The way to understand this doublethink: that we can avoid dangerous climate change while continuing to burn fossil fuels – is that it relies on the concept of overshoot. The promise is that we can overshoot past any amount of warming, with the deployment of planetary-scale carbon dioxide removal dragging temperatures back down by the end of the century.

This not only cripples any attempt to limit warming to 1.5°C, but risks catastrophic levels of climate change as it locks us in to energy and material-intensive solutions which for the most part exist only on paper.

If you want to pinpoint your place in the universe, start with your cosmic address. You live on Earth->Solar System->Milky Way Galaxy->Local Cluster->Virgo Cluster->Virgo Supercluster->Laniakea. Thanks to new deep sky surveys, astronomers now think all those places are part of an even bigger cosmic structure in the "neighborhood" called The Shapley Concentration.

Mauvaise nouvelle : le niveau de température qui entraîne la mort de l'humain (en fonction de l'humidité ambiante et de l'âge du sujet) s'avère plus bas qu'estimé précédemment.

Théorie fascinante qui propose un modèle pour expliquer l'émergence de la conscience dans le vivant.

Ever since Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species in 1859, evolution has been the grand unifying theory of biology. Yet one of our most important biological traits, consciousness, is rarely studied in the context of evolution. Theories of consciousness come from religion, from philosophy, from cognitive science, but not so much from evolutionary biology. Maybe that’s why so few theories have been able to tackle basic questions such as: What is the adaptive value of consciousness? When did it evolve and what animals have it?

Une étude montre que la majorité des Américains se préoccuent des questions liées au changement climatique et sont en faveur de mesures pour lutter contre celui-ci. Mais plus intéressant : la majorité des Américains sont également persuadés que seule une minorité de leurs compatriotes partagent ce point de vue. Cette "fausse réalité sociale" peut à son tour dissuader les politiciens de prendre des mesures fortes.

Distorted beliefs about support for climate policy, and about concerns over climate change in general, are so commonly held among the more than 6,000 American adults in the researchers’ nationally representative sample that the study’s authors call these misperceptions a “false social reality.” Recent polls from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication show that 66 to 80 percent of people in the U.S. support major climate mitigation policies. But participants in the new study estimated that only between 37 and 43 percent do so. A range of 80 to 90 percent of those polled by the researchers underestimated the U.S. population’s climate concern and support for major climate mitigation policies.

Feminism boosts sexual satisfaction for both men and women, a new study suggests.

Of course this leads to all kinds of “social problems” (substance abuse, falling achievement, etc.). But any PR specialist or other propagandist knows it would be plain stupid to allow the actual policies and their roots to be discussed, or even to be visible.

So, let’s talk about something really serious, like the possibility that Black mothers don’t nurture their children because they evolved in the warm climate of Africa — real hard science, of the kind taken seriously by Malcolm Browne of the >New York Times, in the lead review mentioned earlier.

Such ideas, Browne writes, we ignore at our peril, unlike the social policies that have an overwhelming effect on the problems under discussion; these we not only can but must ignore, and he has not a word about them; not a word, for example, about the fact that in the city where he writes, forty percent of the children now live below the poverty line.