I bought a nice pair of gloves this year with ChatGPT, but when they arrived I found that they each had six fingers.

If you read again what I wrote, I was commenting in the need to take crap, not the willingness. It is a difference and a rather big one.

If you are interested learning about actual science you can read the actual paper. It is not paywalled. Look up "speleothem isotopes" to learn about specific climatologic techniques for this study.

We do have records. We just can't read them. The Harappan language has never been deciphered. There are about 5000 inscriptions known.

That droughts led to the end of Indus Valley Civilization has been surmised for decades, this study provided a much more detailed account of the process.

For people to settle in "untouched tracts of land" you need to have water to irrigate it. Large empty areas on Earth require water for them to be "tamed".

Well, I can see that you never made that experience. I have.

Indeed. People with a good education have _options_. And that means they do not have to take crap. Obviously, quite a few assholes do not like to have that type of person around.

It really depends. As degrees in the US are a big business, there are many worthless degrees and many that you can get easily, making them worthless if you did it the easy way.

Funny thing. The largest private (i.e. for profit) University in Germany currently has problems because many students find the degrees are not valuable and they do not learn a lot. No such problems with the regular ones. I think commercial education is just broken because of perverted incentives.

Getting a degree does not absolve you from really learning and being good at things. I think a significant pert of the people with degrees that have trouble finding jobs did select "easy" ones or took it wayyyy to easy getting them. Commercial "education" will make that easy, but you waste your time and money that way.

Because people without degrees are often just envious.

I routinely ask my part-time students why they chose to get that degree after all. It is "need more skills for my job", "no career options without that degree" and sometimes "I really want to know more about things". This mostly students that are interested in IT security though, no idea how representative that is.

Ah, so "stupid" is what you are going for. Gotcha.

Have a look at history. I recommend the French revolution, in particular. Point is, you can keep people in poverty, but putting them there is something that rarely works on mass-scale. If it has ever worked at all.

One of the reasons we have two pilots is for redundancy in the case that a single pilot becomes incapacitated (or during emergencies, overloaded). How would a technology enforced rule that requires two pilots to agree on something work if one of them is incapacitated? Sure, you could have some system where a single pilot could override that rule, but then you are back to a single pilot making the decision. You could have additional monitoring so that if one pilot does something weird, the other is alerted, but in this case the other pilot noticed immediately (the voice recorder caught one pilot asking the other, "why did you do that"?), so additional monitoring would not have helped.

As others have noted, ultimately you have to trust the pilots as there are lots of ways a pilot desiring to do so could crash a plane.

The chlorophyll in plants is finely tuned to absorb specific wavelengths of light. It already has a hard time with green light compared to blue light, and it's simply not going to work at all with radiation that has wavelengths that are orders of magnitude shorter. Chlorophyll acts like a little antenna that gets excited by certain light frequencies, but ionizing radiation would just blow the chlorophyll molecules apart and destroy them.

Taking advantage ionizing radiation is going to require a completely different mechanism than plant photosynthesis, just like you can't use glass lenses or parabolic mirrors to focus X rays or gamma rays. Plants probably have no more chance of having such a mechanism than fungi do.

Do you think about what you write or do you just regurgitate all slop that comes to your mind?

Funny, how you use cheap manipulation techniques in your answer. Makes me think you have absolutely nothing except a big ego.