Watch Midwit 'Journalists' Analyze the Election

This chonky alga loves a bit of carbon dioxide.

The international conference is due to begin on Monday in Azerbaijan.

Revenge is best served by stopping the water flow.

“It's one of the most fundamental problems in mathematics. It had been considered totally out of reach before this.”

Sit back, relax, and let’s Break It Down in episode 39...

It played a role in the formation of the asteroid and maybe even in the formation of the giant planets.

Today, I hosted two academic professionals, Andrew Simmons from Washington DC and Lourdes German from Cambridge MA, who confessed that they had been following my search for extraterrestrial artifacts over the past few years. They asked me how I came to pursue this search. I explained that my interest was triggered by the discovery of the first astronomical object from outside the Solar system, `Oumuamua on October 19, 2017. This 100-meters-size object was anomalous in its inferred pancake-like shape and non-gravitational acceleration with no sign of evaporation. In short, `Oumuamua did not resemble familiar asteroids or comets from the Solar system. `Oumuamua’s wake-up call revealed a research opportunity that I never encountered before in the preceding thirty years of my academic career. The search for extraterrestrial artifacts could carry huge implications for the future of humanity but is largely abandoned by the scientific community.Other transformative themes, like the search for the unknown nature of dark matter, often have a long history and are crowded with many competing practitioners. This means that the prospects for making a unique contribution to their knowledge base is small. However, here was a research path not taken, to which I can make a major contribution. My training was in theoretical physics, but I was willing to lead the experimental Galileo Project, aimed to collect evidence that could guide us towards a better understanding of our cosmic neighborhood. The general public resonated with my agenda and was extremely interested in my research. Paradoxically, the more attention I received from the world outside academia, the more intense were the push back and personal attacks I received from science popularizers, reporters, social media influencers or jealous scientists, who pretended to `defend’ science. Their attempts to suppress the scientific collection of evidence through the Galileo Project reflected an anti-science bias, which is meant to protect cherished beliefs from the burden of attending to anomalies. Andrew and Lourdes asked why is this research area avoided by the academic mainstream? I reasoned that the public is definitely intrigued by the possibility that some Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) near Earth may reflect extraterrestrial technologies. Surely, members of academia are drawn from the public, so deep down many of them must share this sentiment. However, because of stigma they never discuss it openly. Paradoxically, the stigma is promoted by members of the SETI community who banned discussions about UAP in their conferences. I started in an academic culture of `chess players,’ where considering new possible signatures of dark matter is rewarded, but now I find myself among `mud wrestlers’ who resist thinking outside the box. They prefer to speculate that the anomalies of interstellar objects like `Oumuamua represent rocks of a type that we had never seen before but at the same time dismiss artificial interpretations as speculative. Some of them ignore the vast collection of papers which attempted — with serious difficulties — to explain `Oumuamua’s anomalies, and suggest to forget the anomalies and move on. They miss the fundamental lesson from the history of science that revolutionary knowledge first appears in the form of anomalies. As of now, the academic gates in the search for technological signatures of extraterrestrial civilizations are occupied by gatekeepers who tolerate unsuccessful searches for radio signals but ban a possible technological interpretation of the anomalies exhibited by interstellar objects like `Oumuamua. Whether the U.S. government has classified data on UAP that indicates an extraterrestrial origin will be discussed at the congressional hearing to be held next Wednesday, November 13, 2024. Andrew and Lourdes asked me how would the academic community respond to disclosure of related government data, if it exists? In response, I quoted Arthur Schopenhauer, who wisely stated: “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” Based on my experience, I added a fourth stage: “Finally, the early critics claim that they were first to propose it.” As a scientist leading the Galileo Project, I wish to collect as much data as possible so that my critics will have no way out but to admit that at least one of the anomalous objects in our sky is of extraterrestrial technological origin. But I am not delusional. If other astronomers will use the Rubin Observatory and the Webb telescope to conclude that a new object like `Oumuamua is artificial in origin, they would still insist that `Oumuamua could have been a natural rock. This would constitute their version of the fourth stage. Nevertheless, I am at peace with Schopenhauer’s forecast. What really matters is the knowledge that humanity will gain from a superhuman intelligence, including its technologies and scientific insights. If we had the benefit of surveying all the inhabited planets in the ten-billion-year history of the Milky-Way, we could have found evidence for past civilizations that perished billions of years ago by self-inflicted wounds or natural catastrophes. This knowledge would have allowed us to avoid their mistakes. Instead, by staying at our current vantage point and looking around, we could learn from the most accomplished civilizations which managed to reach us with their technological products. This local search would be most effective if government agencies and private donors funded it on a larger scale. Without searching, we will surely not find anything. The post Could UAP Save Us from Ourselves? appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Making several appearances Thursday on CNN to discuss the aftermath of Donald Trump winning the presidential election, CNN chief climate correspondent Bill Weir fretted over a second Trump administration's climate policies, and declared that the President-elect is "the most notorious climate denier in history" who will let the climate "go to hell." This is the same Bill Weir who famously declared "even the seagulls" were "awed" with Barack Obama's first inauguration.  Shortly before 9:00 a.m. during extended election coverage, CNN host Sara Sidner hinted at global warming being to blame for recent extreme weather, and provocatively called Trump a "climate denier" as she set up the segment: These wildfires are just the latest in a slew of unprecedented severe weather events -- including, as you remember, back-to-back hurricanes and extreme heat. President-elect Donald Trump is a known climate denier vowing to pull the U.S. out of the Paris climate accord a second time. His election comes on the heels of startling new data showing worsening effects of delaying action against climate change. Her reference to a high hurricane frequency being "unprecedented" flies in the face of data showing there have been many times since the mid 1800s that several hurricanes have made landfall in the U.S. in just one hurricane season. Weir then came aboard and recounted the different possibilities for how many degrees warmer the world might become and argued that it is necessary to cut back fossil fuel burning within five years to prevent dire consequences. He soon took aim at President-elect Trump: "Every country in the world says we're going to try to hold the line at 1.5, and now we're here just as maybe the most notorious climate denier in history takes power once again." As he appeared again in the afternoon shortly before 3 p.m., Weir fearmongered that there would be "hell on Earth" if the world fails to cut carbon emissions, and then took aim at Trump again: "Once we hit two degrees, if you think things are bad now, imagine the hell on Earth that would be three degrees of global warming. Well, Donald Trump is basically saying, 'Go to hell -- go to that hell,' because he doesn't want to even acknowledge the existence of the problem." He soon repeated his claim that Trump is "the most notorious climate denier in the public eye these days." Transcripts below: CNN November 7, 2024 8:57 a.m. Eastern SARA SIDNER: These wildfires are just the latest in a slew of unprecedented severe weather events -- including, as you remember, back-to-back hurricanes and extreme heat. President-elect Donald Trump is a known climate denier vowing to pull the U.S. out of the Paris climate accord a second time. His election comes on the heels of startling new data showing worsening effects of delaying action against climate change. CNN's Bill Weir is joining us now. What could a second Trump administration mean for the -- for the planet? Which is a huge question. BILL WEIR: It is a very big question at such a vital time. Science says these next five years are everything when it comes to winding down the fuels that burn, replacing them with the abundant clean energy of the sun in the sky. But he wants to roll it all back. If the first term was any indication, he will gut all environmental regulation, give oil and gas producers sort of carte blanche, as he promised there, as well. It will be interesting to see how much he can claw back of the Inflation Reduction Act because a lot of that money is going to the Republican districts -- over 75 percent of it right now. But this is really the crux of it. Take a look at this temperature chart, Sara. This year, 2024 -- according to Copernicus, the European space unit -- will shatter all records, being the warmest ever. And it's the first year where we've blown past the 1.5 degrees Celsius or three degrees Fahrenheit limit of the Paris climate accords. Every country in the world says we're going to try to hold the line at 1.5, and now we're here just as maybe the most notorious climate denier in history takes power once again. SIDNER: It is concerning to a lot of people -- young people have talked about this quite a bit. What does this tell us about what we will see? I mean, temperatures hottest ever this year? WEIR: Right, right. And it stalls the knockoff effects and a new report out that insurance losses in the last decade 50 percent higher than the decade before. It's changing property values and building codes and immigrant streams and supply chains. All of this is happening in real time. So you have to adapt to the pain that's already built in while trying to mitigate the price of it right now. And then there's disaster response. under the Trump and Biden administration which we saw the very different approaches under the Trump and Biden administration as to who gets the aid -- sometimes it's a political favor under Trump. So all of this has folks in the climate environmental space very, very worried. And it also has a lot of brave faces. You've got folks from California saying, "We will continue to lead." The state of Washington passed a sweeping climate bond bill there and laws to sort of protect that. Californians passed that bond bill. So what you might see is a kind of balkanization of states like Minnesota, Michigan, California that are going to lead the way on this clean technologies. But at the end of the day, these cleaner alternatives now are the cheapest in human history. So Texas leads the nation in green energy right now. So we'll see. But the immediate pain -- that's what folks have to deal with -- these immediate storms and wildfires. SIDNER: Yup, and we're seeing them play out right now in California -- a place where some insurers have pulled back because they can't keep affording to rebuild those houses. It is always a pleasure to see you even though you bring us sometimes disappointing and sad news. (...) CNN News Central November 7, 2024 2:53 p.m. Eastern BORIS SANCHEZ: There is a wildfire raging in Southern California; a late-season hurricane tearing through Cuba and threatening the U.S. Gulf Coast; and also record autumn heat across the country. These are now just some of the realities of climate change. The question is: How will the U.S. respond to it under a second Trump administration? BRIANNA KEILAR: Yeah, there's a new report that finds that 2024 is on track to be the warmest year ever. I know we're feeling that in Washington, D.C., today for sure, and it may cross a red line scientists are really worried about. CNN chief climate correspondent Bill Weir is here with more on this. Bill, 2024 will be the first calendar year to exceed the Paris agreement threshold. What does it mean for the planet? BILL WEIR: Well, that line -- that 1.5-degree Celsius or three degrees Fahrenheit was the idea that anything beyond that would just be so hard to adapt and to do it in time. Once we hit two degrees, if you think things are bad now, imagine the hell on Earth that would be three degrees of global warming. Well, Donald Trump is basically saying, "Go to hell -- go to that hell," because he doesn't want to even acknowledge the existence of the problem. He won with a promise to supercharge the economy and fix the border and heal America, but climate change is the hole in every one of those buckets, making it that much harder to deal with streams of immigrants coming from Central America after storms or droughts down there, dealing with the economy in places like Asheville, North Carolina, completely devastated. We'll put up a map of the ocean temperatures as well, hitting records around the globe, especially around the United States -- the Atlantic and the Gulf there. That, of course, makes hurricanes stronger, faster. It moves water cycles in much less predictable ways. It effects everything from insurance rates -- there's a crisis on that -- to supply chains. And the wildfires that you're talking about now in California -- these warm planet dries things out faster, makes a more flammable Earth. And so at the absolute time scientists saying that humanity must rally together, decarbonize as quick as humanely possible, and brace for the pain that's built in, the United States has really elected the most notorious climate denier in the public eye these days. Next week at COP 29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the world is supposed to meet to talk about finance for developing countries, helping them adapt and get green in time. But we're already hearing diplomats may not be going because of the clues from the United States the Trump administration not interested. And certainly global climate diplomacy, for the countries that really take this seriously, that's a major issue. But there may be enough built-in momentum green energy projects, especially in Republican districts, Brianna and Boris, that it will be hard to claw those back here in the United States.

On Thursday, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre faced the press for the first time since the election results were announced. During the briefing, multiple reporters challenged her regarding President Joe Biden's earlier comments about President-elect Donald Trump.Before Trump's victory on Tuesday, Biden frequently warned Americans that Trump posed a threat to democracy. With the election outcome, the Biden administration has now vowed a peaceful transfer of power to the incoming Trump administration.'I do not appreciate having my words twisted.'Jean-Pierre was pressed about Biden's role in the Democratic Party's Tuesday defeat. Reporters asked the press secretary whether the president regretted stepping down in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris and whether he felt responsible for the loss.Jean-Pierre placed a majority of the blame on "global headwinds.""Despite all of the accomplishments that we were able to get done, there were global headwinds because of the COVID-19 pandemic," she claimed. "And it had a political toll on many incumbents, if you look at what happened in 2024 globally. And that's part of what you saw."Reporters questioned Jean-Pierre about Biden's views on Trump before and after the election."The president repeatedly referred to Donald Trump as a threat to democracy over and over again. And this morning, though, he said we're all going to be okay. So was that just political rhetoric?" NBC News' Gabe Gutierrez asked.Jean-Pierre replied, "If you know the president, you know that him saying we're all going to be okay, he's an optimist, right? He believes when you get knocked down, you get back up. We are — we, we, we lost. But we're not defeated, right?""The president believes — uh, as, as you asked me about the threat to democracy — uh, believes in — being an obligation to be honest to the American people," she continued.Jean-Pierre claimed that Trump had "talked about an enemy within," "mistreating Americans who disagree with him," and "terminating the Constitution." She brought up comments by Trump's former Chief of Staff John Kelly and former Defense Secretary Mark Esper."To be clear, he still believes Donald Trump is a threat to democracy?" Gutierrez asked."I think that the president was very clear, what he stated, and was very honest," she replied. "Right now, we want to move forward, and we want to make sure there's a peaceful transfer of power. That's what the American people deserve."Another reporter asked Jean-Pierre whether Biden still stands by his comments about Trump being "an existential threat to democracy.""I don't have anything else to share beyond what I said," she responded.Fox News senior White House correspondent Jacqui Heinrich said to the press secretary, "This administration's message to millions of Americans that they're going to wake up [the] day after the election, if Trump won, and have their rights stripped away, that democracy would crumble. And the president said today we're going to be okay. So how do you square that?""I can square that," Jean-Pierre replied, stating that she had already answered the question multiple times. "The American people made the decision." Heinrich asked Jean-Pierre what the message is to "people who are fearful based on" Biden's previous comments about Trump."Well, now you're just twisting everything around, and that's really unfair. No, it is, no, no, no, Jacqui, it's unfair because I've been standing here trying to be very respectful to what happened the last two nights, two nights ago," Jean-Pierre said.She appeared frustrated by the line of questioning, adding, "I do not appreciate having my words twisted."Moments later, Jean-Pierre closed her binder and ended the presser. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!