wow, yeah thanks for the repost of it then, and yeah seems even further to go in there, when conservatives comb for examples of the terrible things they are fighting… and it seems like over and over again, even their cherry picked examples seem to fail

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4263280/#%3A~%3Atext=Results+showed+that+male+quail%2Ctest+(Coc+→+Sal).

Sunfish I can’t find the actual study, it appears it was done in 1975, and was a big thing that congress at the time used as the examples of wasteful spending.

First 2 I can’t really say the value or lack of value of. I mean they were studies on effects of dangerous substances on behavior. and yes of course like all studies you pick animals that you might be able to get the effects of. Obviously a lot of science is just randomly probing around looking for oddities that give you a hypothesis to try and refine later into something useful. Obviously addictive substances is an important topic to understand, and poking around randomly might actually give solutions that could be discovered IMO.

Now the last one is the only one I’d agree, isn’t exactly super useful.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2033014/feds-blow-700k-to-find-out-what-really-happened-on-the-moon/

was done in 2016.

All that being said… lets also take a serious statement on cost here… a million dollars in 2016. That’s like, 15 minutes of iraq war money.

If I were to guess, and question the existance of standing, my bet is musk was a bidder when infowars was put for sale. My guess is possibly the families themselves objected and asked the court to take a lower bid, that would do what they actually cared about (Create counter messaging to his blowhard conspiracy theories).

Agreed there, but I’d say wait until there’s an actual person discovered. Anonymous notes left by criminals… aren’t trustworthy sources. It could be by someone that is protesting isreal… or it could be by someone that believes all Palestinians are terrorists, and wants everyone else to believe it too.

Course either way, doesn’t matter, it’s one crazed person or group, and we can’t let him speak for anyone of a whole no matter how much we dislike the other side.

Honestly I’m at the point where I just don’t know which way minimizes casualties. I feel like it’s like trying to calculate if the nukes in WW2 saved more lives than they cost.

Stopping facism seems off the table. If something manages to moderate it, it may kill less per year, but may last decades longer.

Letting it run without rails it may kill millions, may start a war, but it might collapse on itself sooner.

IMO the real mystery is, did the people who had the spine to say no to trump in 2016-2020… part of why he got elected again… if trump had say been allowed to launch a nuke into a hurricane, would he have been able to make his comeback.

We need a bank account check on him.

Was going to say, why wouldn’t it be the USA.

Competition is… well about competitive. A unilateral Tariff hurts everyone equally.

So if China was selling batteries to the US at $4

Taiwan was selling them at $3.90

You slap a $2 tarrif on both countries.

China raises the price to $6 to compensate, Taiwan to $5.90, Both countries make the same profit per battery sold. Unless there happens to be a US company that can make the batteries at $5 (not likely as we don’t currently have the infrastructure, and a lot of products are dependent on natural resources that we just don’t have).