the world would have moved past feudalism. There just would not be the motivation to change.

Glad he found something to do with his little mushroom.

unfortunaty large parts of our “exploring the wonders of the universe” has been developed from “firing explody rockets at eachother.”

Yep. That is more about getting weight into space. As we know water can provide protection.

But the issue of moving water from earth to space then building a 2 layered craft strong enough to surrou d passengers with a foot or more of water. While doable theoretically. Is just a huge huge task.

If mankind is seriose about such. Robotic collection of ice from space is more practice. Moving it towards earth using it to create hydrogen and oxygen slowly via solar. Then using that to move the water itself into earth near orbit. From there building a vessel able to rotate and protect occupants from radiation etc would be possible.

But seriosly the amount of work involved. Mars really is not the best place to go. Once humanity has developed the ability to generate graverty. Confirmed mankind can live is centrifugal generated enviroments. And developed to robotics to move ice and asteroids into orbit.

Honestly building O’Neil station like structures would be healthier then trying to live in 1/3 g of Mars anyway. Mars is worth learning about. But musks population plan is not really the best way to make humanity less at risk of planetary loss.

Unless someone nasa/or musk, starts looking at the effects of centrifugal gravity on long term health.

Its just not going to happen. Atm anyone travelling to Mars is unlikely to be fit to explore by landing. Given the trip length.

But we have understood centrifugal artificial gravity since before space flight, and planned to experiment on iss.

But cheep politics has not bothered.

Can’t imagine them tasting very good.

I spose if you wrap um in bacon, pretty much anything taste good. But at some point. It’s just a waste of good bacon.

As likely as this is. (not that Oxfam is exactly the scientific research org I look to for evidence. I do not have any reason to doubt)

But it seems to me the top 1% is an easy target. When the huge commercial shipping to reduce labour costs and cheap plastic packaging etc used to handle it are equal if not a much larger overall cause of deaths.

Just a much harder oner to argue for the change of, even if public opinion can actually have more effect.

The top 1% have ignored public opinion since the invention of money. Commercial cooperation may try, but hiding or greenwashing is normally the closest they get.

Nope. Nor evidence of it haveing ever existed.

The above guess is no better then religion. Based on current evidence.

Very Much this ^.

All fines do is force too poor to walk when they cannot afford the fine or other options. If that is the goal, free/cheap access to pools and sports centres as we had in the 70s was a better solution.

If the goal is to stop driving. Points on the licence. And providing practical alternatives.

I am Pretty sure the narcissistic claims about trump are true.

This means he actually believes his insane lies. He trully thinks anyone who disagreeswith him is wrong. And any success they have is due to corruption not valid arguments.

IE he is a fucking nutt case.

My first thought.

But u assume it dosent includw land or actual trains etc. Just laying the line.

Still seems cheap compared to the UK HS2.

Ill add. My now passed grandfather raised me.

He was a pacifist durimg the second world war. He and many were forced to mine resorces. As they refused to fight. As he was an engineer he was eventually reasigned to other work. Aircraft instrament manufacture at smiths.

But at no point did he think the UK should just allow germany to take over.

He just knew he was not able to fight himself. This was a commonf feeling among those conscripted during the second world war. And will always be a risk whe. A mation needs to defend itself from agressors.

Not all of a nations people are best suited to fight.

Given the requests for more military aid comes from people in ukraine.

Seems. Your the one arguing against them from a position of safty.

Were the best at, exporting actors with crappy opinions to the US.

Bit slow on politicians but Farage and Subak will get there.

Yep tuis is the history of cars.

The UK was the leader in the 50s. Changed to US cars in the 70s. Due to better (more reliable) byild quality and cheaper build standards. Then to japan again more reliable and cheaper.

China is on cheaper and reliability is catching up. Given priority changes and tech changes. Its ti be wxpected.

Sorta suprised its only 6.

Given its clearly a polutical hot potato. Thanks to tories intentionaly using it to divide and anger some voters.

I cant help but wonder about motives.

The most non negative reason i can think of for MPs not to be bothered. Is fear that thos is more common amonst younger folks who grew up with the idea more acceptable.

As those folks are also more likely to be living at home with family. There is a reasonbly high chance the data would be inaccurate depending on views of head of household.

IE any subject that is politically sensitive would need indevidual secret collection of data. As not everyone would be comfortable discussing it with family members.

???

6even when recycled the whole process increases the amount of plastics in the air.

And plastic in general is always going to eventually end up in the enviroment. There is only so many times you can heat and melt plastic before its bonds start to collasps.

Right from day one recycling was a plastics industries attempt to green wash and delay shut down/ replacement.

Many better options exist. The only issue is production cost. And that will not improve while corperations continue to use plastic as the cheap solution.

The industry knew what they were doing when they claimed plastic could be recycled. And need to suffer for the lie that it was a solution to the harm their product dose.

Parts of a drone 100m from the plant.

In no way provides proof of an attack aimed to damage the plant.

Unless you are trying to claim russia walked in without firing a weapon. Atm you do not have the info to make that comparison.

Taking posesston requires survailance and potential removal of guarding forces. Drone can be used for both.

Of course the police suck in every country, too.

Yep. But in some nations we know they would respond to mass slavery in their jurisdiction.

By raiding and mowing down all in the building with machine guns?

Industry groups are furious.

Likely the best sign it’s the right thing to do.

Until the cost of using plastic matches the cost of removing it from our environment. No one is truly going to provide the support needed to bring the cost of safer replacements down to a point where industry will care.

Just like all damage to the environment. Until world governments are willing to agree to make those profiting pay all current and future costs of clean-up. Capitalism will never accept its role n the task.

Remove carrots and start some application of fucking big sticks.