placeholder

First off, as the article states, the research was delayed due to covid 19. So it doesn't seem the results would even have been available. Second, there's an awful lot of research out there. How do you that everything gets funded? That nothing gets rejected? You work for one of the organizations that decides who gets funded? You don't really know anything about the specifics of how this works.

Thank you for your authoritative pronouncement.

What struck me most about this video is how it avoids the central issue: human caused global warming. Even when it briefly mentioned China's coal industry, no reference was made to the fact that China's burning of coal was a major contributor to this. It just referred to it as a pollutant and consumer of large amounts of water. This video also made no mention of the fact that the same issues that affect China are affecting the world at large, also. But keeps on saying that it's China's fault if the failure of its water supply hurts the global economy. It ignores that similar problems afflict the rest of the world. The USA is suffering the effects of a massive drought in the Southwest. The giant Oglalla aquifer has been massively overpumped for years. Stretches of the Mississippis river, which is crucial for transport of grain, have run dry. Europe is also experiencing a big problem with drought and not just the southern portion. Transport on the Rhine is threatened because of low water levels. In fact most of the Northern Hemisphere suffered from drought this year. And much that which didn't experienced disastrous flooding. Climatologists know that greenhouse gases are fueling drastic changes in weather patterns. But you wouldn't get that from this video. I'm guessing that the source of this is some right-wing Taiwanese based organization which is using China's water problems to bash the CCCP. Which would explain why no mention is made of human caused climate change. Anyway, those of us who are literate, might want to turn to more balanced and better sources You know, the kind that use something called the "written word". Here's a link to a brief article which covers the same ground as the video, but more succinctly and more precise data. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/water-scarcity-challenges-china-s-development-model This one offers a deeper dive: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/seeking-solutions-for-water-scarcity-china

"Interestingly, the worldwide research team behind the influenza report had also looked into the treatment of coronaviruses before the virus that temporarily halted their work arrived."

In Chiangmai I did contact Bangkok hospital about a month or so ago and they said they are offering vaccinations. Maybe they have a different policy for Bangkok. Anyway, thanks for the information. I will follow up.

Thank you so much.

I have 2 American relatives visiting Thailand from China where they live. They want to get boosted, preferably with Moderna but Pfizer will do as well. Are there any locales that will do this? They have no problem with paying for the service.

I have 2 American relatives who live in China but want to visit Thailand as tourists. Are there any special requirements still in place on the Thai side because of covid or for some other reason? I'm assuming that as Americans they won't need to get a visa in advance.

A study published on January 13th, 2020 touted the development of a potential therapy that may be used to fight all known strains of the flu. One week later, the first laboratory-confirmed case of SARS-CoV-2 triggered the two-and-a-half-year-long COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Interestingly, the worldwide research team behind the influenza report had also looked into the treatment of coronaviruses before the virus that temporarily halted their work arrived. https://scitechdaily.com/new-banana-derived-therapy-is-effective-against-all-known-coronaviruses-and-flu-strains/ The article is a bit confusingly written. It's actually based on research published in 2022. Here's a link to that research: https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/fulltext/S2666-3791(22)00329-9?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS2666379122003299%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

Give it up already. All that matters is for one person to bring the case to a Supreme Court that has shifted even further right than it was when Obergefell was decided. As I noted before the one conservative judge who voted with the progessives is now gone, and 3 far more right wing judges have taken his place. Maybe you're fine with gay people being entitled to marry but there are still lots who aren't. Your claim only makes sense if there is absolutely no one willing to bring a case to court. And that supposition is clearly ridiculous.

To date, it's a vanishingly small percentage of Chinese people. And the State has hardly begun to strike back.

And according to your own percentage that means 10's of millions of Americans are opposed. All it would take is one lawsuit. Why would that be unlikely? Why wouldn't the Supreme Court reverse Obergefell?

Is oil down? What you cited were predictions. What candide cited was facts which don't show production down. But even if it was, that's not what you claimed. You claimed energy production was down. As for using Venezuelan oil, I've got some exciting news for you. There's a war going on. To help win it, some compromises need to be made. America had one very unsavory ally in WW2.

Given the rage of so many on the Christian right, what makes you think that there wouldn't have been a case brought before the courts? The thing is, though, that you seem to misunderstand this bill and the Constitution. If any bill was in violation of the Constitution it was the DOMA statute that allowed states not to recognize gay marriages performed in other states despite the existence of the Full Faith and Credit Clause in the Constitution. "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof. U.S. Const. art." This new bill eliminates the exception authorized by DOMA. It requires states to recognize gay marriages performed in other states. It does not require states to all gay marriages to be performed within their jurisdiction. The states were purposely not required out of the very rational fear that the Supreme Court would jump on such a requirement to invalidate the bill.

Really? Why wouldn't the court overturn the right to gay marriage? Gay marriage was decided by a five to four vote. The one conservative Justice who supported that, Anthony Kennedy, has now retired. There are three far more conservative judges now on the court. They have shown no reluctance to overturn other major presidents. Why not this one? Especially given that it's so recent. What does it even mean to say they have far more pressing issues?

And if you ignore the fact that the bill protects gay people from discrimination, then you are in denial about the bigotry that reigns in the Republican party.

So why was a big majority of the Republican senators opposed to it?

Sure about that? Those are figures for petroleum.They don't take into account natural gas. US becomes world’s top exporter of liquefied natural gas https://edition.cnn.com/2022/01/05/energy/us-lng-exports/index.html

Meanwhile back in the USA: Elon Musk’s Twitter Is Full of People Swearing Off Tesla Until May of this year, the company outperformed other automakers, with around 70% of owners saying they were likely to buy from the brand again. That rate has slid below 60%, while the rest of the industry hovers around 65%. The trend is basically the same, HundredX finds, on the question of whether owners would recommend the brand to a friend. https://news.yahoo.com/elon-musk-twitter-full-people-123443970.html And, of course, he's hijacking ihe services of people from Tesla, which is a public company, to help him at Twitter. What's possible defense can he mount for that? That he's only using non hardcore workers from Tesla so it doesn't matter? Musk is now an obvious target for a shareholder lawsuit.

And you are claiming because it comes from a right wing website that means that all or most right wingers recognize it as being such? How does that work? Is there some kind of telepathic connection among those on the right? It looks to me like there's an error in your reasoning. Trump tweets satirical news story: What is Babylon Bee and is it 'fake news'? President Donald Trump on Friday morning tweeted a link to an unapologetically fake news website, appearing to share the satirical story in earnest. The knowingly fake story came from Babylon Bee, a satire site with a conservative bent, and claimed, in jest, that Twitter was shutting down its platform to prevent the spread of negative news about Democratic nominee Joe Biden. "Wow, this has never been done in history. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/10/16/donald-trump-tweets-babylon-bees-satirical-news-story-joe-biden/3676071001/

Here's another one: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/3/14805500/fox-news-chyron-email-pence

If you want to see a purposeful use of chyrons to bury a story take a look at this: https://frontpagelive.com/2020/04/15/fox-vs-cnn-chyrons-reveal-how-far-removed-from-reality-the-maga-crowd-is/

However, it is not the case that the reporter was claiming that the incidents taking place behind him were mostly peaceful. Inept use of a chyron is hardly dispositive.

Yes. You are correct. I should have followed the link. You will note, that unlike some, ahem, I don't vanish when my errors are pointed out.

So, what are we to make of the right's understanding of humour or memes given that you fell for this one?