Yet here we are, talking about it. “There’s no such thing as ‘Bad Press’”, I guess? Are they right?.. maybe. Are they detracting from the plight?.. also, maybe. Am I sure of my opinion of their protests?.. no, not really.

Right, but we are talking about it knowing the consequences of not enacting changes. In the US fox news is watched by something like 40% of active voters. Meaning a significant portion of voters actively distrust news about climate change, another significant portion do not think about it on a day to day basis.

Giving the news network ammunition like this only further entrenches these audiences in anti climate change reactions.

Seems like something I’ll have to read more about.

Would knowing that this particular ngo is funded by an oil heiress that lives in a 33m dollar home affect your opinion?

Sorry for believing a protest should help your cause more than it harms it?

You do know this particular ngo is funded by an oil heiress, right?

Surely we’ll all be okay as long as people are teaching us to be civil and not… harm the cause.

I never claimed that I wanted people to remain “civil”, you can attack that strawman as you wish.

I don’t mind people engaging in violent disobedience or civil disobedience, every MLK needs a Malcom X. However, I just don’t see the benefit in this particular situation. If you are going to do something that could potentially harm public sentiment you should at least be doing something that materially changes things for the positive.

I’m done, a lot of us are. Good luck.

Get off your high horse, were all dealing with the same problem here. Just because someone differs in opinion on how political capital should be spent, it doesn’t mean your perspective has a monopoly on morality or anything.

I say they’re building political capital. They’re creating a fuss.

The people who think of this as a net positive are already supportive of climate change initiatives. So who exactly are they building political capital with?

They’re creating noise, which can then be turned into action.

How? In what situation is there a problem that is more easily solved when people “make a fuss”?

What are you doing?

Not turning potential allies into enemies?

What are you doing?

It was as pointless as everything else, that’s why they did it, it’s screaming into the void to get attention.

It’s not just pointless, it’s potentially damaging to the cause. I don’t mind if someone rubs against the grain of public sentiment for a cause, so long as the way they do it actually accomplishes a goal.

Are there though? I’m old enough to remember this has gone on for decades without anyone doing anything of significance and now we’re at the actual edge of global catastrophe and STILL people are like “hmn, those kids should be recycling.”

And how does cornstarching rocks, or defacing art make any kind of difference? Is there any possible outcome that benefits the cause? It seems like the only thing this accomplishes is drowning out any other news about climate change for 2 to 3 weeks.

Bruh, you and so many people have no idea how many lives are going to be lost in the next century while every milquetoast liberal and conservative in the developed world roll their eyes and get pissed at slight annoyances like… checks notes colored corn starch on rocks you will never visit.

Just because someone disagrees with you on how to spend the very limited amount of political capital accumulated for climate change, does not mean they are less informed on the subject than you.

I don’t give a fuck about Stonehenge, but it’s stupid to believe that others do not. It’s also pretty stupid to ignore concepts like blowback and public sentiment.

They HAVE sprayed BP’s factories and lots and machines, they have sabotaged equipment and chained themselves to machines and have caused material harm to companies like BP, but that doesn’t get any fucking coverage because media doesn’t want to encourage “violent activism” for fear of turning away viewers like YOU who are annoyed by such things.

Lol, they arent afraid of turning away viewers, they are worried about turning away advertisers. They are part of the capital class preserving the fossil fuel industry. Of course they don’t want to spread violent activism. They would much rather all climate activists display protest that they can utilize to turn the public against the cause.

Which begs the question, why are these groups providing the media with ineffective protests that turn public opinion against the cause and garter a ton of negative press in the first place?

I’ve heard of them. I’ve never heard of you.

Not exactly a good thing… One of the problems with making a lot of noise is drowning out the voices of others on the same side.

Political capital is a thing, utilizing it in a protest that doesn’t really accomplish anything but turning public sentiment against your cause is kinda a dumb way to spend it.

If you’ve ever played in the surf and can feel when a wave pulls you towards the ocean before another wave pushes you back towards the beach. It’s like that, but just the undertow part. It’s very noticable.

It is definitely limited by the cultural understanding of linguistical norms. Because the language we utilize in the methodology predates it, the language itself can limit most people’s conceptual understanding of whatever topic you are utilizing the methodology on.

Accurate communication is hard.

would argue that Muslims are, by default, required by their religion to make the hajj. You make it sound as if it’s opt in, but their religion mandates it with some exceptions.

Nah dude, the vast majority of Muslims never go to mecca. It’s not a mandate anyone enforces but yourself. I think only like 9% of Muslims ever actually get to make the trip.

Don’t. I already did a little write up about this a while ago, I work in orthotics and prosthetics.

This device was created by an 3d printer artist and tested by a cognitive science lab. It’s really not a medical device, and wasn’t tested to the same degree that medical devices are subjected too.

When testing devices that are actually made to help the disabled, the criteria isn’t just that the pt can utilize it, but that the utilization the device provides is greater than what the patient would be able to do without it.

None of the actions done by the second thumb are things you wouldn’t be able to do as an amputee in the first place. People are highly adaptive and will figure out ways to utilize their body or what’s left of their amputated limbs.

There are a few reasons this will never be utilized by disabled people. The largest one being that foot controls aren’t ever used in upper limb prosthetics, mainly because they only work when you are sitting, or standing still. If this has been made by a prosthetic lab they would have used myoelectrics, the same tech we’ve had for like 40 years.

Secondly, how is an amputee or disabled person going to don this device by themselves. A medical device that’s meant to give you more independence also requires help to put on?

And lastly, the main benefit of having a thumb in the first place is that it is opposible. The thumb isn’t really useful by itself, it’s meant to work in conjunction with other fingers for manipulation. If you wanted another place to hold or pin something in place you would just stick it in the crease of your elbow.

It’s a neat art project, but pretty limited as far as a prosthetic device. My main criticism is for the cognitive lab that partnered with the artist in the first place. The university is using this as a marketing device for their department, and shouldn’t be claiming it’s a medical device. If they were serious about it they would be partnering with actual orthotist or prosthetist or a biomedical engineering department, not cognitive science.

A person’s sex is science, but their gender is a social construct.

Even sex is not the black and white dichotomy most people make it out to be. The way we define and dictate someone’s sex isn’t reproducible for everyone. The intersex population is larger than what most people assume, and can vary in ways that defy the way we normally evaluate sex. It can range from someone having different chromosomal pairings, to having a varied arrangement of secondary sexual organs.

Anyone saying that someone’s sex is scientifically dependent on “x” is either ignorant, or academically dishonest.

That’s not fair. I’m still kinda convinced Brandon Sanderson has clones, or has made a compact with the devil or something. How can someone write so much and not be in the throws of of some kind of manic breakdown? It’s just not fair to the other fantasy writers.

In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State shall have the exclusive right to construct and to authorize and regulate the construction, operation and use of:

(a) artificial islands;

(b) installations and structures for the purposes provided for in article 56 and other economic purposes;

© installations and structures which may interfere with the exercise of the rights of the coastal State in the zone.

There no language in the EEZ article that mentions “territorial military outpost”.

According to who?

In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State shall have the exclusive right to construct and to authorize and regulate the construction, operation and use of:

(a) artificial islands;

(b) installations and structures for the purposes provided for in article 56 and other economic purposes;

© installations and structures which may interfere with the exercise of the rights of the coastal State in the zone.

Can you link what article that falls under?

Well…they tried. What else would you call it when western backed NGOs organize astroturfed protests and violent riots aimed at toppling the elected government because the government is trying to pass a law that would expose foreign funding of said NGOs?

Well typically a revolution would require a change in the status quo, not a protest against the government rapidly shifting policy.

They aren’t trying to create a revolution, they are trying to preserve the status quo. The reason they are upset is because it’s the same policy Orban used before cracking down on independent journalism.

NATO troops have been in Ukraine since 2014

Lol, invited of course. That’s not invading someone…

Ukrainian troops have been on Russian territory since 2022 when the new oblasts voted in a referendum to join Russia.

Lol, and now it’s okay for foreign governments influence voting…

Color revolution bad, Russia funding and arming separatist groups all over eastern Europe good.

Them doing so forced Russia to intervene to protect those people and as a result there is now a larger conflict in Ukraine.

Those people Russia armed and agitated against the government in the first place? How many of Russia’s neighbors actively have armed separatist regions being bolstered by Russian troops? Surely it’s just a coincidence, and surely Russia has a long history of being very empathetic towards minority groups…

Comparing Palestinians with Nazis who want to commit ethnic cleansing is grotesque genocide apologetics and literally a Zionist talking point.

My dude, you are literally repeating nationalist talking points. Maybe take your own advice and consume sources that aren’t funded by the Russian state.

This shows to me that you are not engaging in good faith

I very much doubt you ever engage with anyone in good faith.

Nah, there’s pretty clear rules. It’s just that the main power in the region tends to ignore them when it suits them. Again, how is the Philippine government breaking international law?

So if it’s acceptable for those “communists” to join forces with western backed color revolution agents

So in your theory, the opposition parties are committing a color revolution…in a country that has had the same government since the Georgian Dream party did a color revolution?

Do you know what a color revolution is?

Also, it is quite arrogant of you to assume you know more about what’s good for Georgian communist than Georgian communist.

that’s what you think is happening you haven’t been paying attention.

I could lay the same claims at your feet? However, my argument is pretty well bolstered by the fact that only one nation is actually on someone else’s sovereign territory.

Yes they are the warmongers, they are the ones who purposely engineered the conflict and who continue to needlessly prolong it to Ukraine’s detriment.

Lol, you don’t think the people ordering bombs being dropped on civilians may have something to do with Ukrainian’s detriment?

Next you’re going to claim that Palestine engineered their own genocide…

There is only one imperialist camp

Only if narrow the definition of imperialism to the point where it looses its inherent meaning.

I think that’s more plausible than China’s claim that their exclusive economic zone stretches over a thousand miles off their coast, and supercedes both Vietnams and the Philippines exclusive economic zones…

What’s your point?

You seemed to be suggesting that what the Philippines is doing is breaking the rules of unclos, but you haven’t explained how.

but flouts it at every opportunity. International law for thee but not for me.

How? They are allowed to protect the resources in their exclusive economic zone. China on the other hand is still attempting to enforce a claim that was invalidated by international courts in 2016.

Seems like you might be projecting on the behalf of China.

And how exactly does China’s claim work within unclos? The shoal is only 190nm away from the Philippines and should be part of the Philippines exclusive economic zone. If there is any questions of legitimate territorial claim it would be with Vietnam not China.

Also, stopping any navigation within your own exclusive economic zone goes against unclos, let alone stopping navigation of a country in their own exclusive economic zone.