I thought Salesforce continually announcing their plans for a "Winter/Summer Update" was obnoxiously ill conceived (whose winter, mine or yours? And which hemisphere are you announcing this from?).
But WTF is a "holiday season"? It's the school holidays now in my country - is it coming out now? How about we stick to something universal, like months or quarters.

I like meat too, but I see two problems with your theory:

Firstly, nature doesn't care what diet is optimal, just whether you stay alive long enough to successfully reproduce. You can have a terrible diet and die painfully at 45, as long as you've reproduced by then.

And secondly, the relative health of the Inuit / Eskimo diet has since been dismissed as a myth due to poor research practices. Subsequent studies have found they have equal or higher incidence of heart problems than the general population.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry...

It's probably a sign that he had nothing to do with it beyond signing his name at the bottom.

No, there isn't a global conspiracy to suppress nuclear power by lefties trying to take over the economy. This is the same anti-science rationalisation as you see behind anti-vaxxers and climate change denial; where it's easier to blame a vast global conspiracy behind all of the world's scientists rather than admit your ideology fails in the real world.

Nuclear power fails all on its own by being incredibly slow to build, expensive to run, economical only at massive scales and demanding of manpower just to keep going. Wind and solar power can be built and dispatched cheaply at both small and large scale; have few running costs and every year prices are tumbling. This allows energy capacity to increase gradually with increasing demand, rather than suddenly adding an extra gigawatt of power when you nuclear plant finally comes online in 10 years.

No country is vastly building new nukes because the economics simply don't make sense. If your goal is to decarbonise, renewables are far better at it than nukes for every dollar spent.

If a breakthrough vaccination is discovered in Australia, where are you going to make your money? A country with socialised medicine where vaccinations are bought in bulk by the government, or the US, where you can charge a small fortune for it? I don't know how often this happens with other medications, but it is certainly what happened with Gardasil (HPV vaccination). It makes sense for pharmaceutical companies to move R&D, patents and manufacturing to where the most lucrative market is.

Did he campaign heavily for his own political party in this issue? If he did, I missed it in An Inconvenient Truth and various speeches of his I read. I suspect he was more ridiculed and ignored as part of the right-wing political propaganda machine that is Fox News, because he is a Democrat. To my mind, he made every effort to make it a bipartisan/non-political issue.

I enjoyed the Hobbit films, but I think expectations are important. The Hobbit was meant as a children's book - a beginner's guide to the Tolkien universe. The LOTR film trilogy is probably too dark for children to enjoy, just as the books were probably too detailed for younger minds. If you approach the movies with a similar attitude to the books, then it's not so offensive that the heroes always win at impossible odds.

I believe one feminist argument would be that the patriarchy would discourage women to run for president, and discourage men and women from voting for them. Maybe if you added up the number of people who would never vote for a woman to be president, it would be more than those who would never vote for a man?

Maybe society has stronger expectations that the man be the provider and the woman be the nurturer? Maybe women get negative societal/peer pressure when they put their careers first? Maybe they are called a "bad mother" for putting money before children?

Perhaps society discourages women from being more assertive by dismissing it as being too "masculine", "bitchy", "hormonal" when they try to be more forceful than men?

Errr, no, I was thinking France, Spain, Italy actually. Solar benefits more from moving west for time-shifting peak load, which is usually afternoon / early evening. Obviously anywhere south is likely to have more hours of sunshine, as well as being outside any local weather systems. In any case, even if you want to consider connections outside the EU, I can't see how having a more connected grid could be a bad thing when it comes to redundancy.

I don't really understand your point on the geopolitics either. Economic dependency increases geopolitical stability. We trade with China because it makes economic sense, even if we don't necessary like their politics. They trade with us for similar reasons. This interdependence increases stability, each side has too much to lose by antagonising the other.

Germany would be foolish to build nuclear plants now, the economics make no sense at all. For the price of one new reactor they could build multiple wind/solar farms with storage in diverse locations, and have delivery within the year instead of within ten. This would improve reliability far more than having one large reactor, which might need to get shutdown when the weather gets too hot.

Highly doubtful when renewables + storage is still cheaper than nuclear today, never mind how much cheaper it will be when you've finished building a new nuclear plant. Germany's grid is connected to neighbouring countries, so even if their land is to expensive for solar, they can import it from sunnier countries over HVDC.

Germany currently gets 34% of its power from renewables, and its grid is more reliable than the US, UK and even nuclear-loving France; with 12 minutes per year downtime (versus US: 128 mins, UK: 53 mins, France: 51 mins).
Source: https://www.cleanenergywire.or...

The problem with HDR in Australia is the best locations (such as Cooper Basin and the Nullarbor plain) are located about as far from civilisation - and therefore energy demands - as you can get. This makes transmission energy loss and maintenance costs prohibitively expensive.

Just to clarify, trees (over 30m) are thought to have evolved 360 million years ago, grasses only about 60 million. So there were no grasses before trees.

Nuclear is not carbon-free. It takes considerable amount of concrete (a major source of C02 emissions) to build the reactor core, as well as significant fossil fuels to mine and transport the fuel. And for considerably less cost, we can build solar/wind with battery storage, with dispatch in less than 1 year vs 10 years for nuclear. Storage prices are steadily declining, even if battery technology is slow to improve. The nuclear plant you build now is already obsolete in price per MWh, in 10 years battery storage will absolutely kill it.

Every dollar invested in nuclear is one that could give 3x as much decarbonization if invested in wind or solar.

Nuclear is a dead-end, and base-load is not required on a large enough grid with diverse sources.
Sources:
https://www.lazard.com/media/4... https://www.sciencedirect.com/...

If nothing else, it means the electric car you've barely driven would have a high resale-value due to the lower mileage, meaning you could upgrade more often if you wished, or get more back in a trade-in if you didn't.

The high cost of Australia's grid has far more to do with the fact that the partly-privatised energy suppliers were allowed to pass on upgrade costs back to the government. Numerous reports have confirmed this:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/20...

South Australia's blackouts have little to do with renewable energy and more to do with dependency on interstate connectors and storm events. Here in WA we have a mostly coal powered grid disconnected from the rest of Australia, and our energy prices are high also. I think you should get your news sources from somewhere other than New Corp, which is waging a war against renewable energy and promoting climate change denial as per Murdoch's global agenda.