Your paper proves that you can write a lot without saying much.
First, the author conflates birth defects (intersex) with willful body modification (surgery and hormone treatments). No one is complaining about intersex people. No one. To drag them in to provide cover for what amounts to accusations of cheating is disingenuous.
Second, read all his conclusions. He uses the terms 'may' and 'no evidence' a great deal. He engages in a great deal of speculation than the people who want to ban males from competing against women, but he slathers on some science-talk, which blinds some folks. The people who he argues against have common experience on their side (men are bigger, stronger, faster than women); the author has 'may' and 'no evidence' on his side.
The only actual evidence he offers up is item 51, a small study of 8 long distance runners who have had hormone injections. That's it. That's all his evidence. Everything else is either speculation or a political position.

Rich people are protected. The middle class and the poor deal with anarchy. The murder rate is currently way up in Democrat-controlled cities that have attacked the police. For the most part, it's not wealthy white liberals paying the price for their ideas.

Do you believe that the favorable wind generating conditions for Scotland exist world wide? That's plainly not the case. Your 'point', such as it is, seems to rely on that sentiment.

You seem angry. That might cloud your responses, which aren't technical in the slightest. You can read the books, I'll continue to produce and distribute electricity for my day job.

If you're going to refer to a problem that's 10 years in the past, you really ought to be specific. Else it's reasonable to assume you're referring to the problem 10-ish weeks in the past.

The power lines were never the problem in Texas; unwinterized power plants were.
California is it's own kind of dumb with several layers of problems; suffice it to say the state government is an incompetent regulator, or to be kinder, has other priorities than reliable electrical supply.

Solar, wind & batteries can't provide the same quality of life improvement nuclear can. I'll tell you why.

You can't add enough batteries to solar and wind to make them reliable. Nuclear has the advantage of being reliable. For every huge windfarm or solar farm built, you need a large, fast-acting natural gas plant in spinning reserve ready to take up the slack. That also means that solar and wind will be limited to a small fraction of electrical generation, because all the other sources have to be ready to pick up the slack when the clouds come out and the wind dies down. Those reliable power plants still need time to ramp up and down, and if they can't ramp fast enough to account for the loss of 'green' generation, then the grid operator has to drop cities and counties off the grid. Lights out. Search for 'Duck Bill Curve.' I just refreshed myself, and besides the power generation problem, you also have a frequency control problem.

For frequency control, it turns out that several thousand tons of spinning turbine generators- in nuclear and conventional plants- stabilize the grid in ways that solar inverters & wind turbines can't. Rotational inertia matters a great deal.

The amount of electricity flowing through the grid is so mind-bogglingly high that electricity must be produced at the same rate it is consumed. Batteries and other storage methods can smooth out short-term problems, but building enough energy storage to make wind and solar significant energy sources is an economic and physical non- starter.

Some folks might be fine with that because they bought expensive, automatic backup generators, but I ask all of you to think of other folks might be out of luck for longer than 20 seconds. (Not to mention that backup generator operation cancels out any theoretical environmental gains.)

Insurance companies have a good faith obligation to carry out their contractual obligations in a decent and professional manner.
If you ever feel like you're getting the run-around from an insurer when making a claim, ask them if they feel like they're living up to the highest standards of good faith dealing and if they think your state's insurance board would agree.
And if they don't clean up their act, said insurance commission and any number of lawyers would be happy to help them 'move in the right direction.'

Turns out the Ever Given has a sister ship named the Ever Gifted , and it's steaming from Rotterdam to Sri Lanka at 20 km/hr.

If you had anything of substance to say to defend Warren, you would have said it. Since you don't, you cry "RACIST" and "SEXIST!."

Nuclear construction in the US right now is an absolute boondoggle. I'm glad they're sticking it out at Vogtle, because we need to essentially restart the nuclear construction industry in the US and re-develop the institutional knowledge necessary to build on-time and on-schedule. We build big, complicated projects on-time and on-budget all the time in the US; we just need to re-learn how to do it with that that "N" quality stamp.

That being said, there are a number of companies that are getting very efficient at running nuclear power plants, and the O&M costs are frequently very competitive with other sources of power. The fuel costs are so phenomenally cheap that the extra personnel costs aren't deal-breakers.

Well said! You reminded me of a passage from de Tocqueville's Democracy in America

In ages of fervent devotion men sometimes abandon their religion, but they only shake one off in order to adopt another. Their faith changes its objects, but suffers no decline.

That's the most famous bit; the rest of the paragraph is rather relevant as well:

The old religion then excites enthusiastic attachment or bitter enmity in either party; some leave it with anger, others cling to it with increased devotedness, and although persuasions differ, irreligion is unknown. Such, however, is not the case when a religious belief is secretly undermined by doctrines which may be termed negative, since they deny the truth of one religion without affirming that of any other. Prodigious revolutions then take place in the human mind, without the apparent co-operation of the passions of man, and almost without his knowledge. Men lose the objects of their fondest hopes as if through forgetfulness. They are carried away by an imperceptible current, which they have not the courage to stem, but which they follow with regret, since it bears them away from a faith they love to a skepticism that plunges them into despair.

If there's any happiness among the Woke faithful, I have yet to see it.

Why are you so angry at them? If their path is foolish, a bunch of them will die off; won't you get some smug sense of self-satisfaction from that? Isn't the consequence of disobeying the establishment and departing from your plainly superior intellect- the disease culling the 'vax-afraiders'- doesn't this prospect set your heart at peace?

But cryptic discoveries often mean that species once considered common and widespread are actually several, some of which may be endangered and require immediate protection.

Sounds like a bullshit basis for a power grab. Redefine 'species' in an attempt to grab more power over land and resources by abuse of existing laws. Screw activists. You may not be interested in politics, but politics is interested in you. Don't let them pull off this end run around power grab.

It's no secret that the vast majority of the plastic in the oceans comes from about 10 rivers in Africa and Asia that the locals use as dumps. Specifically, the Yangtze; Indus; Yellow; Hai He; Ganges; Pearl; Amur; Mekong, Nile and the Niger.

In the US, we greatly reduced litter with public campaigns to encourage people- individuals- to put their trash where it belongs. This was a combination of advertising, law enforcement, and infrastructure- specifically, common placement of public trash cans. We've also made huge strides in the engineering of landfills.

By blaming western corporations, Emma Priestland and the 'Break Free From Plastic' organization are all but plainly stating that they think the locals around those 10 rivers are incapable of modifying their behavior and infrastructure.

And that, my friends, is the most racist BS I've seen so far today.