It's Time to Take Out the Trash

Pre-Election Special SALE: 60% Off VIP Membership

Poor abolitionists, they had no idea what they were trying to fight.

Scientists are investigating what kind of greenhouse effect would be necessary on Mars to raise its frigid climate enough to support tree growth, reports Space.com. A new study outlines how much carbon dioxide (CO2) would need to accumulate on the Red Planet to create an environment where trees and other plants could thrive. The research, led by Professor Robert Olszewski of the Warsaw University of Technology in Poland, examines the balance of surface energy on Mars. This includes processes such as CO2 condensation and evaporation, heat exchange with the planet’s interior, and atmospheric circulation. “Interestingly, the first areas to reach suitable conditions for plant life may not be the tropics (±25°), but rather the Hellas plain,” the study’s authors note. “As the greenhouse effect intensifies, this region expands further into the southern hemisphere.” Using a computer model based on actual Mars data, Olszewski and his team calculated the ideal levels of CO2, oxygen, water, and temperature ranges necessary for tree growth. “Today’s Martian atmosphere is hostile to life, so we examined the requirements for tree growth in the context of both planet-wide terraforming and greenhouse environments,” Olszewski explains. Temperature, he emphasized, is critical, as it controls the CO2 cycle and maintains water in a liquid state. Oxygen levels in a denser, warmer atmosphere also remain a significant challenge. Ultimately, the scientists concluded that the most promising conditions for a Martian forest would be in the southern hemisphere, where summers are warmer and longer. “A long, warm summer could provide the first viable growing season,” the researchers conclude. “The low altitude of the Hellas Plain, in particular, could create the earliest favorable conditions for tree growth.” The post Scientists Figure Out How to Grow Trees on the Red Planet appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) has appealed to Big Tech companies to prioritize free speech ahead of the 2024 election. In response to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and a group of seven Democrat lawmakers writing to tech companies to insist on increased online censorship in the lead up to the election, Schmitt sent a letter of his own. His Oct. 24 letter to the leading executives of Google, TikTok, Meta, Microsoft, X, Instagram, YouTube and Snap expressed concern “that Representative Schiff and his colleagues may be attempting to pressure your company to suppress speech on your platforms ahead of the 2024 presidential election.” But Schmitt urged the Big Tech executives instead to “recognize[] the importance of Free Speech and the ability of Americans to speak their mind in the modern public square of social media platforms.” Schmitt asked that all the companies “resist any pressure from elected officials or Executive Branch officials to engage in viewpoint censorship ahead of the 2024 presidential election.” He noted further: “Fortunately, the First Amendment’s codification of our right to Free Speech prevents politicians from directly making use of government power to censor their opponents.”  But, as Schmitt exposed in the Murthy v. Missouri lawsuit he filed when he was attorney general in Missouri, Democrats, “including at the highest levels of the federal government, have attempted to pressure” Big Tech into censoring free speech they disagreed with. The senator cited several recent shocking examples of the left calling for censorship online. These included former climate envoy John Kerry complaining that the First Amendment was a “major block” to “hammer[ing] [disinformation] out of existence” at a September World Economic Forum event. And Democrat vice presidential nominee Tim Walz falsely asserted on MSNBC that there’s “no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech.” Walz later defended censorship using a debunked legal standard during the CBS vice presidential debate. Schmitt also mentioned how Murthy exposed the Biden-Harris administration’s collusion with Big Tech to censor COVID-19-related speech, even “humor and satire.” MRC’s unique CensorTrack database includes many examples, such as Facebook and Instagram deplatformingand unpublishing Covid vaccine-critical Children’s Health Defense in 2022. Facebook also censored satire site The Babylon Bee in 2021 for mocking Covid masking policies.  Schmitt ended the letter with a series of questions about whether Big Tech companies had received pressure from multiple government entities (besides Schiff) to censor, if a list of such requests has been kept, and if the companies have already or intend to respond, how they did or will do so. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Texas Tech head coach Joey McGuire said the team will address the situation with their kicker internally after the athlete showed his support for presidential candidate Donald Trump on the field during a game.While down by 11 points to TCU last Saturday, Texas Tech's kicker Reese Burkhardt took a fake field goal to the end zone for a five-yard touchdown run.The fifth-year senior celebrated his touchdown by pulling up his jersey to reveal a white shirt with "Trump '24 MAGA" written on it.Coach McGuire, who noted he wasn't aware of what Burkhardt's shirt said until after the game, spoke to media at a press conference and addressed the situation."We have addressed it. We will continue to address it. We're addressing internally," McGuire said, according to the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal.'I don't think necessarily that's a time or the place.'"It's always one of [the] things as far as whenever you're dealing with young adults, the really young adults, I guess, the choices that we make and when we make them and when you share it."McGuire alluded to the fact he didn't think it was a fair decision for the kicker to make a political statement on the field, telling reporters that being in a team sport means players need to make sure they're "putting [their] team in the best situation."The coach continued, "I always think the greatest thing about football, basketball, sports like that, it's a team sport. ... And there's places that you express your opinion and, you know, I don't think necessarily that's a time or the place.""As far as with [Burkhardt], we're going to deal with it. Dealt with it on Saturday and continue to talk through stuff and find the best solution and keep it in house," he added. Texas Tech head coach Joey McGuirePhoto by John E. Moore III/Getty ImagesThe same weekend, San Francisco 49ers defensive end Nick Bosa showed his own message of support for Trump on the field, albeit after the game.While three of Bosa's teammates were participating in a postgame interview, Bosa appeared behind the group wearing a white hat with "Make America Great Again" written in gold letters.When asked about his political statement, Bosa later said, "I'm not gonna talk too much about it, but I think it's an important time."Texas Tech's McGuire was reportedly asked on who he plans on voting for in the federal election but declined to reveal his choice."I do encourage everybody to vote," McGuire said instead.Burkhardt did not respond to Blaze News' request for comment.Texas Tech's next game is November 2 against Iowa State.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CBS News may have acted out of loyalty to Vice President Kamala Harris when it edited her “60 Minutes” interview to make her sound more presidential and less chaotic — but it didn’t let her get away with it so easily in a recent interview with anchor Norah O’Donnell. “So you do support restrictions after viability?” O’Donnell asked the Vice President. “I support Roe v. Wade being put back into law by Congress and to restore the fundamental right of women to make decisions about their own body. It is that basic,” Kamala responded. “But you know, with Roe v. Wade, there were restrictions after viability,” O’Donnell shot back. Kamala went on to pin it on Donald Trump, telling O’Donnell that “women have died because of Trump’s abortion ban” and that “women who have survived rape and incest” are not allowed to make decisions about their body. “We have seen women who are experiencing a miscarriage around a pregnancy they prayed for and being denied health care because doctors are afraid they’re going to go to prison,” she continued. “And when you argue that Donald Trump, if elected, would put forward a national abortion ban,” O’Donnell began her response before being cut off by Kamala, who interjected with “just read Project 2025.” “The former president said that’s not true,” O’Donnell continued, before Kamala started meandering on about how we shouldn’t be taking Trump’s word for it. Pat Gray of “Pat Gray Unleashed” can’t hear anymore of it. “Are we really taking your word for anything after you flip-flopped on every single issue from 2020 until now?” Gray says. “You flipped on fracking, you flipped on confiscating guns supposedly, we’re supposed to take your word for that? Eliminating private health insurance, now you don’t want to do that? Decriminalizing border crossings, federal job guarantees.” “She has flipped on everything, and we’re supposed to take her word that now she feels completely different,” he adds, annoyed. Want more from Pat Gray?To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The Biden-Harris Department of Justice sued Virginia earlier this month in hopes of killing an initiative aimed at removing thousands of suspected noncitizens from the commonwealth's voter rolls. The Youngkin administration fought back and won. Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares noted, "I am pleased to announce that the US Supreme Court granted Virginia's emergency stay to keep noncitizens off our voter rolls." In a 6-3 ruling Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily overruled Democrat-appointed 4th Circuit judges and halted a Biden-appointed judge's order, thereby allowing Virginia to resume the work of making sure that only American citizens can vote in next week's election. Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. The stay means that Virginia — where the latest Quantus Insights poll indicates Kamala Harris and President Donald Trump are virtually tied — will not have to put over 1,500 suspected noncitizens back onto its voter rolls before Election Day. 'Kamala's Administration sued Virginia and is now arguing to the US Supreme Court that non-citizens must remain on the voter rolls.' Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin said in a statement, "We are pleased by the Supreme Court's order today. This is a victory for commonsense and election fairness. I am grateful for the work of Attorney General Jason Miyares on this critical fight to protect the fundamental rights of U.S. citizens." "Clean voter rolls are one important part of a comprehensive approach we are taking to ensure the fairness of our elections," continued Youngkin. "Virginians can cast their ballots on Election Day knowing that Virginia's elections are fair, secure, and free from politically motivated interference." Dozens of red states backed Virginia's defense along with the Republican National Committee. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill tweeted, "Huge victory for election integrity! SCOTUS grants Virginia's emergency stay to keep noncitizens off its voter roles. Proud to have joined my fellow AGs in support of the American people and our most sacred right." Murrill was among the 27 state attorneys general who filed an amicus brief asking the high court to allow Virginia to resume the work of ensuring the integrity of the election. The amicus brief noted, "Non-citizens are not eligible voters. They were not eligible voters before Congress passed the National Voter Registration Act, they were not eligible when Congress passed the NVRA, and they are not eligible today." Ahead of the ruling, RNC chairman Michael Whatley stated, "With only one week to our country's most important election, Democrats are now taking extraordinary measures to keep non-citizens on voter rolls. Kamala's Administration sued Virginia and is now arguing to the U.S. Supreme Court that non-citizens must remain on the voter rolls." Blaze News previously reported that the DOJ sued the state over Youngkin's Aug. 7 executive order, which requires both the commissioner of the Virginia Department of Elections to routinely update voter lists to remove individuals identified as noncitizens and that the state Department of Motor Vehicles must expedite the interagency data-sharing with the DOE with regard to noncitizen transactions. According to the DOJ, the election integrity initiative violated Section 8(c)(2) of the National Voter Registration Act, which requires states to complete programs intended to systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from registration lists by no later than 90 days prior to a primary election or general election for federal office. Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia agreed with the DOJ, claiming the removals of suspected noncitizens amounted to a "clear violation" of the NVRA. Giles ordered Virginia to reinstate those individuals whose registrations were canceled under the program, including suspected noncitizens. Virginia asked the 4th Circuit to put a hold on Giles' order, but two Obama-appointed judges and another Biden appointee denied their request Sunday, prompting the state to file for an emergency stay of the injunction hours later. The commonwealth's emergency application stated that the injunction sought by the Biden-Harris DOJ will "irreparably injure Virginia's sovereignty, confuse her voters, overload her election machinery and administrators, and likely lead noncitizens to think they are permitted to vote, a criminal offense that will cancel the franchise of eligible voters." According to Virginia, the program did not violate the NVRA as it was an individualized removal process. Further, the state stressed that Giles' injunction was based on a provision of the NVRA that "does not even apply to the removal of noncitizens and other voter registrations that are void ab initio." The state told the high court that of the over 1,600 suspected noncitizens whom Giles ordered back onto the voter rolls: About 600 of these individuals personally informed Virginia's Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) that they are not citizens, and about 1,000 presented noncitizen residency documents to DMV and were then positively identified as noncitizens through the United States' own Systematic Alerian Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database. The Supreme Court did not indicate which of the state's arguments ultimately prompted its decision. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Blaze News investigative reporter Steve Baker says his attorney will ask U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper for a continuance of his Jan. 6 criminal case so that he can seek reconsideration of the judge’s refusal to dismiss charges based on selective prosecution. In a nine-page Oct. 25 opinion and order, Judge Cooper said Baker failed to demonstrate the elements of his motion to dismiss the four misdemeanor charges against him for being at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Baker said defense attorney William Shipley will ask for a trial delay in order to seek reconsideration of Cooper’s decision. “The most important legal argument that we’re bringing is this: Somewhere in the vicinity of 80 journalists of all types — credentialed employees of mainstream news organizations from the New York Times to the L.A. Times to French media to British television — went through broken windows and broken doors that day without permission,” Baker said Oct. 29. “Included in that bunch were freelancers, independents, bloggers, podcasters, and social media influencers without credentials,” Baker said. Reporters and photographers for those media organizations have not been arrested or charged with trespassing or other misdemeanor crimes for entering the Capitol on Jan. 6. More than a half-dozen right-of-center journalists have been prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice for being on restricted grounds Jan. 6. Baker said Cooper’s decision does not answer the legal points Shipley raised in the original motion to dismiss the charges. Baker was arrested in Dallas on March 1 and charged with entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly conduct, and parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building. He pleaded not guilty to the charges. Baker’s case is scheduled to go to trial Nov. 12 in Washington, D.C. The pending motion for reconsideration could delay the trial date. A pretrial hearing in the case is set for Nov. 6. In response to a request for comment, Daniel Ball, a public affairs specialist for the U.S. Attorney's Office, told Blaze News: "We do not have any additional comments outside of what you can find in publicly available court filings." — (@) Judge Cooper previously denied Baker’s motion to be allowed to retain his firearms during the case due to ongoing threats based on his investigative reporting. Baker said two stalkers have followed him across the country in the past six months. Shipley appealed the firearms denial to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, but that court upheld Cooper’s ruling. Baker said the DOJ has extended a plea offer to him. Three charges would be dismissed in exchange for a guilty plea to one count of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds. The offer is under consideration, he said. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Call of Duty Black Ops 6 campaign definitely outshines the half-cooked effort from last year. Modern Warfare 3 didn’t really have a proper single-player mode - it was just Warzone with some objectives and loose narrative strands wrapped around it. But even though it had low expectations to meet, based on responses from CoD players on Steam, Black Ops 6 has outdone itself. Personally, I think the original Modern Warfare from 2007 is far and away the best Call of Duty campaign, closely followed by either Black Ops 3 or Ghosts (yes). But I’m not about to question the enthusiasm and adoration of Ice T, who says that Black Ops 6’s single-player missions represent the “best campaign…on any game in a while.” Continue reading Call of Duty Black Ops 6 campaign gets huge stamp of approval from Ice T himself MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Black Ops 6 guns, Black Ops 6 missions, Black Ops 6 loadouts