From what I heard they want to do that in places like California. So beware.

This is worse than net neutrality. IMO it violates the Sherman antitrust act.

He was probably talking about the Shuttle and manned space flight.

Boeing Delta III? Failure. Delta IV Heavy? Lots of 'partial failures' which put the payload in the wrong orbit. Lockheed Martin Altas V? Powered by Russian RD-180 engines and no launch failures so far.

Launch failures happen. Some guy installed a part upside down in that Proton and the control systems thought the rocket was pointing the other way around.

You might argue that this was also a design error. They could have designed it so it would not fit but in the proper way. However Angara is supposed to replace Proton so it is not like I can blame them for not investing much more on it.

It is always a bit naive to compare the size of programs like this. What actually gets done depends a lot more on PPP than GDP. If the salaries in that nation are a lot lower they can hire more people with the same money and get more results that way.

The launch complex is being built because Kazakhstan keeps asking for more and more concessions in order to continue using Baikonur. Eventually it becomes cheaper to build a new base in Russia itself. Especially considering that they will probably have to build new launch pads to launch Angara.

Not a problem since cosmonauts carry pistols.

I doubt they will fire in the vacuum though.

Is this 'news' story some sort of astroturfing campaign for these applications or what?

You might as well ask why there are differences in price in any other market.

Companies are not interested in wasting time teaching you skills on the job if they can avoid it.

BS. Unless by 'people' you mean Apple.

You do not know what you are talking about. Ammonia fertilizer is made with the Haber-Bosch process. It only requires a source of hydrogen. The source of hydrogen can be petroleum but for e.g. in the US it is usually natural gas. There are more ways to get hydrogen than that.

Temperature control can be taken care of in most populated areas by using all sorts of passive mechanisms like insulation and proper building design. For those that do need active heating in places where a heat pump would not work as desired there are more things to burn than oil.

If petroleum became too expensive farm machinery would go electric. This is already done to a certain degree in the mining business.

If you aggregate even more data points you get the medieval warm period and their results become totally bogus.

Humans are not changing the climate

I do not know anyone who supports this. What we do support is that humans do not change the global temperature with their activities in any meaningful way compared with the other natural phenomena like solar irradiation, etc. The percentage of change humans cause with their activities is so small it might as well be totally irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Take tree rings as an instance. The way it is measured that there is more CO2 in the atmosphere in that year is by assuming the tree has grown faster that year because of elevated CO2. But this does not take into account rainfall at all.

If the change impacted by man made warming is nearly negligible who cares?

Besides the Earth is too cold right now. When the climate was warmer during the Jurassic the global climate was much more amenable to growing a large population than it is now.