Blabla, google it, yet you ignore all evidence that was posted to the contrary of your beliefs. As expected you come up empty handed because you have nothing except your own vitriol.

I get that you are a bitter and resentful person, but that is a choice that you are making. I’ll try to explain below and I get that the text will be longer than you are used to, but I do implore you to read it. I’d like to try and help you get some perspective.

You don’t have to make up things and present them as facts. You don’t have to resent other people who try to show you that some beliefs that you hold, have no factual basis. We don’t try to inform people like you out of malice, but it’s to help others to be more informed and to help people in general make more informed decisions.

I suspect that your wilful ignorance has often brought you into useless conflicts where you ended up resenting the other participants because they were dismissive of you and your opinions. But that’s not their fault. You are the one chosing to reject facts and resenting those that do not accept your beliefs over factual evidence. Your resentment and frustration has it’s origin within your own choices, which has one major potential upside for you: you can chose to stop being that bitter resentful person.

Don’t make things up, respect other people’s opinions, be open to the possibility that some of your beliefs might not be true. Do those 3 simple things and you will find that interactions in your life will on average be much more agreeable and positive for you.

Show the proof then. insulting others and making a fool out of yourself doesn’t count as proof, so do try to come up with a proper science based source.

Your willingness to make things up, your doubling down when it becomes obvious to others that you made stuff up and then finally your reaction to jump to hatred of those that demonstrated that you make stuff up … It all makes you come across as unhinged.

I post literal proof that the shit that you made up, is made up. And your answer is to double down and throw insults around, and even now 2 weeks later you’re still at it. Somehow you’re not very convincing.

From everything that I’ve read it in the past, it was the Bush White House that dropped the ball and the CIA agents who were getting increasingly frustrated + desperate to get the white house to listen and act.

I don’t have much time, so I can only link the first article I found that narrates some of those events, there’s probably better/more complete ones. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2015/11/george-w-bush-s-white-house-ignored-these-extremely-dramatic-pre-9-11-warnings-george-tenet-and-cofer-black-reveal.html

Sorry, I had misread.

This sounds really asinine unless I’m missing something.

You say that you’re not interested in ai content, but you do not block communities that have exclusively content that you are not interested (like ai).

And you down vote posts that you don’t like, so if there is a community that has a type of content that you do not like, you only ever downvote them when something of them appears in your feed.

Which is harmful to that community and the people who do like the content of that community. And you believe that we’re supposed to do this? I can’t believe that we’re supposed to be harming communities that we have no interest in. The kind thing to do, would be to leave them alone.

Just block them and you won’t have to see their posts and their votes won’t be disturbed by you. Different people enjoy different things, live and let live and all that.

Is burning bunker fuel in international waters very polluting and should someone try to do something about it? Yes it is and yes they should. And the good news is that they have been working at it: https://www.imo.org/en/mediacentre/hottopics/pages/sulphur-2020.aspx

But were the more polluting cargo ships from the past more polluting than “a continent”? Probably only if that continent was not Asia, Europe, America or Africa. If they were and I’m wrong, then I would love to see a source. Telling me to “google it” is not a source, I already tried looking for it when I first asked the question and I could find no info about this claim. It seemed like a hyperbole comparison that they made up.

I also tried looking up your claim that 10 ships pollute more than all cars combined, and the first result was an article debunking a similar myth (about 15 ships): https://www.oldsaltblog.com/2021/04/no-sixteen-large-ships-do-no-pollute-more-than-all-the-cars-in-the-world/

Which continent? Antarctica? It wouldn’t surprise me, but it seems like an entirely useless comparison to make.

Yes, many times. Historically, it seems like the very strong empires first defeated themselves and once they were sufficiently weakened for outside forces to be able to threaten them … they still kept being self sabotaged by their own elite who prioritized maneuvering against each other for temporary power/wealth grabs over working together to face the outside threats.

The late Roman empire has a bunch of good examples: blatant corruption, over taxation of the poor, many assassinations, sabotaging their peers that were trying to improve the situation, constant civil war, the battle that destroyed the military backbone of the western Roman empire was fought between romans, … And all that while the empire was being torn apart by outside invasions.

Or a more recent example: the polish Lithuanian commonwealth had a paralyzed government thanks to corrupt elites with veto powers in their parliament of nobles (sejm) and only once the nation was mostly destroyed and the nation on the cusp of final destruction, did the sejm introduce some sensible new laws, but it was too late.

With smaller regional powers you can have cases like “they were in a golden age and had never been as powerful, but then the mongols appeared”, but with hegemon empires the failure of their inner workings is always going to be instrumental in their own demise.