BTW, re: the Congo in particular: the most common traditional type of fishing is basket fishing with woven funnels suspended in the rapids. You sure as hell better know how to swim if you want to do that.

Famous angler Jeremy Wade referred to the local Congo fishermen as nearly suicidal, just diving into the rapids to get nets unstuck and the like.

SIGH.

There were 10 people chosen and people with dark skin in the USA make up about 1 out of 8 Americans.

1 in 8 is 12,5%.

African-American without mixed race in 2024 is estimated at 46,3M, or 14,2%
With mixed race, that rises to 51,6M, or 15,8% of the population.
Some hispanics have dark skin, some light. In 2023 there were 62,5%, representing 19% of the population (though there's a small overlap with black - doesn't affect the numbers much).
In 2023, Asians were 25,8M people, or 7,7% of the population. This is again a diverse group with mixed skin tones (for example, the Indian subcontinent)
In 2023, there were 1,6M people (0,49%) of pacific island ancestry and 3,3M native Americans - again, mixed skin tones.
People of Mediterranean European ancestry often have so-called "olive" complexions.

With a strict definition of dark skin, you're probably talking like 1 in 6 or so (~16,7%). With a looser definition, you could be talking upwards of 40% or more of the population.

The chances of the 10 people to be a perfect representation of the racial demographics of the USA is quite small.

Here are the actual odds of selecting no dark-skinned people at different population percentages being "dark skinned", by one's definition of "dark":

15%: 1 in 4
20%: 1 in 8
25%: 1 in 17
30%: 1 in 34
35%: 1 in 73
40%: 1 in 165

Then consider that NASA astronauts are required to pass a swimming test

It is not a test of swimming prowess, just of an ability to not drown. You have to be able to do three lengths of a 25-meter pool without stopping, three lengths of the pool in a flight suit and tennis shoes, and tread water for 10 minutes while wearing a flight suit. This is not some massively imposing task. You don't have to be Michael Phelps to become an astronaut.

and as a general rule those with African ancestry tend to have less stamina in swimming than those with lighter skin

Yes, white athletes tend to have an advantage in swimming. A 1,5% advantage. While a 1,5% advantage may be of good relevance at the highest level of a sport, it's hardly meaningful in a "can you tread water with a flight suit on" test.

Think of the different races as just really big families

That is not how genetics work, and is instead the pseudoscience that drove fascist movements, and in particular, Nazism.

There is far more genetic diversity within a given "race" than between them. Certain genetic traits tend to have strong correlates - for example dark skin and sickle cell anemia - but that's not because races are some sort of genetic isolates, but rather for very practical reasons (dark skin is an adaptation to not die of skin cancer in the tropics, and sickle cell disease is a consequence of a genetic adaptation to not die of malaria which also happens to be found in such climates). But the vast majority of genes don't have such strong correlates.

The concept of "race" as a distinct biological category is not supported by modern genetics.

If we are to ignore skin color and just put one big family up against another big family on swimming ability then just due to random mutations, perhaps some Darwinian selection way back in the family tree, one family will swim better than the other

The main "racial difference" in swimming ability in the US is "inherited", that is, parents who don't know how to swim tend to not teach their kids how to swim. As a result, white children are 56% more likely to receive swimming lessons than black children. One can expect that to directly correspond to an advantage in adulthood. But again, the ability to tread water is not out there knocking 90% of astronaut candidates out of the race - especially given that astronaut candidates tend to be athletic and motivated to learn new skills.

People with light skin tend to have ancestors that had to go fishing for their protein

Utter tripe. Fish consumption has no correlation with skin colour. How much fish do you think your average herder or plains horseman ate? And fish is massively important in much of Africa - in coastal areas (Gabon, Ghana, Sierra Leone in particular note), along the Congo (it's literally the world's largest river, people have been fishing it since time immemorial), Lake Victoria, Lake Chad, the Niger Delta, etc etc. What sort of racist stereotype world are you living in where black people don't fish?

Having a large candidate pool relative to the number chosen makes it easier to show bias and still get high-quality candidaes, not harder.

That makes 2 worlds we've polluted. Probably Mars also: 3.

More fake candidates will be chasing more fake jobs.

Re: "and put only half our eggs in the energy basket." -- should be "half our eggs in one energy basket".

And "Western-friendly companies" may also factor in location. For example, if war breaks out at Taiwan, getting supplies from Japan could be logistically difficult. Thus, we probably want a fair number of suppliers in the American, European, and/or African continents.

this may not account for things like environmental degradation, harm to the general population and other issues surrounding personal rights, etc.

China's workers are de-facto slaves and their consumers are de-facto guinea pigs.

The article mentioned the "996" labor model, which while technically illegal, is given a blind eye by the gov't.

The Soviet Union quickly caught up in nuclear weapons just after WW2 by radiating everybody and their dog around factories and test grounds. They moved fast and broke people. China has a similar mentality when Xi lists a top goal: win first, citizens be damned. To misquote Mel Brooks: "It's good to be dictator".

The Western world should refuse to become fully dependent on China for green energy equipment, and limit their market share in batteries, wind, panels, etc. to say 50%. That would mean the investors mentioned could focus on Western-friendly* companies that are to fill in that other 50%. That China's prices are lower doesn't matter, they would be limited to 50% of sales regardless of price. Don't forget the lesson of the pandemic: don't have a single source for anything important because wars, plagues, and mayhem happen.

We already know Xi is drooling bigly over Taiwan, having arguably the biggest navy now; we should thus presume there will be a war over it and run our industry with that assumption active, and put only half our eggs in the energy basket. (Both sides will likely shut down trade with each other during the Taiwan battle.)

* Not sure Trump is "Western friendly", that's a wildcard.

or as MTG says, "disrobed"?

North Korea?

Why not, everyone else is.

It's more entertaining than the original! No cat torturing, for one.

That kind of thinking got us stuck with COBOL ;-)

War is dumb, but giving bullies free reign is dumber.

Yes, Iran and Vietnam were probably mistakes, but nobody said conflicts are easy nor clear.

> There is no exception here. Teachers are to teach what is in the published curriculum

If the curriculum limits answers to certain questions for religious reasons than it's in violation of the separation clause.

> It can be a matter of health,

I'm sure the evil GOP will try to twist their argument into being about health or the like, but underlying it's religion trying to camouflage itself, like how Intelligent Design tried to disguise creationism as science. It's bearing False Witness and thus should be punished via an elevator to Hell. Jesus can read GOP's evil minds.

> but the fascists got the trains running on time...

They actually lied about that, jailing reporters who criticized timing.

> School teachers don't have a 1st Amendment right in the classroom, just as I didn't have a 1st Amendment right while in my US Army uniform.

Apples and oranges. In the military one has to learn to STFU or the enemy can hear where you are. A teacher simply describing what LGBTQ+ concepts are shouldn't be an exception to the 1st. There's no logical reason other than religious offense, which then has the church sticking its peanut butter in secular chocolate.

> How do we resolve this [restroom & shower issues]?

There are ways to compromise, but that's a longer topic.

> If the teachers want to express their beliefs

That's NOT what I proposed.

> While in the classroom the teachers should be expected to follow the state specified curriculum or expect to be fired.

It's realistic to answer a simple question from a child, even if it offends religious troglodytes.