If we ban cattle due to methane emissions, we'd better ban termites, cockroaches and other insects which are responsible for far more methane emissions than cattle.

Why is it OK to eat insects, but not animal meat? If you measure methane emissions in isolation, rather than in context to their environment, you couldn't support either.

Insects raised for human consumption, would be just as problematic as cows raised in a feedlot or barn.

But most of Australia's meat cattle are raised in pasture. So methane emissions are not an issue and farmers should not be penalised. (Not that I believe emissions are a problem anyway).

'....with so much of the discussion with cattle and methane is that there is no discussion of context. The way enteric emissions (essentially burps) have been measured with cattle is either through masks, SF6 tracers, or chambers. This means the cattle’s emissions are measured out of the context of where the cattle live.

In healthy well managed pastures, cattle help build organic soil matter that stores more carbon via photosynthesis (carbon is pumped by plants roots into the soil in exchange for soil nutrients) and due to the land not being disturbed.'

Insects raised for human consumption, would be just as problematic as cows raised in a feedlot or barn.

Watching commercial television these days comes with constant hawking of pharmaceuticals , fast food, insurance and, increasingly, home sales to or through online vendors.

It’s hard not to question the growing number of real estate ads centering on panicked home mortgagees (most folks don’t hold clear title to their residence) racing to buy a bigger house. In truth, how many homeowners can really afford to move up in a recessionary economy that’s artificially inflating real estate values? Why are corporate property peddlers pitching rushed sales in a market beset by rising interest rates due to the devalued dollar that’s shrinking real wages? Throw in the inflation strangled stock market where 401(K)s and retirement plans have lost $4 Trillion in value as of October 18, 2022, and it’s dubious why homeowners are being pressured to upgrade when their savings are being slashed by pernicious economic policies.

It's Sunday in Brexit Britain too…someone will surely have time to tell the fantastic story of Rejoin!

Let's imagine that the UK shows up hat in hand asking to rejoin the European Union. What then? In Brussels…will they pretend nothing has happened and everything will go back as before June 2016?

Probably not. This would create a dangerous precedent, in which a member state leaves causing enormous expenses and a colossal waste of time, and then comes back as if nothing had happened.

The same thing would apply to a return of the United Kingdom as if it were a Norway or a Switzerland.

Any form of return would also by itself cause enormous expenses and a colossal waste of time.

What would then be asked of London? To pay for the inconvenience? Return with fewer rights and powers than before? Accept a series of punishments? "Suffer for the EU Kingdom of Heaven”?

How will those who failed to "sell" Remain in 2016 persuade UK voters that this suffering be good and fair, and necessary?

There are also two other obstacles: the obligation to use the Euro, and famous article 50.

Whoever enters the EU today must adopt the Euro. Who will convince UK voters to drop the Pound?

Those who enter the EU also get the right to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and ... leave. What guarantees could any UK government ever give that after returning, the UK will not leave again, one year, five years, ten years later? Again, this also applies to the Swiss and Norway models.

A British Parliament, for the uninitiated, cannot bind a future British Parliament. Nothing is "written in stone" and Westminster's Sovereignty is virtually unlimited within national borders.

So let's see… what story do the Rejoin supporters imagine, in their heads? The problems above…how can they be solved in a Rejoin process?

It would be nice to hear a coherent story about it but I don't expect much.

Found this in an article on a site called crowdwisdom.liv e

Why is Mitch McConnell pouring money into Alaska and not into Arizona? The equation is simple if Lisa Murkowski wins and Blake Masters loses, Mitch McConnell would still remain in charge of the GOP in the Senate. But if both Tshibaka and Masters win, Mitch McConnell’s political career is likely to end.

------

The red wave will have to be strong for that to happen but it is possible. Masters has been closing in on Kelly and Tshibaka has been closing in on Murkowski.

People complain that Murkowski's good odds of winning are due to Alaska's ranked choice voting system. And it's true under a standard primary-general election system Tshibaka would win. But as I have always said I consider ranked choice, or "instant primary" as it's sometimes called, to be a legitimate way to do elections. The reason Murkowski may win is that Alaska is not nearly as red a state as it is made out to be, and the Democrats plus establishment Republican voters in the state are roughly equal to conservative or populist Republicans.

Found this in an article on a site called crowdwisdom.liv  e

Not to be repetitive - well, a little bit repetitive - but over the past several months, I've written about single points of failure and the linchpin theory, the former noting that a single point of failure can cascade into a massive tsunami of system failures and the latter arguing there exists a single point that can bring it all down.

I’ve recounted how, several years ago, when I was in Angola having a casual conversation about how much the Internet service sucked at the hotel, I was reminded of a basic concept to consider when designing any large-scale system. This is a concept that applies in structuring production processes, machine design, computer networks and even political systems – because after all, government is a system.

Called the "single point of failure", this is most prevalent in the design of communication, data and power transmission networks.

Wikipedia describes a single point of failure as this:

"A single point of failure (SPOF) is a part of a system that, if it fails, will stop the entire system from working. They are undesirable in any system with a goal of high availability or reliability, be it a business practice, software application, or other industrial system."

The country of Angola is a communist/ socialist state and as such all services are centralized and under government control. They experienced a SPOF several months ago in their national Internet service because they had placed all the servers and main routing structures in one area – when there was a single major issue that knocked this data center off-line, the entire country was without Internet service for a week.

The manufacturers of the once ubiquitous Blackberry, Research in Motion, had a massive, week-long outage in Europe, South America and Africa due to a faulty core switch – which strangely was designed as a failsafe system to move the data flow to a redundant backup system – so the "failsafe” failed:

"In a press briefing yesterday evening, RIM Chief Technology Officer David Yach confirmed the technical problem was down to a faulty core switch in the main Slough network operating centre, which routes BlackBerry traffic across Europe, the Middle East, Africa, India and for three operators in South America.

This was a single point of failure as a failover system did not kick in to another switch at the same site. There was no way RIM could have re-routed the traffic bypassing Slough, analysts said, as it is only one of two main network operating centres RIM runs to serve the world network – the other being in Waterloo, Canada where its HQ is."

Why is this germane?

It is relevant because the users of the Internet in Angola and the Blackberry users in affected eastern regions had become dependent on these services for communication, commerce and societal connections. These are smaller scale examples of what is occurring in the US with the insidious integration of government into the economy and our individual lives and the dependencies being created.

If you feel pressure from almost every area of your life, you aren't imagining it. Eight years of Obama accelerated a process that began under FDR, but the Biden Administration has taken the Cloward-Piven strategy, one designed to overwhelm the welfare system, collapse it and replace it with a system of guaranteed annual income, to an entirely new level. What the Bidenistas have done is apply Cloward-Piven to every single thing they have touched, stressing the national economy and every institution and policy to the breaking point.

Even our culture has been so loaded with absurdity, that a correction would come is not unthinkable.

The issue is that the closer to the edge the interrelated systems get, the more opportunities there are for any one system to fail, bringing it all down.

It has already happened once.

The policies leading to the mortgage bubble and its subsequent bursting is an example of how this can happen in the financial system and it almost brought down the global economy. Many would argue that it did and we have been living in an undead zombie economy since, a delayed global depression propped up by massive public debt and unworkable economic theories.

Do everything you can to be self sufficient, cut debt as much as you can, and prepare.

I hope our preparations go unneeded, but we are so close to the edge today, any misstep could lead to catastrophe and when the GOP wins in the coming midterms, pushing back from the edge will not be without pain.

I still believe we will win, but I also believe that fate not only favors the bold, it favors the prepared.

Even our culture has been so loaded with absurdity, that a correction would come is not unthinkable.

For ABBA, the oil deal was a masterstroke and one which would yield them a return. The band denied in the 1980's they had been paid in commodities but the story has been proved.

may have originated as an infectious clone assembled in vitro."

Charlie Crist's campaign manager has quit—three weeks before the election. It's never a good sign when a campaign manager leaves a campaign while it's still in progress. The only thing worse than a campaign manager being fired is a campaign manager quitting. A campaign manager can be fired for a number of reasons: most often because the campaign is losing, but sometimes just because of internal dissent with other staffers, or ideological conflicts with the candidate. But if a campaign manager quits, it usually means they are fed up with something or someone inside the campaign—most likely the candidate! So three weeks before the election? Really a bad sign.

One of the inherent dilemmas of a democracy is that even if a politician is doing the best possible job ever, there will still be some jackass who wants his job anyway, and will say bad things about that politician in order to get people to vote him out of office.

A few months ago, the election polling firms said Democrats had made a "come back" because of the Supreme Court's reversal of Roe v. Wade. Now they are saying that the Democrat bump has evaporated. Thing is, there never WAS a Democrat bump. It was just the polling groups' desire to help the Democrats reassert the advantage they held in 2020 and early 2021.

Why do I say this? Because the polling firms are now shifting to "registered" and "likely" voters, not just "adults." Polling "adults" on politics is always useless and gives skewed results, especially when the polling firms always weight it to the Democrats on top of it all.

Polling likely voters in particular and at least registered voters gives a far better view of what might happen in an election. And even that under counts Republican results.

But the reason polling firms don't like to do likely voters is because it always gives more centrist results, especially on their hot button issues. So, they don't poll likely voters so that their results look more consistently left-wing and that way they can continue the left-wing narrative until the last weeks of an election -- i.e. so they can fool voters into thinking Democrats are always leading in ideas and elections.

Tim adds:

Polling is not intended to take the nations temperature but to lead it.

I wrote this about the stupidity of polling back in 2004. You might want to reread it.

help the Democrats reassert the advantage they held in 2020 and early 2021.

I have been in a running jail and censoring for more than a year on my Facebook account. Mostly over posts to warn and inform people about the JAB. Now the truth is coming out. Even the Wall Street Journal is now acknowledging what was evident from the beginning when they said 14 days to flatten the curve.

I married a man with Huntington Chorea, I did not know at the time that it was in his family, they hid it, but I spent five decades researching RNA, DNA, heredity disease. My first husband died of his disease of course, and my children did not inherit the gene. I know quite a bit about gene therapy. This gene therapy was first tried on hereditary diseases. It was not successful. Moderna which stands for "modified rna" found the golden goose by pushing this for mass production in instructing the body to produce a spike protein.....wha t could go wrong? Well....everyth ing.

I tried to warn people, tried to explain, tried to encourage them to research. You can lead a horse to water, you cannot make him drink.

I have a friend who tried and tried to warn her family, they ostracized her, berated her, demeaned her, froze her out. Her son works for a pharmaceutical company. She died in February, not from covid. In my opinion, a broken heart was the cause of her death. I was there and her designated caretaker with hospice. People do die of broken hearts. And now, the cat is out of the bag, the Wall Street Journal and many more are acknowledging the disaster that this has been. And to give it to children is obscene and evil.

A confluence of malefactors seeking power and wealth used this huge fraud. The government is still using their emergency powers to destroy the constitutional rights of the people and oppress them.