Leaderboard

Collateral damage would be a serious problem even if it might hypothetically work - except it won't. Nuking the atmosphere to reduce CO2 is a new one to me. I've encountered use nukes to make a nuclear winter ie set fire to the world and all the smoke and ash will cool things down - but of course a nuclear winter will do a lot more than cool the climate. To be fair the global destruction and year or two of crop failures and livestock deaths along with the reduced economic demand from all that mass murdering and famines will sustain longer term emissions reductions! After the CO2 spike and renewed warming from all the burning subsides of course. Perhaps people in well prepared deep bunkers will be okay - if incapable of recovering an advanced technological society after. Like that, and with the assumption that nuking the atmosphere would actually reduce CO2 (except that it won't) the other impacts of nuking the atmosphere are just too horrendous. Dunno why, but my response to most "just do X" easy fix shortcuts (that somehow avoid the inconvenience of dealing with the cause ie fossil fuel emissions) is head scratching - "seriously?". I keep coming back to building as much clean energy as our most effective - and cost effective - climate change response.

Those of you who publish original research may find the following interesting, and suggesting of an 'agenda' not backed up by science ( wish BeeCee was still here; he was passionate about this sort of thing, and had great respect for L Krauss ) Lawrence Krauss: Whiteboards are racist because woke physics journal says so (msn.com) What do you guys think; tempest in a teapot, or the unravelling of society as we know it ?

I think you mean kinetic energy, there is no such thing as a kinetic charge.

Intelligence can't be wholly innate, since brain development and network-formation are affected by external factors, such as nutrition and socialization. Intellectual potential may be a given at birth, but there is no guarantee that it will ever be attained. And, of course, the means of measuring it are far from objective, accurate or consistent. The results of any test are also influenced by the emotional and physical state of the test-taker. Practice does matter: it alters the approach of the test-taker to the kind of problems presented on a test.

IQ is meaningless without the required education and research

'Better' is subjective. And here I thought cheese was off-topic

There is a part of the train that moves backward relative to the ground when the train moves forward at any speed.

So they should be more politically correct ;)? But yes there has always been a risk if one wades into public discussions especially if one is not trained to navigate public opinion. That being said, I think we are still struggling how to navigate the whole social media landscape, which expands these types of issues from celebrities to regular folks (who definitely don't have PR folks working for them).

Both. Society as we know it unravels itself as having a high content of tempestuous teapots. "Attention wanted" seems to be the name of the game.

How funny. I’m old enough to remember when all our teachers used a blackboard. Would that be seen now as “cultural appropriation”, perhaps? And what about the universal prevalence of white paper for writing and printing? Pretty shocking, eh? Something Must Be Done! 🤪