Anna Biela

I don’t understand how? Could you explain?

What I don’t understand or appreciate is that apparently this republican GWOT rhetoric has been uncritically and sincerely adopted by dems and leftists.

*Especially* when the context is suffering repercussions for a war waged by our nation, with our tax money, in our name.

If you want to call up your republican senator/rep and work toward convincing them to support renewables because of national security, then I genuinely support you. I’ve done it. It’s a useful argument for the right audience.

I think this comment explains it better?

hostile foreign nations (e.g. European dependence on Russian resources), but independence is about cutting off everyone. Even countries that pose no threat and want to continue trading.

Advocating to stop a mutually beneficial thing because we don’t want to be beholden to anyone is reactionary.

I’m pro renewables. I’m pro building more renewables in the US and abroad. Together, ideally, because climate change is a global issue.

“Energy independence” is literally just cutting off trade for energy resources. That’s isolationism. It can often be a good goal to reduce dependence on specific

I think maybe we’re all reading too much into each other or bringing in external baggage.

I’m genuinely not here to argue just for the sake of it. I respect you and probably would like most of the people in this thread if we weren’t talking past each other. 🤷🏼

I appreciate being given the benefit of the doubt. I’m very pro clean energy.

I’m against isolationism and everyone left of center somehow getting hung up on gas prices instead of *waves hands at fucking everything*. Like we’re just rehashing republican talking points from the aughts, but leftisty.

I don’t think you mean it this way, but you’re supporting isolationism bc it aligns, in this context, with other things we both support (clean energy, not going to war over oil, etc)

But isolationism is xenophobic & reactionary. It hurts both USians & others. Haven’t we seen exactly that this year?

No power generator lasts forever. You can recycle and reuse materials, but there’s limits.

I don’t even think true energy independence is a good, meaningful goal for a nation like the US. Sure, we don’t want to be beholden to and exploited by hostile states, but trade and interdependence is good.

partners to the rest of the world.

Renewables still use resources that we often have to purchase from other countries. Lithium, silicon, and copper being pretty big ones.

The reality is that we live in an interconnected global economy and we’re not going to technology our way out of the need to be good neighbors and trading

Awwwww

I love a good lap dog 🥰

Thank you! Gonna have to scope out travel arrangements and budgets, but if I can make it happen, I will :)

Looking at your schedule from last year, this looks really cool!

You sure Jujube isn’t a cat? Because that sounds like cat attitude

Wait what’s wrong with his name?

Radicalizing myself into coffee snobbery by the power of actually following directions

Sitting here, at work, wanting coffee. There’s a nespresso machine and another instant coffee machine, but, like… no. Thanks.

And, damn, that was some good coffee.

Haven’t been drinking much coffee recently, because I’ve just not been enjoying it

But I had a friend visit, so I bought good local beans, actually carefully prepared the coffee (with a scale! And thermometer! And removing it from the French press after 4 minutes instead of letting it sit)

Yeah, you’re just restarting the bathtub curve each time you rewrite the code.

requiem for vanished birdsong

Good luck, little goat! Glad he has you and a void kitty looking after him

“June 30 This market will resolve to "Yes" if a nuclear weapon is detonated anywhere in the world between Dec 1, 2024 and June 30, 2025, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No". For the purpose of this market's resolution, any detonation of a nuclear weapon anywhere on the planet Earth will be sufficient to trigger a "Yes" resolution. This includes offensive usages, nuclear tests, and accidental detonations. Use/launch of a nuclear weapon that fails to detonate, a fake weapon that never detonates, or a dirty bomb that distributes radioactive material by means of a conventional explosion are not sufficient to trigger a "Yes" resolution of this market. Only a successful nuclear detonation will result in a "Yes" resolution. This market may resolve to "Yes" as soon as a nuclear detonation is confirmed by a preponderance of credible reporting. For the purpose of this market's resolution, determination as to whether a detonation was nuclear will be made by a preponderance of credible reporting.”

Apparently tests do count. Failed weapons do not.

There’s still some ambiguity here about what constitutes a “detonation” though.

Bad things happening at nuclear power plants (specifically nuclear fuel melting, not explosions, although these have been conflated since it came into common-ish use) is where the term came from. The emotional meltdown meaning is actually pretty new.

They’re just trying to help! They’re giving the mat a good shake to help get it clean and dry. 😌 what good helpful birds

Odd Ducks Some of nature’s most colorful waterfowl visit our lakes, rivers, and shores during the colder months. Here are five stylish ducks to watch out for. Northern shoveler Anas clypeata One glance at th…

HOT NEW SINGLES NEAR YOU

(if you happen to live near Massachusetts, anyway)

ah reminds me of my days doing partnered debate 😊

Yup. And they’ll never stop, until they suddenly decide your neighborhood is trendy and cool.