_nosaj
There's more demand for spin based journalism (or activist journalism) than reporting nowadays. I suppose The Guardian - like others - are following the market trend.
There's a part of the east coast of England that's being eroded at a rate of a couple of metres per year due to the sea cliffs being made up of soft glacial deposits.
It's an interesting example because people can observe the effect of the sea eating the land in a very short time. Some losing homes that were once miles from the coast.
Of course this phenomenon occurs on every coastline, but it takes generations.
Do you remember where you saw the data on this?
Here's a clip of Dr Rhonda Patrick, who is incredibly well informed on the effects of dietary cholesterol, basically saying the same thing: https://youtu.be/VnYeuES3joc
That's a lot of CCTV to replace one human.
One wonders how much of this correlation is affected by more people renting properties in low income neighbourhoods combined with the fact that its more economical for landlords to rent low-mid value properties.
In the early years of Microsoft there were no real software companies for them to complete with.
`brew install trash`
My issue with the article is that the author uses a data point and frames it like a trend. It's sensational, sure, but it will only be statistically significant when we can observe a trend.
I agree that man made climate change is a big problem, but I'm not willing to use every sensational event as confirmation of this.
The European Union is the antithesis of democracy. If it wasn't, those directives would never have passed.
Actually it's really easy. Just look at the number of likes/responses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_multiplicatio...