may be rude

the greenhouse gas principle is not controversial. it's kind of like arguing that putting another blanket on won't make you more warm. certain political factions (i won't name who) are manipulating people's lack of scientific experience, so they can continue getting financed by the oil people. 99% of scientists are saying this is a catastrophic emergency like humanity has not faced in recorded history. they reason up from the data. are you sure you want to reason backward from "who knows," while baselessly discounting the loud chorus from experts in the field, saying "there's not really any uncertainty, we know."

i think you've got some strawmen going on there. climate activists do not believe that all changes to climate are caused by greenhouse gas concentration scientists do not deny that other things affect climate goDel, we are techno forum friends. it's ok to admit that maybe the global scientific community is correct when it continues to affirm, after long-enduring scrutiny, that the scope of increased greenhouse gas concentration would be expected to result in global temperature changes, like we are seeing.

maybe it's more physics than chemistry. i think of it as largely chemistry because we're talking about a mixture of gases and the equation of predicting the affect of changes to the mixture. the question of which branch of science is most pertinent is beside the point. there are equations of predicting global temperature change based on increased greenhouse gas concentration. that's all these scientists do is try to calculate things with known principles, and they're unequivocal about what science says the result of increased greenhouse gas concentration is.

doubling the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases is going to cause a predictable affect. it's basic chemistry. some molecules convert more light into energy. this chart shows atmospheric concentration of 3 greenhouse gases, going back 2000 years. climates have been fairly stable at the thousand year scale. maybe not at the million year scale. we are destabilizing the biosphere. unpredictable, macroscopic chain reactions are being set in motion. scientists agree that we are at the emergency point, now.

idk if you heard mueller wants to testify privately, with a public opening statement, and the transcript to be released after. interesting starting position. so, at least that will happen. and maybe by the time negotiations are done, he will be testifying publicly. he doesn't want the fbi to be presented as part of a political spectacle (any more than necessary). if the testimony is private, though, it takes the theatricality out of any republican performances. i wonder if, in that setting, he could simply win over both parties. the republicans seem to be hedging their bets by saying they haven't read the mueller report. the number of democrats calling for impeachment proceedings is growing by the day, and we have republicans in the senate and the house breaking rank. if you look at what the democratic leaders in the house have said about what they're waiting for, they are not unclear. they're waiting for public opinion to catch up to the facts. we seem to be heading down a path that will result in increasing public awareness.

it's weird not knowing if the president is a russian trojan horse or not. especially while he's investigating his political opponents he's firing those who investigate him he's resisting congressional oversight he's declining to counter ongoing russian attacks on the voting process he's establishing precedent for prosecuting the press he's provoking war with iran he's accusing fbi agents involved in investigating him of treason he's discrediting the media, the fbi, and the intelligence community he's alienating allies he's damaging intelligence collection abilities he's causing trade wars cohen testified that trump wouldn't hand over power if he loses section IV of Volume 1 of the mueller report is a hundred pages of descriptions of communications between the trump campaign and the russian government. the communications are weird and troubling

ohh thx

why did it work for you but not me

links to tweets don't produce the twitter post element anymore, which was cool https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1129831615952236546 https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1129831615952236546

gop house rep napalms own party over mueller report. thread https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1129831615952236546

that feature list looks good.

got a copy recorded with actual mics and a rig. blasted on the monitors. good stuff

they are doing a video. they gave it to someone else, not adam.

weird that it's 4 months out, but we have audience recordings. i need to stop watching them.

give no shelter to the idea that "all news is lies" etc. we need to help people navigate the modern information warfare environment. bad actors have jammed the information channels, leaving a populace confused and disaffected. this may not go away. these people need us to tell them to start watching maddow or melber or whoever you think is good.

saw headlines that "Iranian leader announces partial withdrawal from nuclear deal." looked into it and it's the result of what trump did! cnn

lol

trumps' actions toward iran spell out an antagonistic intent. leaving the nuclear deal, which had brought relative stability putting sanctions on iran, which had been lifted designating their military a terrorist group sending this carrier strike group and bomber group it is alarming that we have trump, in the presidency, getting cornered by law enforcement. cohen testified to congress that trump would fight a peaceful transfer of power. people should be concerned.

better quality descending

i thought booker did well. i like 6:37 in that video i posted above where booker tells barr polling data was shared and barr asks "with who" and booker laughs. the mueller report says it was given to kilimnik, the guy with russian intelligence connections meant to post blumenthal's second round time, as well. this is the one where barr just decides fuck it, lets call mueller a bitch here's mueller's letter to barr, complaining about his misrepresentations, and asking him to release the executive summaries he had already redacted and made for public release (weeks before the report was released): Dear Attorney General Barr: I previously sent you a letter dated March 25, 2019, that enclosed the introduction and executive summary for each volume of the Special Counsel's report marked with redactions to remove any information that potentially could be protected by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure that concerned declination decisions; or that related to a charged case. We also had marked an additional two sentences for review and have now confirmed that these sentences can be released publicly. Accordingly, the enclosed documents are in a form that can be released to the public consistent with legal requirements and Department policies. I am requesting that you provide these materials to Congress and authorize their public release at this time. As we stated in our meeting of March 5 and reiterated to the Department early in the afternoon of March 24, the introductions and executive summaries of our two-volume report accurately summarize this Office's work and conclusions. The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017). While we understand that the Department is reviewing the full report to determine what is appropriate for public release - a process that our Office is working with you to complete - that process need not delay release of the enclosed materials. Release at this time would alleviate the misunderstandings that have arisen and would answer congressional and public questions about the nature and outcome of our investigation. It would also accord with the standard for public release of notifications to Congress cited in your letter. See 28 C.F.R. 609(c) ("the Attorney General may determine that public release" of congressional notifications "would be in the public interest"). Sincerely yours, WMA. dated march 27. bold added by me

hirono, booker, blumenthal, and sasse all delivered powerful performances. harris, whitehouse, and klobuchar also notable, among others

barr sweating bullets and looking like he knows he fucked up, live on capital hill

that you, aux? good one!

i worry about people continuing down a path because they don't want to admit they were wrong. with large entities it causes big problems. imagine a dystopia brought by fox not wanting to correct course. we need to invite others to move closer by discussing facts that can be appreciated by anyone. some facts can be brought up in mixed company, without having a partisan charge, that speak to public issues. or, in conversations where it feels hostile, you can just ask innocent questions for the sake of demonstrating a receptive attitude, and to help people flesh out their own thoughts. if it were easy then it would be done. unfortunately, the task at hand is bridging the divide. the individual experience of inconvenience and embarrassment in admitting to being wrong, accumulated en masse, is the glue holding the artifice together. collectively defusing that petty and unneeded human tendency is the way to shift to a more logical state of discussion. this weird challenge of psychology is what we will fail to adapt to, resulting in annihilation of the planet.