Is it warming? Probably (hard to tell with all the 'smoothing' and 'adjusting' of data going on, but I'd agree it probably is.)
Is it driven by humans? Utterly not, though almost certainly we're aggravating it.
Is it faster than ever, historically speaking? Utterly not.

That said, this sort of nonsense catastrophism is welcome; it shows to everyone how hilariously unhinged the doomsayers have become.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... = 90% of the last 500m years has been warmer than today.

For the last 5m years we've routinely had warm spikes followed by a decline to Phanerozoic 'norm' - if anything, this proves climate is NOT chaotically sensitive outside of some magic average (which just happens to be the 20th century, weird!) but in fact astonishingly robust. If you STILL insist that somehow the climate is going to spin into some Venusian disaster, please explain how whatever feedback mechanisms that have 30x-50x canceled the warmth surges have now somehow broken down and won't work this time?

Looking forward to the responses. There are a lot of people on slashdot who seem to have a lot of psychoses invested in global warming being irrefutable.

Countries in which women have full control over their reproduction (ie full access to abortion) population growth has tended to fall below replacement values.

... are just as pathetic as male gooners.

Whenever anyone says "everyone should do this thing" there are decent odds it's bullshit, spread by well-intentioned but ignorant people, or by not-so-benignly-intentioned people that know better but benefit from the outcome.

Meanwhile, if one is informed and tries to speak against the herd, it's pretty amazing in an anthropological sense how aggressive and angry "white knights" will pop up with no vested interest in the subject, only apparently in the argument itself.

And social media -which in any subject is vastly ill informed- has made it worse.

LOL sure.
"Canada's Automotive industry going independent of the US"
Next a news article about how your appendix going "independent of the rest of your body."

Canada doesn't HAVE a car industry. They are the outsourced production shop for the US car industry.
And, if you're capable of 2nd order thinking, ask yourself why so many US manufacturers put some parts and assembly work in Canada?

Per AI:

US carmakers established factories in Canada primarily
to bypass high Canadian tariffs on imported vehicles in the early 20th century, later expanding to benefit from lower labor costs, a skilled workforce, and integrated supply chains under trade agreements like the 1965 Auto Pact and NAFTA.
Key reasons for Canadian manufacturing include:

        Tariff Avoidance: Early in the 20th century, Canada placed a 35% tariff on imported cars, forcing companies like Ford to open factories in Canada to sell to the Canadian market, as well as to other parts of the British Empire which gave preferential treatment to Canadian-made goods.
        The Auto Pact (1965): The Canadaâ"United States Automotive Products Agreement eliminated tariffs, allowing the Big Three to integrate production, making it efficient to produce specific models in Canada for the entire North American market.
        Cost and Logistics: Lower Canadian wages compared to the US and favorable exchange rates (lower Canadian dollar) made production cost-effective. Close proximity to Detroit (Windsor-Detroit corridor) allowed for easy logistics.

Wait, so you're saying Canada put up....prohibitive tariffs blocking US goods? To drive manufacturing into Canada? And it worked? I thought only the Orange Baboon did things like that to friendly neighbors?
And then after those tariffs went away (in 1965 I guarantee it wasn't "for the good of consumers" lol) that the artificially-propped-up US dollar effectively benefited Canada's economy and workers, the same way the same action benefitted who else? European postwar manufacturers as well?

I know most of you are raging and will be unable to even see this paragraph but I think Trump's fight with Canada is stupid and egotistical. If he hadn't been such a moron, Poilievre would have won handily and the US & Canada could be - as usual, as natural - cooperating on bigger, more important issues.
But let's not pretend the US hasn't since WW2 deeply & generously advantaged other economies, and it's no longer a postwar world. The US can't afford to keep buying everyone lunch, not when we borrow 25c of every dollar from the future. That's dumb. I also think it's dumb to start fights with everyone like an egotistical child but whatever.

Plus, if even that teeny bit of loosely flapping material measurably helps, maybe women would get closer to mens' performance?

Feels like a win-win.
I guarantee the Olympics would get much, much better viewer numbers across all events.

This is an awful thing, granted but "Eric and Emily never go out without wearing hats now, for fear they might be recognised" is ridiculous - there are 8.3 BILLION people on the planet.

Eric & Emily I 1000% guarantee your sex antics are utterly not noteworthy nor memorable enough that the sorts of pr0n addicts that subscribe to these things would recognize you if you were sitting across from them at dinner. Guaranteed.

And you look like you're reasonably fit, healthy people.
Me, they'd pay to never see me in their feed again.

Meanwhile they use Chinese electronics and buy energy from Russia.

TDS is a powerful thing.

I don't think it's a lack of expertise that's the point.
The EU of course has ample technological resources.

The problems are the incessant bureaucrats. The EU is suffused with and mired in endless bureaucracy.

The obstacle to replacing Microsoft will not be the code, it will be the necessity of ensuring every country gets their participation, gets their say, that every special interest gets served, that everyone has a piece of whatever is created.

Who said that?
I'm sorry are there other points on the liberal wishlist that would have been better examples?

Or are you one of those people who INSISTS their ideology is "the center" without even the fundamental self-awareness to recognize honestly ones' own biases and where they are in the spectrum of beliefs?

I apologize if english isn't your primary language, as a native speaker would recognize the "but" in that sentence would mean 'everything on the list but that one'.

Or are you simply confirming my point? That if there are 1000 Progressive Points on the Liberal Wishlist, and they agree to 999 but not that last one, they're not to be considered liberal?
If nothing else, you're epistemologically fascinating.

Or you're just dumb? But I really don't think you are, I think you're so incandescently biased it's impossible for you to think/act like a normal person, and just answer the question.

"stuff like underwear, headlight bulbs, even batteries are locked up"
Do you think this was WalMart's choice?

Maybe we need to go back to, y'know, crazy concepts like punishing shoplifters?

This is a lot like the conclusions to the eye-opening video I saw about bread:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
"Why ancient bread was a superfood and modern bread makes people sick"

His salient point is that people used to eat 2-3 POUNDS of bread a day as a staple food, in physically hard lives and were healthy. Today everyone has Crohns & gluten allergies..

Boils down to:
- ancient bread had 3 ingredients - water, yeast, flour
- today's bread has 30.
Modern wheat, processing, ingredients are engineered for yield, speed of processing, and shelf-stability. Then they throw in some missing nutrition and call it 'fortified'.
Basically the gut reacts to today's bread like it's non-organic.

By this article, bread is CERTAINLY a ultra-processed food.

It prompted my wife and I to start making bread ourselves from einkorn.

"Might be going too far" seems to be all the food-industry scolds do now.

Bacon is a "tier 1 carcinogen" - at the same scale as asbestos, diesel exhaust, and neutron radiation.

To your point, though, I recognized the same thing living in Italy and coming back to the US. Stodgy is a great term for the feeling.

So you are being an ideological purist?

They can literally agree with you on EVERY SINGLE ITEM on the progressive-fantasy wishlist, but if they don't want their employees to unionize, in your view "well they're not really liberals then"?

You're not serious, are you?
Do you understand how irrational that is?