A Very Brady Sequel.

I like to picture Jesus in a Tuxedo T-shirt, 'cause it says, ‘I wanna be formal, but I’m here to party, too.’

You know, Jesus did grow up. You don’t always have to call him baby. It’s a bit odd and off putting to pray to a baby.

So ignore all non-significant results? What’s to say those methods result in findings closer to the truth than the methods with no significant results.

The issue is that so many seemingly legitimate methods produce different findings with the same data.

9 of the teams reaching a different conclusion is a pretty large group. Nearly a third of the teams, using what I assume are legitimate methods, disagree with the findings of the other 20 teams.

Sure, not all teams disagree, but a lot do. So the issue is whether or not the current research paradigm correctly answers “subjective” questions such as these.

Don’t get me wrong, I think that’s where the money should come from too. I just meant where else is the money going to come from in the current US healthcare system.

Unfortunately, we don’t live in a country where that’s the case right now. I think it is still a very good thing to donate blood, despite having for-profit/privatized healthcare.

Fair enough. If that’s the philosophy you want to live by, then who am I to say otherwise.

Personally, I’d rather help people the best I can in the world I live in.

But where does the money come from? It sucks that in the US it has to come from the patient, but that’s the world we live in right now. I think it’s worth doing all the good you can with the tools available at the moment. Even if it’s not perfect.

I’m just assuming you’re in the US. Sorry if that’s not the case and your country has a different situation.

That’s a terrible reason. You would rather a patient in need not have blood available than be charged for it?

There is definitely price gouging in blood. But it also requires testing, transportation, and storage before it can be used. The money for all that has to come from somewhere (unfortunately in the US it’s usually the patient).

I would have thought so too, but they’re working on at least one. Although you’re right about a lot of places being unfeasible–anything more than dirt/gravel in a very limited number of communities would be cost prohibitive.

Those are the exact things I’m looking for (just waiting for a few more roads to connect towns). I’m glad to hear it’s living up to the expectations I’ve heard of!

I went to Iceland a couple years ago and the landscapes are amazing, but there are definitely areas where you run into a lot of tourists, busses, etc.

I’m visiting the Faroe Islands later this year and I’m hoping to experience some rugged landscapes in relative isolation there too.

I’d definitely like to go there someday too–it’s just a bit too remote for me at the moment.

I can see its tourism becoming what Iceland was like 15-20 years ago.

I think Greenland will fit the premise of your question in a few years.

There’s not a ton of tourism infrastructure yet, but there are currently a lot of subsidies going into roads, airports, lodging, etc. to induce more tourism.

https://traveltrade.visitgreenland.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Strategi-EN-feb2021.pdf

That’s not true at all. There are multiple copies of the original film. Only one of the original copies was damaged by Life.

I’m simply stating depleted uranium munitions have health risks for everyone in response to the comment above me seemingly implying they’re only a risk to Russians.

Depleted uranium munitions aren’t just a risk to Russians. They’re a significant heath risk to everyone where they’re used–Russian soldiers, Ukranian soldiers, and civilians.

That figure is slightly misleading without context.

The billion deaths are total premature deaths. It’s analogous to the total covid death toll. Have millions of people died due to covid? Yes. Were the deaths uniformly distributed across the world’s population? No. The majority of premature covid deaths were concentrated in specific groups of people.

The climate change death toll is similar. People who are living in already precarious situations will be disproportionately impacted.

I think lots of people see that billion deaths number and imagine tornados, hurricanes, and heat waves destroying western cities. In reality, it will largely be the sick, young, and elderly in developing nations prematurely dying due to resource scarcity.

Obviously still a major problem, but the context is necessary to develop effective responses and solutions.

Dead link. Try this:

https://aeon.co/essays/slum-photos-were-weaponised-against-the-people-they-depict

I know it’s not the popular opinion, but I agree with your position in your first paragraph. I think the context does make a difference.

The chocolate pudding line is definitely weird, but also definitely racist.

What? Sandwiches definitely shouldn’t go days without refrigeration!?