I don’t know if it’ll be harder. Critics tend to get tired over time… Salami tactics work after all.

Wrote this in a cross-post:

Okay, so I’ve read half of the article. And while I absolutely agree with the basic premise that our executives’ selfish, competitive mindset prevents sensible international cooperation, I did stumble upon a premise that I find questionable:

The simulation assumes that the U.S. remains a global hegemonic power and is capable of asserting itself. Given the country’s current unstable state, and the fact that Trump, out of sheer stupidity, has managed to discredit the U.S. internationally in the eyes of nearly all its allies (especially the Europeans), this seems rather questionable to me with an eye toward the next decade. The Europeans will very likely not support the U.S. internationally if it becomes clear that people like Trump will ultimately blackmail them just as much as the rest of the world. What happens next with Russia is another question… but even there, it doesn’t seem certain to me that the current balance of power will remain stable in the long term.

No, he’s to stupid. Comic villians usually have an at least half intelligent plan and hence need to be stopped by a hero. Trump is so deranged his plans never work out it the first place because he trips over his own shoe laces.

That’s not true, at least not as directly as you state it.

Berlin’s water issues stem from the end of recent lignite mining. The drainage water from the open-pit mines accounts for about one-third of the Spree River’s current water volume, which is why the end of mining (and the end of drainage water) is leading to a reduction in the amount of water available in Berlin. However, the article focuses on the conversion of already closed open-pit mines (many dating back to the GDR era) into local recreational areas. The discharge of river water into these areas, however, does not lead to a water shortage in Berlin.

To put it simply: the restoration of open-pit mines and water shortages in the metropolitan area share the same cause (the end of open-pit lignite mining) but are not directly linked.

Depends on what we deem favorable. French (and actually all EU farmers) are highly dependend on subsidies by the EU. Otherwise they couldn’t compete globally and/or stand the price war from the retailers. Ukraine in the market would most probably mean lower consumer prices (due to further improved supply) while further stressing farmers. On the onther hand with farmers already dependend on subsidies I don’t see why this couldn’t be countered.

What also bothers me is that the far-right usually has a libertarian economic point of view which in the last resort is the reason for the miserable situation of dmall farmers… however now and then they pretend to care about them, just like the conservatives do.

China continues to withhold data from the WHO regarding the outbreak in Wuhan. That in itself is not proof, but now, seven years into the pandemic, I personally find it suspicious. The other indicators supporting the lab-origin theory are well known. Aside from the incompetence of the Trump I administration, it seems that some intelligence agencies still subscribe to this theory.

You’re welcome. Thanks for bringing this up. I think a lot of people are probably asking themselves this question… especially when it comes to such a beautiful animal as the weta ;)

Okay, first of all, I understand where that line of thinking comes from: “If there are 300 species of grasshoppers worldwide, why is this one so important?”

I’d answer on two levels, one local and one global:

1. Locally Wetas are special in that, since there have never been any mammals in their habitat other than seals and bats, they fill the ecological niche of small rodents such as mice. This means that, at the trophical level, they serve as the link between lower trophic levels and the predators at the top of the food chain. Since the entire ecosystem is endemic due to New Zealand’s isolated location and all species are specialized to coexist with one another, the disappearance of the weta could trigger a chain reaction leading to the extinction of a whole range of other species. This is because weta fill the niche that mice occupy elsewhere, but they are insects, not mammals (differences include metabolism, nutrient content, feeding habits, etc.).

2. Global We have enormous biodiversity globally. In an ecological context, diversity means resilience to disturbances. Let me explain with an example: Let’s assume that there are perhaps 500 tree species globally in the temperate zones. One might ask again: Why do we need 500 species when 10 would suffice (ideally fast-growing ones that are useful to us humans)? The difference lies in the resilience of our timber supply: If, in a system with 500 species, one, two, or even five species are damaged by a newly emerging pest, climate change, or some other factor, this accounts for about 1% of the total biomass. In a system with only 10 species, however, the same change would result in a loss of 50% of the biomass (and thus of the timber yield usable by us humans), not to mention the consequences for ecosystems… and there, too, we would be indirectly affected through ecosystem services such as water purification, etc. We as humanity therefore have a vested interest in preserving biodiversity. Not out of goodwill… but purely out of selfish self-interest and to protect ourselves from disruptions to our means of subsistence (which we are already severely undermining due to other issues).

What did he actually say/ mean?

My bet is that this is once again a statement generalized/taken out of context to push ones agenda.